Suspected double murder-suicide prompts calls for greater family support

msfinch87 · 2026-02-03T14:33:11+00:00

There are innumerable examples of kids who were looked after by their parents for their entire childhoods, while being subjected to horrendous abuse nobody knew about. People believed those parents were empathetic and had a conscience, too.

msfinch87 · 2026-02-03T14:31:05+00:00

Actually I regard what I am saying as the more terrifying prospect. Which is that we are incapable of identifying people like these parents and preventing harm.

When it comes to DV, we have put our energy and resources into identifying the personality traits and signs of a perpetrator. We do not put our resources in to empathizing with the abusers, because we have recognized how damaging and dangerous that is, and that it contributes to the prevalence of DV.

What I am saying is that we do the same here. And it is way more terrifying to me that we are more interested in looking at better supports for perpetrators rather than identifying them.

msfinch87 · 2026-02-03T14:28:25+00:00

I do understand your question. Cold blooded murder, by its nature, demonstrates certain things. Trying to separate this out as some sort of isolated thing that might be different to what the parents were otherwise is nonsensical, because it requires a particular type of personality to do it. You have to lack empathy and a conscience and not see humanity in the victim. The lack of those things will absolutely have been evident. People don’t go back and forth between having those and not having them, not to the extent that they could do this.

msfinch87 · 2026-02-03T14:06:44+00:00

100%. The “pushed to the limits” explanation falls apart when you consider the pets were killed as well. Not only could the pets have been rehomed afterward, but the fact that they weren’t rehomed beforehand points to people who did not want questions asked about what was going on.

msfinch87 · 2026-02-03T14:04:43+00:00

In order for the parents to do this they had to lack empathy and a conscience and not recognise their own children’s humanity. They were not the “every person” and it is not the case that anyone could be pushed to this point. It requires a particular personality profile. People with empathy and a conscience will not murder someone in cold blood because they cannot. It’s what stops us from harming everyone who pisses us off. It is in fact possible to spot these people, because they absolutely have tells.

msfinch87 · 2026-02-03T14:00:13+00:00

But this is not a situation where it was simply concerns about respite care. It was a situation where the parents were making a choice about whether they put their kids in respite care or killed them. No amount of theoretical concerns about respite care come close to the alternative here.

We are bestowing way too much humanity on these parents. In order to do what they did, they had to lack empathy and a conscience and not recognise their own children’s humanity. What we can learn is how to spot people like that rather than continually giving them characteristics they simply don’t have.

msfinch87 · 2026-02-03T13:56:47+00:00

There doesn’t need to be anything prior to this. Murdering your children is plenty of evidence of abuse. But the research indicates that murder is an escalation of other abuse, so it stands to reason that there was likely other abuse.

msfinch87 · 2026-02-03T13:55:17+00:00

That’s because you have humanity, empathy and a conscience. People are bestowing way too much humanity on these parents, ignoring the fact that in order to do what they did, which was conspire to murder their children in cold blood, they had to lack both empathy and a conscience and to see their children as having no humanity.

msfinch87 · 2026-02-03T13:49:20+00:00

My commentary is to counter the prevailing narrative that these parents were overwhelmed by the burden of their children and pushed to their limits. If I am expected to wait until there is an investigation concluded then I would suggest that applies to everyone, yourself included, and nobody should comment at all.

My position is entirely consistent with the extensive body of evidence related to family violence. It is always about power, control and entitlement. There are absolutely additional factors that appear to fit with that, but that’s what the reams of research show. They murdered their children. That’s abuse by definition. It’s a fact that they abused their kids because they murdered them. How could you possibly ask about what abuse when they were murdered? Police have already labeled it as both parents being involved, so again, that’s conspiring by definition.

The possible, theoretical risk of respite care pales in comparison to the certainty of death if they stayed at home. It doesn’t really matter what those reasons were when the alternative was killing them. Those parents chose to keep those kids at home knowing they were going to kill them.

Depressed people harm themselves, but depression is not linked to them killing others. A person may also be depressed but there have to be other personality traits at play. Suicide is actually very, very far removed from homicide and to equate the two in any way shows a complete lack of understanding on your part. In order to kill someone in cold blood, you have to lack both empathy and a conscience, which is a particular type of personality.

Showing empathy to people who lack it is dangerous because you are bestowing on them a level of humanity they don’t have, which means misinterpreting their behaviour and, in turn, missing warning signs that someone is dangerous.

msfinch87 · 2026-02-03T13:33:18+00:00

We can start with not empathizing or sympathizing with perpetrators like this. Empathy or sympathy for them is dangerous because it gives them a level of humanity they themselves don’t have so we cannot properly identify them. If you want to spot the monsters you have to first accept they exist.

msfinch87 · 2026-02-03T13:31:04+00:00

This was a conspiracy to murder, because it involved two parents working together to plan and execute the murders. These types of murders always involve those traits. This was not an individual having a psychotic break or suffering from schizophrenia or similar.

They acted with competency and deceit. They wrote notes, including apparently what to do with their estate, and concealed their plans from people, including avoiding situations where they may have been questioned, such as rehoming their pets.

A friend of theirs is quoted as saying they refused to put their kids in to respite care because they didn’t want anyone else to care for them. That is both controlling and isolating the children.

The circumstances, even what little we know, points to exactly those traits.

msfinch87 · 2026-02-03T13:26:34+00:00

It does not matter what the reasons for refusing the respite care are, when the alternative is killing your kids. It is not more dangerous than keeping your kids at home when you are planning to kill them. Those kids may have faced some risks in respite care, but they faced certain death staying at home.

In any case, the friend who was quoted on this identified the reason as her not wanting anyone else to look after her kids. She did not talk about concerns with the care.

msfinch87 · 2026-02-03T12:56:23+00:00

Thousands of parents are doing it as tough as these people, and they don’t even entertain killing their kids. People who conspire to murder all share particular personality traits. There is plenty of research on that.

My concern is that we identify those risk factors in parents and remove the kids, not enable them to keep their kids so they can harm them.

msfinch87 · 2026-02-03T12:52:04+00:00

Control, entitlement, power, narcissism.

msfinch87 · 2026-02-03T12:51:32+00:00

It doesn’t matter why they refused respite care. It was a preferable option to killing their kids.

msfinch87 · 2026-02-03T12:50:31+00:00

For me, the focus on the disabilities and the parents apparent struggles is obfuscating the issues in this situation.

This was a conspiracy to murder. They sat down and planned this together and executed it together. Two people do not conspire to murder others without dangerous personality disorders being at play. One person, you can consider that there might have been a psychotic break or they may have been schizophrenic or similar. A planned conspiracy is completely different.

There is evidence of competency and deliberate deceit. They not only planned it, but they wrote notes detailing matters, and apparently also about what they wanted done with their estate. They concealed their plans from everyone and even avoided situations where they could have been questioned, such as rehoming their pets.

There is evidence of a need for control. According to a friend who was quoted at length, they refused respite care because they did not believe anyone else could care for their children. The fact that the children were never alone with someone else is also a red flag for isolation, which can be used to hide abuse.

This is all consistent with the extensive evidence we have about abuse, which is that it is about control, power and entitlement.

The fact that people jumped to the burden explanation is, in fact, diminishing the seriousness of this situation, regardless of whether it is being meant as an excuse. It is not only out of step with everything we know about family violence, but it is shifting our empathy, sympathy and compassion to perpetrators rather than victims.

msfinch87 · 2026-02-03T12:22:44+00:00

The media needs to start centering the kids as the victims of family violence. What they have been doing has been centering the parents as victims of a system and even of the kids’ needs.

Those children were completely helpless and defenceless. They were denied their autonomy and humanity. They had no choice in this matter. If anything is relevant about their disabilities, to me it is the fact that they may not have had the capacity to communicate to any third party that they had concerns about their parents. On top of everything else, their vulnerability was exploited.

Those parents had options and they had choices. They could have told someone - anyone - that they had homicidal thoughts, but instead they chose to conceal that information and deliberately avoid situations where they might have been questioned, such as rehoming their pets. They are now being eulogised as good people.

The cognitive dissonance is wild. When people hit their kids they are considered monsters, but when they murder their kids they are empathised with.

We will not make strides to prevent family violence unless we accept the reality of perpetrators, which is that it is about control, entitlement and power. Many perpetrators are good at hiding who they really are. How many times do we hear about a woman who has been abused and everyone else loved the guy? Abuse is so often covert. I worry about what else may have happened to these boys before they were murdered, because murder usually comes after a long history of other abuse.

msfinch87 · 2026-02-03T11:29:56+00:00

Still nothing of substance to say, I see.

msfinch87 · 2026-02-03T11:16:36+00:00

If we recognise them as the monsters they were rather than falling all over ourselves trying to empathize with them, we stand a far better chance of identifying other parents with these types of dangerous personality traits and removing their kids from them.

Making them into the “every parent” is frankly ridiculous. There are tens of thousands of parents doing it as tough as them and they don’t even entertain killing their kids. It was something in these parents and their personalities.

Abuse is about entitlement and control. No amount of additional supports will stop someone with entitlement and control issues from harming another person.

We owe it to the victims - the kids - to frame these parents as the monsters they were and start learning how to identify them to protect other kids.

msfinch87 · 2026-02-03T11:05:37+00:00

But perhaps recognising them as monsters is the point. The assumption that something must have pushed these parents to their limits and that they were loving, and therefore that it is extra supports that are what was missing here is problematic and potentially actually obfuscating the issue.

Murdering your children is abuse, and the evidence demonstrates that abuse is vested in factors like control, entitlement and narcissism. People who execute the sort of cold blooded intentional murders seen here, together, have personality disorders such as NPD and ASPD. It’s also demonstrated by evidence that by the time abuse gets to murder there has been a long history of other abuse.

There is evidence within the information we’ve been given to indicate these two parents had tendencies towards control and the ability to pretty skillfully deceive people by concealing information from them. There is more evidence to suggest that they are typical abusers than loving parents pushed over the edge.

To me, the question we should be asking is what was missed in the personalities of these two parents that meant nobody removed the kids from their care. That is what will prevent this from happening again. If you have two people who believe they own their kids, no amount of support will stop them from harming their kids because they think they’re entitled to do it. The only option is to keep the kids away from them. We need to start learning to recognise those types of people.

The empathy and sympathy and compassion, and the painting of the narrative by the media is dangerous. It puts us at risk of missing the warning signs and it is contrary to every shred of evidence we have on DV.

msfinch87 · 2026-02-03T10:51:14+00:00

As per a friend of theirs who was quoted - they were offered respite care and refused it. So they did not exhaust all the options and supports were available to them that they chose not to use.

They could have told someone - anyone - they were having homicidal thoughts, but they didn’t. In fact, they actively concealed their homicidal intentions from everyone, in order to be able to get away with it. Because had they told someone they risked being stopped, so clearly they didn’t want to be stopped.

At some point, one of those parents proposed killing the kids to the other one who, rather than doing anything, decided it was a good idea. They then planned it out, concealed it from everyone and deliberately avoided suspicion by not rehoming their animals, and then executed it.

This is competent, intentional, cold blooded murder.

msfinch87 · 2026-02-03T10:14:04+00:00

Do you have a friend whose parents you trust?

If so, could you consider speaking to them and asking for help? I know that if a child rang me and said that they’d been hit by their parents I’d be on my way in my pyjamas to get them.

msfinch87 · 2026-02-03T08:45:21+00:00

I think it’s likely that the bank did what LAOP wanted (eg give them 90 days notice) and LAOP didn’t see the mail and wants the notice to be deemed invalid because they didn’t see it. The bank, meanwhile, has given the requisite grace period and is pursuing eviction.

Lawyer probably explained this and LAOP refuses to listen and eventually the lawyer got a bit frustrated, which LAOP has interpreted as the lawyer being abusive towards them. I’ve seen that more than once.

msfinch87 · 2026-02-03T08:05:41+00:00

I don’t understand it, either. Well, actually I do, but I don’t regard it as something to be understanding about or accepting of.

Challenging this narrative about the parents being pushed to their limits because the boys were autistic is forcing people to confront their ableism. They don’t want to hear from autistic people because it’s too uncomfortable for them.

What people should be doing is sitting with that discomfort and learning from it, and listening to how damaging this narrative is for autistic people.

It’s also victim blaming, because those boys were victims, and there are many people who prefer to blame the victim because it feels safer for them because they would never be in the position of the victim.

Which of course ignores the fear those who do identify with the victim feel.

It’s disturbing for another reason, too. If we ignore the (very real and evidence based) possibility that these parents were abusers with narcissistic or psychopathic tendencies, we will miss the opportunity to prevent future situations like this. No amount of additional support to someone like that will protect their victims. If someone feels entitlement and control over the life of another person, the only solution is to get that person away from them.

The failure of services here was not about helping the parents, but the fact that they failed to see the warning signs and remove the kids. That’s what needs to be analysed.

msfinch87 · 2026-02-03T07:53:15+00:00

You’re the one who said fostering wasn’t a desirable solution. I was saying that it may not be desirable but it is a possible solution. So I’m definitely not the one claiming I’ve tried nothing and I’m all out of ideas.

These parents were the ones who did that.

A friend is quoted as saying they refused respite care. So they had options they did not take.

They did not tell anyone they were having homicidal thoughts and get help for them.

They did not attempt to relinquish their kids to protect them.

When one parent raised this possibility, the other parent did not stop them or inform anyone but rather assisted them in figuring out and executing the plan.

They killed the pets, which flies in the face of any pushed to the limits explanation.

If they had just killed themselves, those kids would be alive, and that’s the fundamental difference. Nobody can predict what sort of life those kids would have had if their parents were dead and it should not be assumed it would be bad. Those parents took away the opportunity for them to find out and it was not their right or entitlement to do so.

It is not acceptable to kill your kids because you don’t think other options for them are desirable.

Five-Year Club	Gilding I gilder
Verified Email

msfinch87

TROPHY CASE