Gender Disparities in Sentence Discourses for Parental Figures Convicted of Severe Violence Against Minors in Their Care in Portugal

Abstract

This study aimed to scrutinize court discourses in cases of severe violence by parental figures against minors. Studies on gender differences in judicial settings have revealed that women may be either protected or demonized, as framed by the chivalry hypothesis, familial paternalism, and the double deviance/evil woman hypothesis. This study analyzed 66 judicial sentences involving parental figures (i.e., fathers/stepfathers and mothers/stepmothers) who committed extreme violence against minors. Using Braun and Clarke’s (2012) thematic analysis, we found three main themes: Description of the Act, Courts' Justifications, and Aggravating Factors. Findings revealed that maternal figures received more mentions of mitigating circumstances, psychological state, and motivations for committing their crime, but were more harshly punished and criticized, supporting the evil woman hypothesis. In a field lacking ample data, this study offers crucial findings that warrant discussion for contextualizing and guiding future research.