Latest update May 14th, 2024 12:59 AM
Jan 20, 2020 Letters
DEAR EDITOR,
Familicide is the term used when a member of the family murders another or other members of his/her family. In reading the online editions of the various daily newspapers in Guyana, I am struck with the frequency of the occurrence of this act.
Indeed, things are so alarming that a number of notable persons have found it concerning enough to call out to various institutions in the country for help. President Granger, as reported in the Kaieteur News of 15th December 2019, reminded senior members of the Seventh Day Adventist Church in Guyana, that “the church have the moral authority to ensure that there is reduced conflict and violence in the home and in the family.”
The form of family killing that is most prevalent is uxoricide – the killing of one’s wife. A Justice Department study released in 1994 noted that when spouse murdered spouse, the husband is the assailant in almost two-thirds of cases. In 2001 the Bureau of Justice Statistics in the USA indicated that 32% of women, but only 4% of men were killed by spouses or ex-spouses. Perhaps most alarming is the fact that the number of American troops killed in Afghanistan and Iraq between 2001 and 2012 was 6,488. While the number of American women who were murdered by current or ex-male partners during that time was 11,766.
Here in Guyana, in 2018 between January – April seven (7) women died at the hands of their partners. Between March – August 2019 six (6) women were allegedly killed by their present or former partners. Since the killing of female partners is the main form that familicide takes, I will focus my discourse on uxoricide.
While sociologists offer a range of reasons for this act, in the context of Guyana its cause seems to be either one or a combination of the following – financial worries, an affair or suspected affair in the marriage, matters surrounding access to the children and mental illness. Since, the space that is usually allowed letters will not allow for me to discuss each of these likely causes, I will, for now, discuss the causes listed above as first and second.
Financial worries as a cause for serious conflict in marriage has become one of the most offered reason for conflict and violence in the family. Traditionally, marriages could be understood through familiarity with the exchange theory. Men, to make themselves desirable for marriage strived to obtain material worth so as to be able to offer the desired woman a comfortable material life. Women on the other hand, were expected to make themselves attractive so as to interest suitors. In other words, men offered material security in exchange for access to beauty, and women offered beauty in exchange for material security. Now you know why men take ten minutes to dress for a date and women take an hour.
This form of the exchange theory as the guiding principle in choosing one’s spouse held sway up unto around the 1950s and early 60s. Indeed, our most prolific social commentator – the Mighty Sparrow adequately articulated some of the problems that inability to satisfy the demands of the exchange theory can lead to. Recall Sparrow’s “No money, no love,” in which he gave us these lines:
Ivy pack -up sh clothe to leave
Johnny was down and out
She said openly
Ah really love yuh Johnny
But yuh in have no money
So what would my future be
Even though yuh say yuh love me?
Overtime romantic love began to grow in importance as the primary influence guiding one’s choice of spouse, thus undermined the exchange principle that underpinned marriages. Romantic love as the primary reason for marriage has been encouraged with women entering the labour force, thus, reducing their reliance on men for provision of material comfort and security.
The problem with holding romantic love as the basis for marriage is that this form of love tends to wane with time. So, if there is an “attractive available alternative around,” extra marital affairs are likely. In such a situation the partner who feels wronged can visit his/her partner with a violence that leads to death. Since it is women who have gained this new independence, it is they who are primarily victims in cases where spouse kills spouse, or when a romantic partner or ex-partner does so. So what can be done to eliminate or significantly minimize instances of uxoricide?
In the context of Guyana, we seem to have decided to rely on our criminal justice system and religious bodies as our main weapons to be used in response to this phenomenon. However, these institutions’ ability to arrest this problem is quite uncertain.
First, the justice system is woefully inadequate for dealing with this type of crime. The justice system treats acts of uxoricide the way it treats any act of murder – long prison sentences or the death penalty (which today equals long prison sentence). If indeed acts of uxoricide are on the increase then, long prison sentences is not acting as a deterrent. At best therefore, the justice system’s behaviour merely satisfies our collective anger.
Second, we would seek the intervention of religious leaders when there are serious problems among spouses should not surprise. Marriage ceremonies/rituals in Guyana invariably involve religion. So, that we would turn to religious leaders when the union is in need of repair is only natural. This is especially so in cases where the problem is extra martial affairs, where couples need to be reminded “thou shall not commit adultery.” In the Christian marriage rituals, the purpose of the ring is to convey to others that the wearer is not available. Of this couples might need to be reminded, and of the commitment it implies.
Of course, our women (especially the young) might; justifiably so; be suspicious of religious intervention. All the main religions in Guyana have, in their religious texts, articulated positions that suggest that women are not to be considered the social equal of men. Also in this age of ‘prosperity preaching,’ where the modern priests, bishops and prophets display an unquenchable desire for material excess, it will be challenging for them to convince couples to stay in relationships when material needs are not being satisfied.
But perhaps we would be better advised not to rely so heavily on punishment (justice system) and encouraging religious sanctioned behaviours to deliver us from this cancer of uxoricide. Perhaps there is need for other institutions, organizations, agencies to be seen as essential players in this fight.
If we acknowledge that there will be conflicts in relationships, then perhaps our concentration should be focused on giving couples skills in conflict resolution instead of focusing on their stated dissatisfaction with each other.
Remember, conflict does not necessarily lead to negative outcome/s. Indeed conflict can have a positive or a negative impact on a relationship, it all depends on how conflict is resolved. When conflict gives rise to hard headedness, and a refusal to interact with one’s partner, it is harmful. However, when disagreements give rise to conflict and conflict is viewed as an occasion to seek clarification on one’s partner’s views or actions, it is likely to give rise to understanding. Understanding can give rise to a willingness to compromise and the changing of expectation about the relationship. Alternatively, embracing the principles of conflict resolution can lead to an amicable separation if this is necessary, thus negating the threat of murder.
In this regard, I am reminded that report in another newspaper of 26th August 2019, informed us of the successes that a programme presently employed at prisons in Guyana, is achieving. The programme seeks to give prisoners anger management skills. Anger management is usually part of any comprehensive conflict management programme. Perhaps such a programme, with a bit of tweaking could be modified and used in counselling couples. Further, with the growth in instances of youth violence, perhaps conflict management skills should be a part of our secondary school curriculum.
Faithfully,
Claudius Prince
Listen how to run an oil country
May 14, 2024
– Rugby Union peeved at silence from Government on request for National Park upgrade By Rawle Toney Kaieteur Sports – The Guyana Rugby Football Union (GRFU), under the guidance of its...Kaieteur News – Bharrat Jagdeo needs a refresher to be able to better differentiate between a party’s foundational... more
By Sir Ronald Sanders Is it ever justifiable for journalism to fan the flames of geopolitical tension? This question arises... more
Freedom of speech is our core value at Kaieteur News. If the letter/e-mail you sent was not published, and you believe that its contents were not libellous, let us know, please contact us by phone or email.
Feel free to send us your comments and/or criticisms.
Contact: 624-6456; 225-8452; 225-8458; 225-8463; 225-8465; 225-8473 or 225-8491.
Or by Email: [email protected] / [email protected]