{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.012629161882893225, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.411764705882353, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The impact of gender roles on verdicts and sentences in cases of filicide

Although mothers and fathers are equally likely to kill their children, maternal filicide cases tend to draw more media coverage and community outrage. While traditional gender role expectations appear to contribute to the community response that follows a report of filicide – and influence media representations – little is known about the offenders’ treatment in the criminal justice system. Drawing on theorizing within gender studies, this article examines relationships between traditional gender role expectations and court case outcomes in cases of maternal and paternal filicide. Findings indicate that both verdicts and sentences in these cases vary by gender and that, for female offenders, the differential treatment is related to how well they appear to fit traditional gender roles.