Fear the Crab

There have been a rash of murder-suicides here, and by rash I mean maybe two or three in the short 5-month span of 2008. This is what the media would have me say, perhaps illustrating a growing problem in the islands concerning domestic violence. Whether or not that is a responsible statement from the press is a different subject altogether, since it’s difficult to label the two murder-suicides as a reflection of a disturbing trend in family relationships.

Instead, I have been contemplating the community reaction to such events. It is interesting to see how one family’s hardships garner a greater response than another’s. One of the recent families affected by a murder-suicide has received a tremendous amount of help and support from the local community, including monetary donations from restaurants and funds set up for the orphaned children. There has been extensive media coverage, typed and tubed, about the aftermath and everything going on.

Yet I know of two families similarly affected that have received nothing. Only a brief report describing the crime itself made print, survivors listed, and cursory interviews with neighbors. One family lost the father, not to murder-suicide, but straight murder, and the three kids got no help (the mother died of cancer, I believe). The other family was an actual murder-suicide, and the orphaned child has Down syndrome, and he got no help.

Why the discrepancy? It’s nice to know that of the two latter families, the kids are doing all right and making their way through the world, despite the pain. Yet what is the deciding factor in whether or not the community helps to support the displaced?

I was recently made aware of an allegation that someone advised the first family to contact the press about the situation. Perhaps that prompted the media to consider it a worthwhile story to pursue, and as the story was aired, the sympathies of the community were drawn to the grief the family was going through. If this was the case, is the decision to notify the press a matter of familial pride? Is it a matter of how the family prioritizes its needs?

Consider that in the case of the first family, it could be said that the relatives have no problem in saying, “We need help. This was a tragedy and the kids will have a hard time taking care of themselves, so please give us your support.” Whereas in the other family, relatives have taken the position of, “This is a tragic affair that we don’t need to dwell on, that we don’t need other people to know about. Let us move on and do our best to work things out.” One is a position of internal solidarity, the other is of reaching out and asking for help from complete strangers.

I’m not inclined to say that either position is the right one. I’m sure there are benefits and detriments to either, and it is up to each individual who reads about these things to decide which path to follow; that of actively helping the affected, or doing nothing. It is also impossible to expect people to be consistent in their dealings with tragedy. I’d find it hard to believe anyone could afford to give $5300.00 to every single needy family, when there are so many out there that require assistance. So it stands to reason that a generous donation of support is given when one can afford the time or resources, to whomever happens to be the focus of attention at that time.

I just find the dichotomy intriguing. What causes one person to tell all, versus another that keeps quiet? I am finding the moments where some receive help whilst others don’t to be a case of the former being squeaky wheels. Perhaps the latter consider themselves the standing nail, who do not wish any kind of hammer to fall, even if that hammer were made of money.

Or maybe the simile of a hammer striking down hard is a bit too reminiscent of the horrible events that preceded.