The Invisible Woman. Joanne Belknap
as likely to be killed by strangers (25%) and acquaintances (43%) than are elder women (14% and 22%, respectively).
Intimate Partner Homicides (IPHs)
Men are more likely than women to kill current or former intimate partners (Addington & Perumean-Chaney, 2014; Bachman & Saltzman, 1995; Belknap, Larson, Abrams, & Garcia, 2012; Biroscak, Smith, & Post, 2006; Bossarte, Simon, & Barker, 2006; J. C. Campbell, Glass, Sharps, Laughon, & Bloom, 2007; DeJong, Pizarro, & McGarrell, 2011; Dobash & Dobash, 2015; Fox & Fridel, 2017; Gauthier & Bankston, 1997; Glass, Koziol-McLain, Campbell, & Block, 2004; H. Johnson, Eriksson, Mazerolle, & Wortley, 2017; Langford, Isaac, & Kabat, 1998; Serran & Firestone, 2004; Shai, 2010; P. H. Smith, Moracco, & Butts, 1998; Smucker, Kerber, & Cook, 2018; Vittes & Sorenson, 2008; Yousuf et al., 2017). When women kill, however, their victims are most likely to be their current or former intimate partners (boyfriends, husbands, ex-husbands, etc.) (e.g., Block & Christakos, 1995; Browne & Williams, 1989; DeJong et al., 2011; Fox & Zawitz, 2010; Gauthier & Bankston, 1997; Greenfeld & Snell, 1999). Even though intimate partner homicides (IPHs) are highly male-gender-related, among all homicides, the IPH gender gap is smaller (Gauthier & Bankston, 1997; Fox & Fridel, 2017). An analysis of intimate partner homicides in the United States from 1976 to 2005 reported that the number of men murdered by intimate partners decreased by 75% over this time period, whereas the number of women killed by intimate partners remained steady for two decades and then declined after 1993, reaching the lowest recorded level in 2004 and stabilizing there since then (Fox & Zawitz, 2010). IPHs declined for all gender and race groups, but mostly for Black men victims (decreased 83%), followed by white men victims (decreased 61%), Black women victims (decreased 52%), and least for white women victims (decreased by 6%) (Fox & Zawitz, 2010).
Filicides
Nowhere is the violation of culturally bound gender roles more sensationalized and symbolic than women who kill their own children. Three terms describe parents’ killing of their own children: (1) Neonaticide is the killing of one’s infant in the first 24 hours of life, (2) infanticide is the killing of one’s baby who is less than a year but more than 1 day old, and (3) filicide is the killing of one’s own child who is birth to 18 years old (although some studies use 1 to 18 years old). Large national U.S. studies fairly consistently identify filicide as a gender-neutral offense (Fox & Zawitz, 2004; Greenfeld & Snell, 1999; Mariano, Chan, & Myers, 2014), although mothers are more likely to kill very young children (especially neonates and infants) and fathers are more likely to kill older children (Alder & Baker, 1997; Debowska, Boduszek, & Dhingra, 2015; Greenfeld & Snell, 1999; Mariano et al., 2014; Putkonen, Weizmann-Henelius, Lindberg, Rovamo, & Häkkänen-Nyholm, 2011; S. F. Rodriguez & Smithey, 1999). However, an analysis of 30 years (1976–2005) of U.S. infanticides reported 62% were by men/fathers (Fox & Zawitz, 2010). Another study found infanticides committed by mothers’ boyfriends (16.4%) plus those committed by the infants’ fathers (24.7%) exceeded the percentage of infanticides committed by the infants’ mothers (32.4%) (Smithey, 1998). Given that mothers generally spend far more time parenting, especially as single parents, we would expect them to be more likely to commit filicide, but no studies account for this.
Compared with maternal filicides (mother-killed children), in paternal filicides (father-killed children) the children were older (Alder & Baker, 1997; Debowska et al., 2015; Putkonen et al., 2011); the parent was older (than the other parent) (Debowska et al., 2015); the parent was previously violent to the child (Putkonen et al., 2011); the parent was violent with other children in the home, including killing other children in the home (Putkonen et al., 2011); the parent was abusive or violent to the other parent, including in some cases, having killed the other parent (Adhia, Austin, Fitzmaurice, & Hemenway, 2019; Putkonen et al., 2011); the filicide was more impulsive (Putkonen et al., 2011); the killing was motivated by revenge or retaliation against the other parent and/or the child(ren) (Putkonen et al., 2011; Wilczynski, 1995); and the parent was intoxicated/high at the time (Putkonen et al., 2011). Conversely, compared with paternal filicides, in maternal filicides, the child was unwanted (Wilczynski 1995); the parent was more isolated (Alder & Baker, 1997); the child had a disability (Alder & Baker, 1997); the parent was frustrated with the child (Alder & Baker, 1997); the killing was altruistic (e.g., the child is dying or in pain and, sometimes, wishes to die) (Debowska et al., 2015; Wilczynski, 1995); the killing was consistent with Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy (the parent does it to get attention/sympathy from others) (Wilczynski, 1995); or the parent was psychotic/mentally ill (Debowska et al., 2015; Wilczynski, 1995).
Regarding filicide methods, fathers are more likely to use guns (Mariano et al., 2014; Putkonen et al., 2011), and mothers are more likely to drown, poison, or criminally neglect the child (Putkonen et al., 2011). Fathers are more likely to suicide after the killings (Debowska et al., 2015; Putkonen et al., 2011); mothers are more likely to try to cover their tracks and get rid of the body (Putkonen et al., 2011). One of the important themes in these identifiers is the connection with intimate partner abuse. The United States not only has the highest rate of child homicides among 25 populous, high-income countries, but 20.2% of U.S. child homicide victims are related to intimate partner violence (Adhia, Austin et al., 2019). Compared with other child-homicide offenders, those who commit child homicide that is related to intimate partner violence are disproportionately men, parents of the victim (i.e., fathers), white, use a firearm, and kill at the victim’s home (Adhia, Austin et al., 2019).
Research focusing solely on maternal filicides indicates that they are most frequently neonaticides, followed by infanticides, with killing of their children a year or older the least common (Ciani & Fontanesi, 2012). Oberman (2003) identified four types of maternal filicide offenders: (1) neonaticide—killing an infant less than 24 hours old, mostly by very young women/girls who deny their pregnancy to others and sometimes to themselves and may fear single parenthood; (2) fatal child neglect—unintentional killings, where the mother is distracted or inattentive (e.g., leaving a baby in a bath tub, car, or home alone or with a sibling too young to care for the child); (3) abuse-related—a violent episode where there is child abuse, but the mother did not mean to kill the child; (4) assisted or coerced— mothers who kill their children with their male partners (e.g., the children’s fathers or the mother’s boyfriends) and usually involves mothers also victimized by these male partners.
Women who commit neonaticide are disproportionately younger (often pregnant teenagers), poor, have no partner, attempt to conceal the pregnancy and the baby, and kill nonviolently, usually through abandonment (e.g., Ciani & Fontanesi, 2012; ebowski et al., 2015; Oberman, 2003; Smithey, 1998). It should be remembered that many of these women and girls face very real consequences if their pregnancies “were to become known,” that “could result in rejection and ostracization by significant others, such as parents, husbands, or boyfriends” (Smithey, 1998, p. 287). In addition, teenage parenting, particularly being a single parent, can throw someone into poverty or make someone’s situation far more dire. Despite an abundance of research on the sexist, classist, and racist treatment of young/teen mothers, evolutionary theory has been speculated to explain their neonaticides and infanticides (Mariano et al., 2014) without acknowledging their often highly disadvantaged situations.
Girls and Women in Gangs
People, including police, rarely think of girls when envisioning gang members (D. Peterson, 2012). Studies vary widely in what they report as girls’ representation in gangs, ranging from 6% to half of gang members (Bjerregaard, 2002; Bjerregaard & Smith, 1993; Esbensen & Winfree, 1998; Felkenes & Becker, 1995; Gilman, Hill, Hawkins, Howell, & Kosterman, 2014; Pyrooz, Sweeten, & Piquero, 2013). Although the National Gang Center reports that girls consistently constituted around 7% of U.S. gang members between 1998 and 2010 (their most recent data) and that girls constitute increasingly higher percentages moving from larger cities to rural counties (National Gang Center, 2019), the scholarship on gangs in the most recent years indicates that girls’ proportion of gang members is much higher than 7%; indeed it was reported to be 24% (Gilman et al., 2014), 31% (Watkins & Melde, 2018), and 41% (Estrada, Gilreath,