Between condemnation and compassion: Sentencing narratives of eldercide by family caregivers in Japanese criminal courts

Abstract

Despite increasing public concern over caregiver homicides, little research has examined how judges characterize and rationalize these crimes in sentencing. This article investigates how Japanese courts narrate and justify punishment in cases of eldercide committed by family caregivers. Drawing on 91 district-court sentencing decisions between 2000 and 2024, retrieved from the LEX/DB database, the study employs qualitative content analysis of the “reasons for sentencing” sections. Two dominant narrative frames emerge. The first, denouncing act, constructs caregiver eldercide as a grave moral and legal wrong, an egregious breach of familial duty and, in some cases, an affront to the social order that threatens wider public trust in caregiving norms. The second, compassionate tragedy, situates the homicide within cumulative caregiving burdens, highlighting motives of mercy or despair, offender vulnerabilities such as age, illness, and psychological fragility, and systemic shortcomings in support. These findings illuminate how Japanese courts oscillate between condemnation and compassion, portraying eldercide either as a selfish betrayal of trust or as a tragic outcome of structural and emotional strain. The study contributes to sociolegal scholarship by showing how judicial narratives make sense of homicide in contexts where familial care and state responsibility intersect.