Grief and delivering a statement in court: a longitudinal mixed-method study among homicidally bereaved people

ABSTRACT

Background: Participating in a criminal trial may increase the likelihood of developing psychopathology. In 2021, people bereaved by a plane disaster (flight MH17) had the opportunity to deliver a victim personal statement (VPS) in Dutch court.

Objective: This longitudinal mixed-method study examined different aspects of 84 bereaved people’s experiences with VPS delivery.

Method: Motivations to deliver, or not deliver, an oral VPS were examined qualitatively using thematic content analysis. Whether background and loss-related variables were related to the decision to deliver a VPS was examined using binary logistic regression analyses. Between-group (delivered VPS vs. did not) and within-group (pre- vs. post-VPS) comparisons were made regarding prolonged grief disorder (PGD), posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and depression levels using t-tests and paired t-tests.

Results: Bereaved people were most frequently motivated to deliver an oral VPS to describe the impact of the incident, while those who did not deliver an oral VPS commonly wanted to protect themselves from the perceived emotional burden. None of the correlates – i.e. biological sex, age, level of education, number of losses, and (closest) relationship to the deceased – were related to the decision to deliver a VPS. Lastly, significantly higher PGD, PTSD, and depression levels were reported by people who delivered a VPS than those who did not, before and after the court hearing. No significant within-group differences were found over time.

Conclusions: Professionals may provide emotional support to bereaved people who want to deliver a VPS and manage their expectations if they want to deliver a VPS for the purpose of symptom reduction. Future research may benefit from examining other ways in which VPS delivery might have beneficial or detrimental effects for specific individuals. Overall, implementing VPS delivery in court on the basis of emotional restoration remains empirically unsupported, if defined as a reduction in psychopathological levels.

HIGHLIGHTS

• We are the first to examine if statement delivery changes grief-related distress.

• Statement delivery did not significantly change grief-related distress.

• Defining emotional restoration as a decrease in psychopathology remains unsupported.

Antecedentes: El participar en un juicio penal puede aumentar la probabilidad de desarrollo de psicopatología. En el 2021, las personas en duelo por un accidente aéreo (vuelo MH17) tuvieron la oportunidad de presentar una declaración personal de víctima (VPS por sus siglas en inglés) ante un tribunal holandés.

Objetivo: Este estudio longitudinal de métodos mixtos examinó los diferentes aspectos de la experiencia de 84 personas en duelo con la entrega de VPS.

Método: Las motivaciones para realizar o no una VPS oral se examinaron cualitativamente usando análisis de contenido temático. Se examinó mediante análisis de regresión logística binaria si las variables de antecedentes y relacionadas con las pérdidas estaban relacionadas con la decisión de realizar una VPS. Se realizaron comparaciones entre grupos (los que entregaron VPS vs los que no) e intragrupo (antes vs después de VPS) con respecto al trastorno por duelo prolongado (PGD por sus siglas en inglés), trastorno de estrés postraumático (TEPT) y niveles de depresión utilizando pruebas de t y pruebas de t pareadas.

Resultados: Las personas en duelo se sintieron con mayor frecuencia motivadas a realizar una VPS oral para describir el impacto del incidente, mientras que aquellos que no realizaron una VPS oral comúnmente querían protegerse de la carga emocional percibida. Ninguno de los correlatos por ej., sexo biológico, edad, nivel educacional, números de pérdidas y relación (más cercana) con el fallecido estuvieron relacionadas con la decisión de entregar una VPS. Por último, las personas que realizaron una VPS reportaron mayores niveles de PGD, TEPT y depresión que aquellas que no lo hicieron, antes y después de la audiencia judicial. No se encontraron diferencias significativas dentro del grupo a lo largo del tiempo.

Conclusiones: Los profesionales pueden brindar apoyo emocional a las personas en duelo que quieran realizar una VPS y manejar sus expectativas si desean realizar una VPS con el fin de reducir sus síntomas. Investigaciones futuras podrían beneficiarse al examinar otras formas en las que la entrega de VPS pudiera tener efectos beneficiosos o perjudiciales para individuos específicos. En general, la implementación de VPS en los tribunales sobre la base de la restauración emocional sigue sin tener respaldo empírico, si se define como una reducción en los niveles psicopatológicos.

KEYWORDS:

• Prolonged grief
• posttraumatic stress
• depression
• victim impact statement
• bereavement
• trauma
• homicide
• motivation

PALABRAS CLAVE:

• Duelo prolongado
• estrés traumático
• depresión
• declaración de impacto en la víctima
• duelo
• trauma
• homicidio
• motivación

Acknowledgements

Our sincerest gratitude to all people who took part in the study, as well as the MH17 Disaster Foundation, family liaison officers of the Dutch police, and Victim Support the Netherlands for the effort they put in supporting us with recruiting participants. Additionally, we would like to thank research assistant Marjel Buiter for her support with data collection.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Data availability statement

The dataset associated with this study can be found on the Open Science Framework repository via this link (https://osf.io/xej78/).

Notes

1 The main difference between the two systems is that in common law countries, case law – in the form of published judicial opinions – is of primary importance, whereas in civil law systems, codified statutes predominate.

2 The participants who stated ‘no added value to the participant’ as a motivation to not deliver an oral VPS had not delivered a written VPS.

Additional information

Funding

This research was funded by Fund Victim Support (in Dutch: Fonds Slachtofferhulp), the Dutch Ministry of Justice and Safety [20002853] and Stichting Achmea Slachtoffer en Samenleving (SASS) [201230]. The funding agencies were not involved in the execution of the study.