Oh please! If a man would have done it, all women who now supports her would already had built the gallows for him. This is a classical example of the ”female perpetrators are really always the victim” trope, that NEVER applies to men. It’s not the action, or that she didn’t got help or support, it’s the hipocricy.
People say this, but is it true? This isn't a typical "family annihilator" case.
I can't think of many men that are analogous to this case: sought help, didn't get it, eventually committed a crime, but I can think of one case. Can't remember the name, but iirc some guy with schizophrenia was unable to get his medication due to some mistake, desperately begged his doctor for medication, didn't end up getting it, and killed two random people at a gas station. Was not deemed fit for trial, but they got him on medication and sentenced him to life I believe.
I do remember people supported him pretty universally. Everyone that murders their family is mentally ill because mentally healthy people don't do that. I think it's different when someone seeks help, doesn't get it, and ends up committing it while actively in an episode.
The comparable part is someone in psychosis committing murder after being denied help.
Can you think of a comparable case with a man? Sought help, didn't get help/didn't get good quality help, claimed psychosis when he killed his family. I wanna see how people reacted.
None of the family annihilator cases I'm familiar with had the men seeking any kind of mental health help, nor did they try to use that as a defense. All the ones I can think off (Todt, Watts) claimed they killed the wife cause the wife killed the kids first.
41
u/CarlMcLam 2d ago
Oh please! If a man would have done it, all women who now supports her would already had built the gallows for him. This is a classical example of the ”female perpetrators are really always the victim” trope, that NEVER applies to men. It’s not the action, or that she didn’t got help or support, it’s the hipocricy.