↓ Skip to main content

“Nobody came to help”: interviews with women convicted of filicide in Malaysia

Overview of attention for article published in Archives of Women's Mental Health, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
86 Mendeley
Title
“Nobody came to help”: interviews with women convicted of filicide in Malaysia
Published in
Archives of Women's Mental Health, March 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00737-018-0832-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Salmi Razali, Jane Fisher, Maggie Kirkman

Abstract

Although filicide is of serious concern, it is poorly understood in Malaysia. Our interviews with health and policy professionals revealed that they attribute responsibility for filicide to women's failure to comply with social norms and religious teachings. This research sought to understand the meaning of and background to filicide from the perspectives of women who have been convicted of filicide in Malaysia. In-depth interviews were conducted in person with all eligible and consenting women convicted of filicide and incarcerated in prisons or forensic psychiatric institutions. Women's accounts were translated into English and analysed using interpretative phenomenological analysis and interpreted using narrative theory. Interviews with nine women convicted of filicide yielded evidence that others were implicated in the crime but punished less severely, if at all, and that the women had experienced lifelong gender-based violence and marginalisation with minimal access to health and social care. These findings illuminate an inadequately understood phenomenon in Malaysia and reveal why existing strategies to reduce filicide, which reflect key stakeholders' views, have had little impact. They reveal the pervasive harm of violence against women and children and its link to filicide.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 86 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 9%
Student > Master 7 8%
Student > Bachelor 7 8%
Researcher 6 7%
Other 16 19%
Unknown 34 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 16 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 7%
Social Sciences 6 7%
Engineering 2 2%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 41 48%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 March 2018.
All research outputs
#18,591,506
of 23,028,364 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Women's Mental Health
#814
of 931 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#258,245
of 332,500 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Women's Mental Health
#27
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,028,364 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 931 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.6. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 332,500 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.