This paper discusses the findings of a ten‐year study of filicide in Victoria, Australia, using the data from selected case files held in the Victorian coroner's office for the period 2000–09. The study sought to examine whether separation is a factor in filicide cases, as well as the role of other factors, such as domestic violence and mental illness. Also, the study sought to identify whether filicide perpetrators had contact with support services, including family and friends, general practitioners, mental health services and child protection services, in order to ascertain how these services might more appropriately identify those families most at risk prior to the filicide. The study found that while separation was a factor identified in a significant number of cases, more cases analysed showed evidence of mental illness, mainly depression. These findings suggest the need for improved strategies in preventing filicide by identifying risk factors and improving service responses for victims prior to these tragic events. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Key Practitioner Messages: Filicide is uncommon but does occur. Perpetrators fall into three main groups and a different scenario is associated with each group. Associated (risk) factors were found to be mental illness (especially depression), separation, domestic violence and substance abuse. Any client/patient with mental illness and partner separation should be probed for thoughts of harm. Engagement with services is a protective factor.

The prison population in most jurisdictions is escalating. As many prisoners are also parents, more children will inevitably be affected by the experience of having a parent incarcerated. Police and the lower courts are the gatekeepers of the criminal justice system and make urgent and vital decisions about arrest, remand and sentencing which have critical consequences for the children of those arrested, remanded and sentenced. To better understand how these children are responded to by this adult system, this paper draws on data collected from a purposive sample (N ¼ 16) of Victorian magistrates, legal representatives and police, as part of a broader ARC funded study. Findings indicate that the consideration of these children by police and magistrates is largely ad hoc and depends on good will and the exercise of discretion. The balancing of justice issues and the interests of children is also complex and currently under-researched and under-informed. The authors argue that until the agencies dealing with adults incorporate child-focused practices, children, who have a primary carer in prison, will continue to be disadvantaged by a system which considers them only as collateral damage in the exercise of justice.