We no longer accept “she drove him to it”, so why are we centering the parents here?
We no longer excuse men’s violence by blaming women. We no longer accept “she pushed him too far” in cases of domestic violence or sexual assault.
So why, when disabled children are murdered, do we immediately centre the adults who killed them?
Because we still believe disabled people are a burden. And because, collectively, we still behave as though disabled lives are worth less.
Content note & boundaries
This edition discusses ableism, eugenics, filicide, murder and suicide. It is angry. It is confronting. It will not be for everyone, and I understand if you need to pass.
This edition exists to amplify disabled voices, recentring the children and calling out the ableism embedded in how these deaths are being discussed.
If this topic feels too heavy to sit with right now, I understand. You don’t need to read on.
Instead, I invite you to take that discomfort — the unease that made you pause — and channel it into workplace inclusion - the focus of my LinkedIn newsletter this week.
This event was not caused by workplace exclusion. You don’t need to read about violence to act against ableism. Sometimes the most meaningful work happens far from the headlines.
If you have capacity, consider your workplace policies that would have, and do, support carers and people with disability.
Do your policies reflect the law? Laws that changed in 2022 and 2025?
Is flexibility genuinely accessible, or only available to some?
Is it easy to request adjustments, or administratively exhausting?
How could you, just one person, ask one or two questions to make life a little easier for carers and people with disability?
This edition amplifies others, because this is not my story to own
In this edition, I am amplifying the words of disabled advocates who are naming what many are dancing around:
It is a problem when we centre the perpetrator, not the victims.
When two autistic children were murdered by their parents, headlines and comment sections quickly centred the parents.
They were described as:
“let down by the NDIS”
“pushed to breaking point”
“loving parents who never stopped fighting”
people who “had no other choice”
This is filicide — and yet the framing mirrors the most outdated domestic violence narratives:
“She drove him to it.”
“He’s a good bloke.”
“The narrative twisted in real time”
“The second it was reported the boys were autistic, I saw the narrative twist on the page right in front of me,” wrote Ashlea McKay on LinkedIn.
“Two autistic children were murdered. Two adult human beings made the decision to end their own lives and decided to murder two children first.
It’s a violent and conscious choice that was made and it’s been reported in a way that smooths it all over.
The right people are not seeing these boys as children, or even as humans. They’re being seen as a burden or a health hazard to neurotypical people.
I’m so angry. We don’t choose our parents and those kids deserved better.”
This event has exposed how deeply ableist our “common sense” still is.
As Dr George Taleporos, one of Australia’s leading disability advocates, wrote on LinkedIn:
“They were murdered by both parents.
They recently had their NDIS funding cut.
They struggled to find support providers.
None of these things could ever justify murder.”
Disability is not the tragedy. Ableism is.
“It goes without saying that intentionally ending someone’s life in any circumstances is appalling,” wrote Rebecca Hope in a repost of my Disability Pride Flag
“But the fact that there are people who think it’s OK when disability is involved is absolutely disgusting. It shows that despite the progress we’ve made, there are still people out there who think a different life is somehow less worthy of basic human rights and respect.
Nobody wants to think about being harmed by the people that they trust to keep them safe.
Disability is not a tragedy — ableism and lack of suitable supports are.
If we don’t take action, this will be the reality for so many more people.”
Australia said the quiet part out loud
Another of Australia’s leading disability advocates, Carly Findlay OAM, captured what many in the disability community felt immediately:
“Comments like: “don’t judge parents of disabled kids”, “take a walk in their shoes”, or “I understand”, “I don’t condone murder, but…”, “parents [were] doing their absolute best. They saw no other options”, “I feel for any family coping with disability….Cannot be easy to live with day in and day out”, “it was an act of love”. And so on.
These comments are saying the quiet part out loud.
This is really what people think of disabled people. People like me. And it’s horrifying.”
She went on:
“No one would ever say these things about murders of non-disabled people.
In no other instance of murder is the perpetrator excused. Only when it comes to disabled people killed by people who were supposed to care for them.
Disability really is the last taboo and hatred - it seems our community is the acceptable community to harm”
The pain for the disability community has not only been the deaths — it has been the centring of the parents over the children.
Carly finishes with
“Where are the anti-violence campaigners?
And where are our non disabled allies? The ones who speak up about other diversity issues?
And where are the newly diagnosed neurodivergent white women?
Crickets.
The silence from allies is just loud as the people who say they can understand why disabled people are killed.
Love to the disability community right now. And love and condolences to Leon and Otis Clune, who should still be alive and able to access support, dignity and safety.”
Four people died. But are they all victims?
One of the clearest analyses came from Jarrod Sandell-Hay, whose article “A murderer is responsible for the death of two autistic boys; the Government is responsible for the narrative” was published as the story was breaking.
He wrote:
“Almost immediately, a familiar script kicked in: sympathy for ‘all four victims’, soft language that blurs who did what to whom, and a near-total discomfort with naming the simplest truth, two autistic children were killed.”
And this is the danger:
“When we treat a perpetrator as a co-victim, we do something subtle but brutal: we shift the emotional centre of gravity away from the children who were murdered and toward the adult who chose to do it.
That shift is not neutral.”
It is cultural permission where killing becomes “the inevitable outcome of stress, instead of naming it as violence.”
Please, do read his full article.
We can discuss carers — without centring them
There is a necessary conversation about carer support. It just doesnt come first or at the expense of disabled children’s right to life and safety.
In response to Jarrod’s article, academic and parent, Lisa Grech, reflected on the complexity:
“A complex situation and one I honestly don’t know my own opinion of.
I mean, absolutely, the outcome is murder, but it is also death by suicide, which occurs when a person/people feel so alone and can’t see a way out. It talks to how desperately that family needed better support.
I’m not saying it is less than murder, just that it is also more complex than murder.”
That complexity matters, and that complexity can exist without centring perpetrators.
The Australian Neurodivergent Parents Association has taken a clear stance, sharing evidence-based guidance from the Monash–Deakin Filicide Research Hub and the Autistic Self Advocacy Network:
“When we name murder as murder and refuse to empathise with perpetrators, it reduces future risk to other children.
Disabled children have the right to live and to be safe and protected from family violence.
Many members of The ANPA are victim survivors of family violence at the hands of parents.We cannot reasonably expose them to harm.”
Centring perpetrators causes real harm.
What we must unlearn — urgently
It does not matter how hard the parents found it.
It does not matter how badly systems failed them.
None of that excuses murder.
We should not accept narratives that diffuse or lessen the actions of the parents and we also need to discuss the disability ecosystem as a whole - and that includes carers and the NDIS - always with disabled people at the centre.
As Jarrod wrote:
“If the first thing we do, when autistic boys are murdered, is rush to make the story emotionally comfortable for everyone else, we are telling autistic people that our lives are negotiable.
That is a political choice.”
If you’ve read this far
Thank you. This is a different kind of Mostly Unlearning edition. I encourage you to follow and amplify informed voices. I recommend:
Unlearning prompts
This is a hard topic. Sit with it.
What was your first reaction to the news?
How did you respond to disabled voices centring the children over the parents?
Carly Findlay wrote: “The silence from allies is as loud as those who say they understand why disabled people are killed.” What could you say, share, or amplify?
Love to the disability community right now.
If someone posted that they put down their dog because it had too many health needs, the backlash would be swift and brutal.
That speaks to how little society values disabled children and adults. It's so disheartening.
Thank you for this clarity and for the voices you’ve amplified.