Son cannot claim asylum based on parents' persecution

In Wang v. Attorney General, No. 04-2656 (3d Cir. Apr. 27, 2005), the Third Circuit ruled that a son could not claim asylum based on the extensive persecution his parents faced in China. It seems that the claim focused on China's one-child policy, so in essence the fact that the son was alive was the basis for the persecution that his parents suffered. The Third Circuit ruled that if the son faced no harms of his own, was able to attend school without any difficulties, was never arrested, and was never detained, then the persecution was directed against his parents, not him, and he could not claim asylum.

Perhaps he can argue that a harm against one (in the family) is a harm against all (in the family) to explain why he suffered persecution?