Partner homicides in Denmark are rarely isolated acts, according to a new VIVE report that maps 61 killings between 2017 and 2024 and identifies repeated warning signs, including previous violence, coercive control, stalking, separation and suicidal behaviour by perpetrators.
The report, prepared by the Danish Center for Social Science Research and Analysis (Det Nationale Forsknings- og Analysecenter for Velfærd, VIVE) for the National Board of Social Services and Housing (Social- og Boligstyrelsen), is one of the most detailed Danish studies of partner killings to date. It is based mainly on police investigation files and was commissioned under the government’s Action Plan against Partner Violence and Partner Homicide 2023–2026 (Handlingsplan mod partnervold og partnerdrab 2023–2026).
A gendered form of homicide
The report describes partner homicide as a clearly gendered crime. Of the 61 primary victims examined, 53 were women and eight were men. By contrast, 52 of the perpetrators were men and nine were women. In VIVE’s words, the pattern shows that “it is primarily men who kill women”.
This does not mean that every case is legally or analytically classified in the same way. Denmark does not have a specific legal definition of femicide in its Penal Code. Killings of women are instead prosecuted under provisions such as homicide or aggravated assault resulting in death. The European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE) has noted that Denmark lacks a legal femicide category and that comparable administrative data on intimate partner femicide remain limited.
At the same time, many of the cases identified by VIVE fall within what international organisations usually call intimate partner femicide: the killing of a woman by a current or former male partner. VIVE itself notes the growing international use of the Danish term kvindedrab, corresponding to “femicide”, for killings of women and girls because they are women, including killings linked to partner violence.
Three recurring types of partner homicide in Denmark
VIVE divides the 61 cases into three main categories, each with different dynamics.
The largest group, accounting for 30 cases, is described as loss of control and position. These killings typically followed previous partner violence or stalking and a visible sequence of events before the homicide. Separation, or the threat of separation, was often central. In this group, all victims were women and almost all perpetrators were men, usually in their mid-40s. Many couples had lived together in a family setting and had shared children.
The second group, persistent violence and turbulence, includes 13 cases. These relationships were marked by long-term violence, substance abuse and social marginalisation, but without the same clear escalation path before the killing.
The third group, decline and acute stressors, includes 11 cases. These cases often involved older couples, no previous partner violence, and factors such as deteriorating health, financial collapse or acute psychological strain. Several were followed by suicide or attempted suicide by the perpetrator.
VIVE also identifies a smaller residual category of four cases involving attempted financial gain, but the public debate has focused mainly on the three larger patterns.
Violence, control and separation as warning signs
One of the report’s central findings is that warning signs were visible in many cases. Based on five indicators, VIVE found previous partner violence in three out of four cases. The most common form was psychological violence or controlling behaviour, followed by physical violence.
The Danish Ministry of Social Affairs and Housing (Socialministeriet) said the report shows that prevention can be strengthened across sectors. It pointed in particular to better treatment options for victims and perpetrators, and to stronger knowledge about violence in close relationships.
Social Affairs Minister Monika Rubin, from the Moderates (Moderaterne), said many cases begin with violence and dominance inside a relationship before ending in homicide. The report also highlights that perpetrators in several cases had depression, suicidal thoughts or had threatened suicide before the killing.
For organisations working with victims, this is a critical signal. Danner, one of Denmark’s main organisations supporting women exposed to violence, has stressed that threats, stalking, psychological violence and strangulation often precede partner killings of women.
Why Danish authorities are under pressure
Partner homicide accounts for about one in five killings in Denmark. Until now, however, systematic knowledge about the pathways leading to these killings has been limited.
The new report therefore shifts the discussion away from viewing each killing as an individual tragedy. It frames partner homicides in Denmark as a preventable social and institutional problem involving police, health services, municipalities, courts and civil society.
This is particularly relevant in cases where the victim had contacted authorities before the killing, or where the perpetrator had been in contact with health services because of mental health problems. VIVE suggests that earlier and more coordinated risk assessment could help authorities intervene before violence becomes fatal.
The Nordic and European context
Denmark is not alone in facing gaps in data and prevention. Across Europe, femicide and intimate partner homicide are still difficult to compare because countries use different legal categories and data systems. EIGE has recommended clearer statistical definitions and better recording of the relationship between victim and perpetrator.
For the Nordic countries, the report is also a reminder that high levels of gender equality do not eliminate lethal violence in intimate relationships. Danish data show that partner killing remains deeply connected to gender, power and control, even in a welfare state with strong public institutions.
The next step for Denmark will be whether VIVE’s mapping leads to a more coordinated national strategy. The report indicates that many killings were preceded by identifiable risks. The political question is whether Danish authorities can turn that knowledge into earlier intervention.
