The curious case of Bengaluru CEO Suchana Seth killing her kid son brings to spotlight what has been known as Munchausen’s Syndrome by Proxy (MSBP), but was it really so? Shoma A. Chatterji dissects this and other such cases that have hit headlines.
Is motherhood overrated over the years? Or, is the case of Suchana Seth one of the rarest exceptions that has put a more or less black blot on the image of motherhood as we have been conditioned to learn, think, feel, emotionally, morally and even physically? Or, is she a chronic patient of Munchausen’s Syndrome by Proxy (MSBP)?
What exactly is MSBP? Munchausen’s Syndrome is named after Baron Von Munchausen (1720-1791) by Asher in 1951. People with Münchausen Syndrome have an uncontrolled need to assume the sick role by exaggerating complaints, falsify tests and/or inflict illnesses on themselves directly. In Münchausen Syndrome by Proxy perpetrators fulfill their need for positive attention by hurting their own child, thereby imposing the sick role onto their child, by proxy. In 1977, Roy Meadow, then professor of pediatrics at the University of Leeds, England, discovered the extraordinary behaviour of two mothers and labelled this Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy. Meadow said that one of the two mothers had poisoned her toddler with excessive quantities of salt while the other had introduced her own blood into her baby’s urine sample.
MSBP is a lesser-known, lesser-written-about and lesser discussed issue of psychological health where the child is the victim of his/her mother’s insane mental state who otherwise appears and behaves ‘normally.’ Mark Gado in his serialised articles Mothers who Kill in Crime Library describes in detail some of the most notorious mothers in the history of crime. Among them are Susan Smith, Andrea Yates, Sally Clark, Angela Cannings, Maxine Robinson and the most notorious of them all – Marybeth Tinning. It took 14 years and nine tiny corpses to finally take action against Tinning in 2011. Tinning was charged with the murder of only one child, Tami Lynne. By that time, she was already 68 but was due for parole two years later.
But all these are Westernised theories that fit into stories about Western mothers. How can this be true in India renowned for our faith and worship of Durga, the Mother Goddess and her fiery avatar, the Goddess Kali who saved the entire clan of Gods in heaven by killing the Asuras across the universe? In Christianity, we worship Mother Mary whose immaculate conception brought Jesus Christ on earth.
Within this scenario, why did Suchana Seth, a data scientist for 12 years, an apparent fellow at Harvard University, a woman who made it to the 100 Brilliant Women in AI Ethics list, end up killing her own son? She was no ordinary mother. Nor was she an ordinary woman. She was an empowered woman who was financially independent, married to a power equal and more or less settled in life complete with that final flag of triumph – motherhood?
The technical name of killing one’s own offspring is called “filicide” which applies to fathers too which is more ‘open’ and does not raise as much disgust and mass revulsion like a mother killing her own child for whatever reason. But Suchana Seth cannot be labelled as suffering from Munchausen’s Syndrome by Proxy because she did not need to draw more attention to herself at the cost of doing away with her own child.
Dr. Prabha Chandra, Senior Professor of Psychiatry and Dean, NIMHANS, Bengaluru, states, “a rising number in filicides related to divorce, severe parental conflict, and custody disputes. Some experts in the field also use the term ‘Revenge Filicide’, which is related to severe relationship problems with a partner or spouse. Here, the child is killed as revenge against the spouse’s behaviour, infidelity, divorce, and especially custody and visitation disputes. Clearly, a mother who kills her child must be held accountable for the action. However, it is important to also understand the mental state of the mother prior to the incident, any earlier history of mental illness, criminal behaviour, child maltreatment or violence”.
So, perhaps, while exploring the reasons for this terrible tragedy, Suchana Seth was going through a bad divorce and perhaps, considering that the father had been given visiting rights, she reportedly denied this to him and also, when he insisted through legal means, she failed to turn up at the appointed place with the son. Visitation disputes are quite ‘normal’ in these abnormal situations, but killing the child just to deprive the husband from having access to his son even temporarily, is just unbelievably cold-blooded and brutally cruel.
Studies have stated that mothers have reported powerlessness, helplessness and social isolation prior to the offence. But Suchana Seth does not fit the bill of being powerless, helpless or being socially isolated. The reported marks on her wrists have been interpreted as her attempt to commit suicide after the crime. But this has not been proved yet. Besides, if this be true, this is no proof of her innocence.
In his Parental Investment Theory, Gad Saad suggests that the very mechanism that predicts that women should be the ones to provide greater investment to their children can often ‘misfire’ by psychiatrically damaged women who create conditions to draw the attention of the world to how much of motherly care they shower on their children. The presence of MSBP is based on deception and therefore, is elusive, potentially lethal and often misunderstood for child abuse, Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) and/or medical neglect.
Suchana Seth is no exception though hers is a rare case. The 2012 murder of Sheena Bora by her own mother, the high-profile and glamorous beauty Indrani Mukherjea mainly due to property reasons and for the young lady having fallen in love with her then-current husband Peter Mukherjea’s son from a previous marriage was not liked at all by Indrani, Sheena’s own mother.
Both Indrani and Suchana have two things in common. One, they continue to deny having killed their kids though it is quite clear that no one else could have done this misdeed though Indrani managed to achieve this with the help of her driver and one of her two ex-husbandsdiscovered after more than three years. And two, both Indrani and Suchana belong to the elite class of highly educated women who earn a handsome income and are financially independent. These two mothers are enough to disprove all theories of mothers killing their own children for reasons like disempowerment, helplessness, a disturbed childhood, poverty, domestic violence or anything of these. So, this is not exclusive to any particular socio-economic, religious or communal group. Neither of these two women is a patient of Munchausen’s Syndrome by Proxy. The question “Why” keeps hanging in the air, waiting for an answer…..