Femicide in Turkey between 2000 and 2010

Abstract

Although intimate partner violence (IPV) is an important problem that threatens women’s health, very few studies focus on the victim—perpetrator relationship or examine this relationship across Turkey. The aim of this study is to contribute to a better understanding of femicide cases in Turkey and to describe the socio-demographic, clinical, forensic, and criminological characteristics of femicide victims and offenders. This study analysed 162 femicide cases that occurred in 12 cities in Turkey from 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2010. Eighty women were killed by their partners (classified as intimate partner femicide, IPF), and 81 women were killed by one of their relatives, friends, or strangers (classified as non-intimate partner femicide, non-IPF). According to our results, the typical IPF victim is of child-bearing age, does not have a paid job, is married or divorced, is killed in a domestic setting due to injuries to the thorax or abdomen produced by an edged/pointed weapon or firearm, and is possibly a victim of overkill. The typical IPF perpetrator is close to his victim’s age, has a paid job, has no mental disability, owns a gun, and has threatened his partner or ex-partner previously because of jealousy/infidelity/honour or separation. The typical non-IPF victim is very similar to the IPF victim; however, her marital status can be single, married or divorced, and she is commonly killed by a relative. The surveillance and screening of femicide and IPV is an important step when analysing and attempting to prevent femicide. Second, the training and sensitization of health professionals are important. Moreover, health staff should be encouraged to participate in advocacy interventions. Third, gun ownership must be brought under control.

Violência urbana e fatores de risco relacionados ao feminicídio em contexto amazônico brasileiro

“…However, in the midst of so many uncertainties, it seems certain that men are the principal assailants. This study, as in various other areas of the world 3,41,52,53,54,55 , found that in most femicides the perpetrator is the current or former boyfriend or husband, as opposed to other perpetrators, whether or not they are known to the victim.…”

“…The study's results highlight nuances that have received little attention concerning the magnitude of femicide and the associated risk factors, as well as reflections concerning the possible consequences for the victims' families, especially the children 53,55 , since many of these murders occur at home, in the environment shared by the family and in the children's presence 23 .…”

“…The latter were used in fewer than 20% of the femicides, contrary to the means used in other violent deaths, in which firearms reached nearly 80% of the cases. Studies in different contexts concerning the principal means used by assailants to kill their victims have shown that the use of firearms varies upwards or downwards when compared to Manaus, suggesting wide variation in this indicator, depending on the respective context 23,27,41,46,52,53 .…”

Unveiling the Strategies Used by Women for Confronting Marital Violence

“…A study in Turkey found that over 70% of the analyzed femicides occurred at the victim's home. 4 When not taking their lives, experiencing violence leaves marks on women, such as hematomas, lacerations, bruises and fractures caused by physical aggression and/or due to somatization process. In addition to these, there are mental and physical signs and symptoms of emotional origin, such as insomnia, low self-esteem, panic disorder, gastric ulcers and hypertension.…”

Kadin Ci̇nayetleri̇nde Semboli̇k İkti̇darin Kri̇zi̇

“…Weil'in (2016bWeil'in ( , s. 1126 belirttiği gibi, görünürlük sosyal bilimcilerin toplumsal olguları görüp görmediklerini, ya da nasıl gördüklerini, radikal bir biçimde şekillendirir. Kadınlara yönelen şiddetin ne ölçüde öldürücü boyutlara ulaştığını gözler önüne seren bu temsil biçimi, kadın cinayetlerini akademik bir görüş alanı içerisine taşımakta oldukça etkili olmuş gibi görünüyor: Son yıllarda, adli tıp (Ozgun Unal, Koc, Unal, Akcan, & Javan, 2016;Toprak & Ersoy, 2017), hukuk (Doğan, 2014), ruh sağlığı (Tosun Altınöz, Altınöz, Utku, Eşsizoğlu, & Candansayar, 2018) ve sosyoloji (Çetin, 2015;Taşdemir Afşar, 2016) gibi alanlardan çalışmalar Türkiye'de kadın cinayetlerinin farklı yönlerini mercek altına almaya başladı.…”