One theory is that parents who kill their children and then themselves are narcisistic personalities. They are primarily determined to kill themselves and believe that the children would be better off dead than living without them. Others use the deaths of the children to punish the surviving partner - you don't want me, so can't have my kids either.
Surely they must give some clue, in words or deeds, of their intentions? Do those around them miss the clues because they think "Oh, he'd never harm the kids, he loves them too much"? Think again.
And where would turn for help if you have such suspicions? The police can't act unless he's actually done something, and that's way too late.
No answers. Just questions that raise yet more questions.
Blessings on the surviving members of both parents' families.
Sandi - yes, there is, most often (but not always) a long record of "signs". Unfortunately, police, courts, family, friends, and least of all society (so ready to judge and blame in the most asinine manner) is capable or willing to believe that these outcomes are possible or even likely, until they happen - again and again and again.
In fairness, police have more powers now, and act swiftly when able to, but they can't be there continually, nor are they always contacted.
As for "custody battles": without exception, the parent in these cases has regular and willing access to their children - they don't kidnap their children, in other words; they have not been denied their role as a loving parent, in other words.
6 comments:
This is just so sad, and why has to be asked, why the children?
Bloody horrible.
One theory is that parents who kill their children and then themselves are narcisistic personalities. They are primarily determined to kill themselves and believe that the children would be better off dead than living without them. Others use the deaths of the children to punish the surviving partner - you don't want me, so can't have my kids either.
Surely they must give some clue, in words or deeds, of their intentions? Do those around them miss the clues because they think "Oh, he'd never harm the kids, he loves them too much"? Think again.
And where would turn for help if you have such suspicions? The police can't act unless he's actually done something, and that's way too late.
No answers. Just questions that raise yet more questions.
Blessings on the surviving members of both parents' families.
Regards
Sandi
Sadly it looks like you were on the money Sandi, a disputed custody case.
Sandi - yes, there is, most often (but not always) a long record of "signs". Unfortunately, police, courts, family, friends, and least of all society (so ready to judge and blame in the most asinine manner) is capable or willing to believe that these outcomes are possible or even likely, until they happen - again and again and again.
In fairness, police have more powers now, and act swiftly when able to, but they can't be there continually, nor are they always contacted.
As for "custody battles": without exception, the parent in these cases has regular and willing access to their children - they don't kidnap their children, in other words; they have not been denied their role as a loving parent, in other words.
Unbearably heartbreaking.
horrible tragedy. horrible
That photo of the two children bought tears to my eyes, poor little angels may they rest in peace. They did not deserve that.
Post a Comment