Archival data review of intimate partner homicide-suicide in Jamaica, 2007 – 2017: focus on mental health and community response

Abstract

Objective. To identify social and behavioral patterns and mental health concerns associated with intimate partner homicide-suicide (IPHS) in Jamaica through an analysis of media and police reports. Methods. This was an archival data review of police records and print, radio, and television reports of IPHS incidents from January 2007-June 2017 in Jamaica. The 27 cases found were qualitatively analyzed using pre-identified codes and open coding to generate themes and patterns. Results. A prevalence rate of 0.1 per 100 000 was determined. In all cases, males were the homicide-offender. Sociodemographic patterns associated with IPHS incidents-age, personality traits, choice of weapon, and time of occurrence-were consistent with previous findings. Common triggers were offender obsession, sexual jealousy, and fear of separation. Despite reports of mental health concerns in both male and female partners, neither the couples nor community members sought help prior to the homicide-suicide. Conclusion. These findings demand a change in cultural attitudes toward domestic disputes and mental health concerns, and a redefining of the community's responsibility in IPHS. The warning signs associated with IPHS should be part of existing violence and suicide prevention programs.

Using faith-based organisations to promote mental health education to underserved populations in Jamaica

“…The low referral rate may be linked to poor mental health literacy and urgency for professional care particularly for adults, along with existing mental health stigma and limited availability of public mental health facilities that are common in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) (Asher et al, 2017). Our results support the need to sensitise community leaders to better encourage mental health-seeking behaviours (Bernard et al, 2018; Pottinger et al, 2019) and promote mental health education.…”

Risk Factors for Intimate Partner Femicide–Suicide in Italy: An Ecological Approach

“…Previous studies on IPFS perpetrators’ risk factors showed that it is almost always characterized by an intimate male perpetrator and a female victim [ 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 9 , 10 , 15 , 30 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 ]. Perpetrators are, in most cases, of a white racial background [ 9 , 30 ] with a medium or low socioeconomic background [ 4 , 10 ], and older than the victim [ 4 , 5 , 12 , 37 ].…”

“…Previous studies on IPFS perpetrators’ risk factors showed that it is almost always characterized by an intimate male perpetrator and a female victim [ 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 9 , 10 , 15 , 30 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 ]. Perpetrators are, in most cases, of a white racial background [ 9 , 30 ] with a medium or low socioeconomic background [ 4 , 10 ], and older than the victim [ 4 , 5 , 12 , 37 ]. They generally used a gun for committing IPFS [ 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 35 , 38 , 39 , 40 ] and most often in a relationship with the current or ex-intimate partner (e.g., married, cohabiting, recently separated) [ 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 9 , 10 , 12 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 ].…”

“…Perpetrators are, in most cases, of a white racial background [ 9 , 30 ] with a medium or low socioeconomic background [ 4 , 10 ], and older than the victim [ 4 , 5 , 12 , 37 ]. They generally used a gun for committing IPFS [ 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 35 , 38 , 39 , 40 ] and most often in a relationship with the current or ex-intimate partner (e.g., married, cohabiting, recently separated) [ 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 9 , 10 , 12 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 ]. Most of the existing studies were descriptive and as far as we know, none of them compared IPF and IPFS perpetrators’ individual, relational and contextual characteristics.…”

“…At the individual level, existing studies focused on gender, age, race, alcohol/drug use, mental illness, and previous crimes committed by the author [ 4 , 5 , 6 , 9 , 10 , 12 , 15 , 30 , 36 , 37 , 41 ]. Being male, white, and older are key risk factors in IPFS compared with only IPF cases [ 3 , 4 , 5 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 15 , 35 , 37 , 42 , 43 , 44 ].…”