Violence against women: A series of autopsy studies from Istanbul, Turkey

Ünal, Esra; Koç, Sermet; Ünal, Volkan; Akçan, Ramazan; Javan, Gulnaz T.

doi:10.1016/j.jflm.2015.11.025

Cited by 9 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In line with all these results and as expected, the most common crime scene was a domestic setting (74.5%), and the same has been found to apply in several national and international studies [ 12 , 14 , 17 ]. In our study, the second most common crime scene was on the streets (16.2%), and the same pattern has been found in other Turkish studies [ 17 , 18 ].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…Moreover, our results reflect that gaining access to handguns and other firearms is relatively easy in Turkey. Similarly, recent studies from Turkey have shown very similar results; firearm injuries (43–56%) were most common, followed by sharp force injuries (23–28%) [ 14 , 17 , 18 ].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 62%

“…This assumption is supported by some other findings in the Taiwan study that are not in line with ours, such as the high number of blunt traumatic lesions and the low percentage of firearm deaths. As we will mention below, injury and death rates for blunt trauma have been found to be low in our study and other Turkish studies; in general, killing is the prime intention of femicides in Turkey [ 18 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 46%

“…The peak age for femicide victims has been found to be 30–49 in some international and local studies [ 14 , 15 , 17 , 18 , 28 ]. Similarly, the median age of victims was placed in the fourth decade in our study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Another study conducted in Italy showed that weapons were used in 79.4% of femicide cases [ 16 ]. According to studies conducted in Turkey, weapon use in femicide cases ranged between 66.5%, 80%, 80.1% and 83.4% [ 14 , 15 , 17 , 18 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Femicide in Turkey between 2000 and 2010

Toprak

Ersoy

2017

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract