Warning: imagejpeg(C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\phplern\28832596
.jpg): Failed to open stream: No such file or directory in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 117 PLoS+One
2017 ; 12
(8
): e0182409
Nephropedia Template TP
gab.com Text
Twit Text FOAVip
Twit Text #
English Wikipedia
Femicide in Turkey between 2000 and 2010
#MMPMID28832596
Toprak S
; Ersoy G
PLoS One
2017[]; 12
(8
): e0182409
PMID28832596
show ga
Although intimate partner violence (IPV) is an important problem that threatens
women's health, very few studies focus on the victim-perpetrator relationship or
examine this relationship across Turkey. The aim of this study is to contribute
to a better understanding of femicide cases in Turkey and to describe the
socio-demographic, clinical, forensic, and criminological characteristics of
femicide victims and offenders. This study analysed 162 femicide cases that
occurred in 12 cities in Turkey from 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2010. Eighty
women were killed by their partners (classified as intimate partner femicide,
IPF), and 81 women were killed by one of their relatives, friends, or strangers
(classified as non-intimate partner femicide, non-IPF). According to our results,
the typical IPF victim is of child-bearing age, does not have a paid job, is
married or divorced, is killed in a domestic setting due to injuries to the
thorax or abdomen produced by an edged/pointed weapon or firearm, and is possibly
a victim of overkill. The typical IPF perpetrator is close to his victim's age,
has a paid job, has no mental disability, owns a gun, and has threatened his
partner or ex-partner previously because of jealousy/infidelity/honour or
separation. The typical non-IPF victim is very similar to the IPF victim;
however, her marital status can be single, married or divorced, and she is
commonly killed by a relative. The surveillance and screening of femicide and IPV
is an important step when analysing and attempting to prevent femicide. Second,
the training and sensitization of health professionals are important. Moreover,
health staff should be encouraged to participate in advocacy interventions.
Third, gun ownership must be brought under control.
free
free
free
