If a spouse murders the other spouse who gets the children?

[frogswimming]

It seems so wrong if they go to live with the murderer's parents. How is it decided?

In the case I know of personally, the children live with the murdered mother's parents. They have contact with the father's parents by choice, but the children have no contact with their father.

Only know personally of two cases where this happened.
1.) Father killed mother in front of the two preschool children and told them it was "because Mommy did not behave". Children remained in the apartment with their mother's body alone for three days. After the trial the mother's (identical twin) sister took in the children to raise as a single parent.
2.) Parents were divorced. During visitation with father the 6-year-old boy mentioned that Mommy had a friend and he took them out for pizza and ice cream. Ex brought the children (boy (6) and girl (13) home to their mother and stabbed her. The boy was placed with his maternal aunt and uncle who had three girls close to his age. The girl did not want to be placed with her brother because she blamed him for "tattling" to their father and causing their mother's death. She went into foster care voluntarily and was adopted three years later by her foster parents. She continued to refuse any visitation with her biological brother.

In the only case I know of this the children went to the brother of the victim and his wife

In the case I know the young children went to the parents of the murdered spouse.

So the victims wishes (if in writing) would be considered. But it would typically be ss call as to who is most appropriate and who wants to.

The articles you've shared gives no indication who they ended up being cared for by.

I've worked professionally with a family in this situation, the dc lived with the victim's sister but visited their dad in prison.

However, the closeness of the relation to the perpetrator seems less important to me than the quality of the relative's relationship with the dc. Better to be placed with family of the perpetrator who love them and they know well, than family of the victim they have no connection with.

the 1st case I thought of was the double-murderer Betty Broderick. Her under 18 kids went to live with their uncle's ex-wife.

Sorry this happened.

But I had thought it would surely be dependent on the perpetrators continued defence or contact with them related to the child's best interests.

My friend was murdered by her husband, quite recently.

Her parents have the baby. His parents were deemed unsuitable as despite all the evidence and his confession They still believed my friend must have done something to set him off. Still believed he was a victim of hers. They displayed the same controlling behaviour that he did.

All too often the parents of the murderer still support and try and justify their family members actions or display behaviour that’s huge red flags, when you will be raising a traumatised child.

I have a friend who was the child in this situation. Hee sister and her was raised by her mothers sister and their names were legally changed because of what happened. They had zero contact with their dad or his family as children because SS deemed them not suitable and a risk. As adults they chose to also stay non contact

I know a situation like this - the children went to the victim’s parents.

I understand in the case of Caroline Crouch (the young mother murdered by her husband - in Greece) custody was given to the mudered mother's parents.

I am not sure whether the husband's family were given visiting rights, or not

I believe that your putting it in writing has no legal status, as childrenare not possessions to be willed. I would be happy to be proved wrong though.

All too often the parents of the murderer still support and try and justify their family members actions or display behaviour that’s huge red flags, when you will be raising a traumatised child.

This is my professional experience, also. The children have usually gone to a family member on the victim’s (almost always the mother) side.

I believe that your putting it in writing has no legal status, as childrenare not possessions to be willed. I would be happy to be proved wrong though.

You are wrong.

It's nothing to do with treating them as possessions. It's indicating your preferences for guardianship, in the event of your death. All parents should have such a provision in their will, which they should have too.

In the event, a different decision might be made, based on circumstances but certainly your wishes will be considered.

(This thread is gruesome & distasteful though)

That's why I was wondering about it.

Caroline's daughter now lives in the Philippines with her mother and father and the mothers older daughter who has children. The child is happy and thriving.

His parents have been awarded a one hour Skype each week call from Greece where they live.

I linked to her article in a previous comment.

Back in the 1970s one of my friends was murdered by her husband . She had married young , had 2 children but realised it was a huge mistake . Nowadays it would be recognised as controlling and abusive behaviour on his part.
She told him she was leaving and was actually packing when he walked in and shot her several times .
His family blamed my friend . They were wealthy and the children went to live with them and were back at school the next day ! Different times.
My friend’s mother was devastated especially as his parents wouldn’t allow her to contact the children despite a previously warm and living relationship ship.
Hopefully that wouldn’t happen now.

A foster family in my experience of this. I guess it depends on circumstances though.

Christ, that is awful.

I knew a guy who murdered his wife. There were mitigating circumstances and his PIL took his children to see him in prison and when he was released (vv short sentence) they went to live with him.

So the answer is, it depends on the circumstances.