ABSTRACT
The deliberate killing of a child by its mother is abhorrent and is associated in the minds of many with mental illness and in particular with postnatal depression. However, at least 50% of perpetrators are neither "mad" nor "bad", and mothers who kill children are not "unhinged" by pregnancy or childbirth. We propose a different explanation: "blind rage" or "overwhelmed syndrome", whereby parents, stressed to breaking point by sleep deprivation or incessant baby crying, respond by lethally harming their child contrary to previous behaviour. The roots of this blind rage may be found in psychosocial disturbances, including the mother's own unsatisfactory experience of parenting which has caused attachment disorders. The legal framework guiding decisions to prosecute and structuring sentencing decision-making following conviction should acknowledge the exceptional stress experienced by such mothers postnatally. Health professionals including midwives and obstetricians should increase their vigilance and arrange referrals for mothers at risk of causing harm or committing infanticide.
Subject(s)
Infanticide , Mothers , Humans , Infanticide/legislation & jurisprudence , Infanticide/psychology , Depression , Depression, Postpartum , Sleep Deprivation , Female , Stress, Psychological , Mothers/psychology , Mother-Child RelationsABSTRACT
In the UK context, the rise of the discipline and practice of forensic psychiatry is intimately connected with the concurrent development of principles and practices relating to criminal responsibility. In this article, we seek to chart the relationship between psychiatry and the principles and practices of criminal responsibility in the UK over the early modern, modern and late modern periods. With a focus on claims about authority and expert knowledge around criminal responsibility, we suggest that these claims have been in a state of perpetual negotiation and that, as a result, claims to authority over and knowledge about criminal non-responsibility on the part of psychiatrists and psychiatry are most accurately understood as emergent and contingent. The apparent formalism of legal discourse has tended to conceal the extent to which legal policy has been preoccupied with maintaining the primacy of lay judgments in criminal processes of evaluation and adjudication. While this policy has been somewhat successful in the context of the trial - particularly the murder trial - it has been undermined by administrative procedures surrounding the trial, including those that substitute treatment for punishment without, or in spite of, a formal determination of criminal responsibility.
