Familicide‐Suicide: From Myth To Hypothesis And Toward Understanding

Familicide‐suicide following separation is an underresearched and poorly understood offense. Findings from previous research are inconclusive about risk factors and perpetrator motivation. This article explores common myths about the offense in relation to some of the findings from two studies of familicide‐suicide following separation undertaken in Western Australia. A new conceptualization of the offense is proposed based on attachment theory, the neurobiology of trauma, and the possible subconscious motivation of perpetrators, which may be helpful in assessing risk of familicide‐suicide in family court cases. Keypoints There are warning signs to familicide‐suicide following separation. Warning signs are often not recognised or not adequately communicated to decision makers. Risk factors are dynamic and therefore not always able to be assessed in tests that measure static personality characteristics. Assessment needs to involve input from family members and collaboration with other agencies. Judicial decision making should be informed by comprehensive psychological profiles including childhood abuse history, adult attachment assessments, level of narcissism, degree of symbiosis in the relationship and history of domestic violence, including threats to kill and/or suicide.