Continuing Coercive Control After Intimate Partner Femicide: The Role of Detection Avoidance and Concealment

9Citations
Citations of this article
19Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Links between IPF and homicide concealment have been observed but not explained. We theorize IPF perpetrators use concealment to continue coercively controlling investigators, children, courts and finances post-IPF. We compare abuse in the relationship and surrounding IPF in five diverse cases. Facilitated by concealment, offenders use versatile, subtle and overt tactics to extend control post-IPF. They capitalize on opportunities for concealment and regaining control, sometimes without other benefits. Tactics are akin to those employed previously, aligning with the power and control wheel. Concealment allows offenders to dominate the death narrative and assists with remaining unaccountable.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Ferguson, C., & McLachlan, F. (2023). Continuing Coercive Control After Intimate Partner Femicide: The Role of Detection Avoidance and Concealment. Feminist Criminology, 18(4), 353–375. https://doi.org/10.1177/15570851231189531

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free