Introduction

This chapter draws together the findings from the analysis and considers how the approach taken was useful in making sense of Mary Ann in ways that existing frameworks for understanding female serial killers are not. The authors will argue that this approach – termed institutional mediation – has the potential to be a trailblazer for broader understandings of individual female serial killers. In addition, the chapter also considers future directions for the use of institutional mediation beyond serial homicide.

Towards a new understanding of female serial killers

The authors set out with the aim of generating insights into how Mary Ann was able to get away with murder for as long as she did. Such a study was far from simple as it would involve both a more robust analysis of the social and cultural context of an individual serial killer and an appreciation of the gendered nature of the relevant structures. These elements had been somewhat neglected in the quantitative surveys, typologies and individual case studies on which existing insights into female serial killers have been built in the past. The literature around female serial killers is characteristic of the epistemological imbalance described by Messner (2012) in that macro quantitative surveys and typologies do not consider micro implications, and individual case studies at the micro level are preoccupied with such detail at the expense of the broader macro context.

Having considered the institutional literature, sociological institutionalism was identified as particularly valuable, emphasising a dynamic relationship between individuals and institutions and a central role for cultural components such as values, beliefs and norms (Meyer and Rowan, 1977; Brinton and Nee, 1998; Peters, 1999). Sociological institutionalists have argued that individuals actively work and rework institutional scripts to devise a course of action mindful of mainstream norms and values (March and Olsen, 1989, 1998; Powell and DiMaggio, 1991; Fligstein, 1997; Brinton and Nee, 1998). While the authors wished to diverge from the positivist epistemology that characterises institutional studies of homicide, they identified key concepts from the institutional literature that they wanted to explore – notably ‘social roles’ and ‘institutional configurations’. In addition, the intersectional literature’s emphasis on individual experiences of structurally embedded social divisions was noted, something that institutional theorists have also acknowledged as important – particularly in relation to gender (Potter, 2006; Bernard, 2013; Applin and Messner, 2015).