Religious delusions and filicide: a psychodynamic model

Abstract

In this article, we present a psychodynamic explanation for the complex crime of filicide motivated by religious delusions. To begin, we provide an overview of filicide, including its typology and epidemiology. Second, we examine the psychoanalytic theories of Heinz Kohut and Otto Kernberg so as to better understand how family-of-origin experiences add to the ways in which psychotic disorders later take shape in filicide cases. Third, we offer an explication of the psychology of religion, including the role that religious defences and religious delusions play in cases involving filicide. Ultimately, we hypothesise that mothers with religious delusions commit acts of filicide due to the dynamic and reciprocal interaction between mental illness, psychological functioning, and the psychological role played by religion. We conclude our article with a case illustration to demonstrate our theoretical model.

Keywords:

• filicide
• psychoanalytic theory
• forensic psychology
• chronic mental illness
• religious delusions

Notes

Notes

1. We use the term filicide throughout our article to broadly capture the act of a parent intentionally killing his or her child. Certainly, though, the forensic literature – including several references in this article – also describes a more specific type of child murder, infanticide, defined as child murder by a parent within the first year of life (Oberman, 2003).

2. For a more detailed explication of shame and jealousy from a psychodynamic perspective, see Mollon (2002). As Mollon reveals, jealousy can easily explode violently and without the slightest bit of warning, severely damaging love and trust in relationships and seemingly serving no useful interpersonal function. Mollon further explains: “Shame and jealousy fuel each other. The perception of a rival contains the idea of one's own inadequacy compared to the other, and hence gives rise to shame and jealousy – which gives rise to further shame and feelings of inadequacy – in turn giving rise to further jealousy – and so on” (p. 78).