Date post: | 17-Jan-2017 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | matthew-knapp |
View: | 10 times |
Download: | 1 times |
Matthew A. KnappUniversity of Alabama
STUDIES ON THOSE WHO HAVE HAD A FAMILY MEMBER DIE BY HOMICIDE
STUDIES ON THOSE WHO ARE SIGNIFICANT OTHERS OF A HOMICIDE PERPETRATOR
Qualitative : experiences of survivors (2)
Theory (5) Therapeutic
Interventions (3) Service Provision (3) Victim Impact
Statements (2)
Qualitative (experiences of survivors) (5)
Have skyrocketed since the early 1980’s Victim/Witness Protection Act of 1982 Allows for Victim Impact Statement prior
to sentencing State and federal programs set up for
referral, counseling, and financial support
Numerous human service agencies assist victims (e.g. San Diego)
Co-victims may begin or join support groups (e.g. Parents of Murdered Children)
May start/attend self help groups Private counseling Going to conferences Prison support (rare), involving funeral
arrangements, distribution of possessions, and follow-up from professionals after execution
Religiosity
Sleeplessness Guilt Anxiety Fear Being ostracized from their community No opportunity to provide an Impact Statement prior to
sentencing Possible loss/decrease in income Stress due to media exposure Isolation Increased stress in dealing with the perpetrator over
time Prolonged, complicated grief (knowing the family
member will die, postponement due to appeals draws out process
Relationship problems in the family unit
Foucault and the “Panopticon” Shift from punishment of the body to control of the mind Treatment of perpetrator families may be less about
overt actions, more about the covert Denial or lack of existing formal services might = covert
control Others in the community acting as “guards” between
victim and perpetrators families Community as Panopticon- discouraging families of
perpetrators from full participation in community
Goffman The Stigmatized Body Perpetrators families attempting to
“pass” Being “found out” reinforces negative
self-image Stress of “secret keeping”
FAMILIES OF VICTIMS: FAMILIES OF PERPETRATORS:
Feel the homicide was senseless
Have profound alteration of world view
Seek justice through legal system
Rarely meet or speak with perpetrators family
Understand why their family member received death sentence-accept it
Have less alteration of world view
Often want to speak with and apologize to victim’s family
Experience feelings of guilt Feel shock and horror Anger Experience relationship problems in family
unit Are stressed by media attention Report issues with Law Enforcement
(manner of death notification, and perceptions of “guilt by association”)
Allowing a form of VIS from the family of the perpetrator prior to sentencing
Using professionals who can work with both “sides” (families) to facilitate communication between them
Providing a separate space for perpetrator’s family to regroup during trial and sentencing
Providing for emotional and mental health concerns before, during and after trial and sentencing
Increased implementation of Social/Restorative Justice options
Both victims and perpetrator families have many overlapping issues and experiences
Literature on perpetrator’s family’s experiences was strong in the 1970’s, disappeared after the Victim/Witness Protection Act in 1982, and now is coming back in the past few years
Supports within a community differ dramatically Each “body” (of victim and perpetrator) is forever
tied to the respective families, maintaining social status distinctions
Witnessing an execution did little to provide closure to families of homicide victims
How homicide is viewed and addressed is a societal issue, rather than simply an individual issue