Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://anrows.intersearch.com.au/anrowsjspui/handle/1/13957
Record ID: b292936e-db08-4e93-9f3c-f2df26acfb30
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorBuiten, Deniseen
dc.contributor.authorCoe, Georgiaen
dc.date.accessioned2022-06-30T23:09:57Z-
dc.date.available2022-06-30T23:09:57Z-
dc.date.issued2021en
dc.identifier.urihttps://anrows.intersearch.com.au/anrowsjspui/handle/1/13957-
dc.description.abstractFamilicide – the killing of a partner and child(ren) – is a rare and complex crime that, when it occurs, receives intense media coverage. However, despite growing scholarly attention to filicide in the news, little research to date has looked at how familicide is represented. Situated at the intersection of filicide, intimate partner homicide and very often suicide, how the knotty and confronting issue of familicide is reported on is telling of the discourses available to understand complex forms of family violence. In this article, we argue that reporting on familicide mirrors broader feminist concerns about the tendency to frame fatal family violence at the hands of men in individualised terms – often as driven by mental illness – at the expense of an accounting of gender and power. Here, we seek to elaborate on and contextualise what we call the mental illness/distress frame as part of the broader tendency towards psychocentrism. This is amplified in cases of familicide where cultural signifiers for the increasingly publicly conceived of issue of ‘domestic violence’ are often not apparent, leading to popularised psychological explanations to be assumed. The mental health/distress frame operates not only to obscure the role of gender and power in domestic and family violence; it obscures the connection between gender, mental distress and violence, naturalising (and gender-neutralising) mental distress and violence as a response to it. We argue that intersecting discourses – of gender, age, disability and the heterosexual nuclear family, for instance – operate in important ways to suggest, support and rationalise this frame. We illustrate these ideas through a detailed case study analysis of news reporting on a case of familicide in Sydney, Australia.en
dc.languageenen
dc.publisherSage Publicationsen
dc.relation.ispartofCrime, Media, Culture: An International Journalen
dc.subjectfamilicideen
dc.titleCompeting discourses and cultural intelligibility: Familicide, gender and the mental illness/distress frame in newsen
dc.typeJournal Articleen
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1177/17416590211009275en
dc.identifier.catalogid16922en
dc.subject.keywordnew_recorden
dc.subject.keywordInvalid URLen
dc.subject.readinglistANROWS Notepad 2021 May 6en
dc.date.entered2021-04-29en
dc.subject.listANROWS Notepad 2021 May 6en
Appears in Collections:Journal Articles

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in ANROWS library are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Google Media

Google ScholarTM

Who's citing