‘Just Say Goodbye’ (January 2013 online edition)

DVRCV Discussion Paper No. 8and Ramazan Acar, the perpetrators taunted their ex-partners by telling themthey would never see their children again.Researchers have identified that it is common for perpetrators of familyviolence to hurt children as a means to hurt their mother (Fish et al. 2009,Radford & Hester 2006, Humphreys 2007). Perpetrators often undermine orattack the mother–child relationship, involve children in violence and makethreats to harm the children (ADVCH 2011).It has also been found that children are more vulnerable to abuse afterseparation (Bagshaw et al. 2010) and that post-separation violence is oftenconnected with child contact arrangements (Humphreys & Thiara 2002).Child contact is now being recognised in some jurisdictions as a potential riskfactor in the homicides of mothers and/or children by previously violent fathers(Association of Chief Police Officers/Home Office 2006).Depression and suicideIn all the cases outlined in this chapter there was either indication of priordepression (Arthur Freeman, Robert Farquharson) and self-destructivebehaviour (Ramazan Acar) or the perpetrator committed suicide (or attemptedto) after killing the children ( Jayson Dalton, Rajesh Osborne, Phithak Kongsom,Gary Bell and Dean Williamson).Johnson (2005) found most perpetrators in her study who committed filicidesuicidewere depressed, disturbed and erratic in the period leading up to thekilling. This raises questions about the role of depression and mental illness inthe actions of filicide perpetrators.The extent and role of mental illness in filicides is difficult to determine,particularly when the perpetrators suicide and are therefore not able to undergoa psychiatric assessment. It can also be difficult to assess retrospectively theperpetrator’s mental health at the time of the incident. After the incident, theirmental state may reflect their reaction to what they have done. For instance, atArthur Freeman’s trial there were lengthy debates about his mental state at thetime of the filicide. In sentencing Arthur Freeman, Justice Coghlan said that hebelieved his behaviour after the incident was a result of ‘realising the enormityand awfulness’ of what he had done. 98As discussed in Chapter 3, while mental illness is likely to be a factor in manyfilicides, there is a need for a better understanding of the social and contextualfactors that contribute to perpetrators’ depression and psychological distress.In many of the cases outlined in this chapter the perpetrators’ mental states at98 R v Freeman [2011] VSC 139 (para 19).58