He could do no wrong

Why could Primrose Shipman never accept her husband's guilt? Corinne Sweet on the women who stand by their man, no matter what
What kind of woman hands round chocolates at her husband's trial for multiple murder? Primrose Shipman, 56, the wife of the late Harold Shipman, baffled relatives of her husband's victims as she queued for food with them during breaks in the trial, and tried to make small talk. At the inquiry after her husband's conviction, she replied more than 100 times that she could not remember what took place. Dame Janet Smith, who chaired the inquiry, found Primrose "honest and straightforward".

After 40 years of marriage, Primrose Shipman maintained that her husband was innocent of murdering more than 200 of his patients, and stood by him to the end. When he was jailed, she moved house to be nearer him, and visited as often as she was allowed. Observers said that the couple chatted and held hands during her visits, and their many letters attest to a profound devotion. Shipman is reported as being deeply attached to Primrose, writing her romantic poetry from prison, holding her hand protectively in public and shielding her from having to speak for herself. After his conviction, she lived in almost total isolation, cutting herself off from any friends or relations who would not take the view that her husband was harmless.

Friends say that Shipman was everything to his wife, that she was devoted and submissive to a man commonly remembered as moody and domineering. He has been described by many as forceful, clever, enigmatic; she was barely literate and highly impressionable. They married when she was very young and six months' pregnant, a lapse for which her parents allegedly never forgave her.

The couple met at a bus stop when she was 16 and working as a window dresser, and he was a medical student in Leeds. They had four children; she supported him through his addiction to pethidine and frequently drove him on his rounds because he suffered from blackouts, waiting patiently in the car while he was tending to patients.

Even at the trail she remained loyal, as well she might after 40 years, but could Primrose really not have known by then that he had killed his patients, or did she successfully quell the thought that he might have been responsible for the deaths of so many elderly people in his care? It emerged during the inquiry that Primrose was present at - or soon after - the demise of three patients. It was Primrose who stayed with the body of the barely cold Irene Chapman while her husband paid another house call. Surely, listening to the evidence at the trial, she might have cast her mind back to such events over the course of his two-decade long killing spree, and glimpsed the truth then that the doctor might be delivering his patients, systematically, from the lingering death endured by his mother?

If she did have her doubts, Primrose must have plunged into the depths of psychological denial that so many women who love violent men seem to do: standing by their men in the face of mounting evidence that they are not worth it. Sonia Sutcliffe remained married to Peter Sutcliffe, the Yorkshire Ripper, for 13 years after he was jailed, and although she divorced him in 1994, she continued to speak to him. John Christie, who committed six murders at his home, 10 Rillington Place, was aided in his killing career by his wife Ethel, who unknowingly made false statements to the police. Apparently she never suspected him - and became one of his victims. What will be the personal cost to Primrose of denying to herself and others that she has shared her life with, loved and supported, Britain's most prolific serial murderer?

Women are typically portrayed as being forgiving, loving and loyal. The myth of beauty and the beast promotes the idea that the love of a good woman conquers all, including a monster of a husband. Did Primrose simply deny to herself that her beloved Fred, as she called him, was capable of killing - and killing on a spectacular scale? Did she eventually come to know the truth, but have too much invested to face it?

The absentmindedness Primrose displayed in court may not have been a conscious attempt to save her husband, but selective am nesia can arise from blocking out painful experiences. It may have been a typical response to trauma. "Cognitive dissonance" is the psychological term that explains the origins of this kind of behaviour. Finding out that your lover, whom you adore, is a fraudster, means your original picture of him is threatened. This can create a mass of stress and pain. In order to restore harmony, the mind simply deletes the bits of information that it finds too uncomfortable. This is the basis of denial. It is my belief that Primrose could not face the truth of what her husband did.

Psychologists agree that the concept of denial is crucial to understanding such cases. My own theory about Primrose comes from my counselling work with women, particularly those who attach themselves to addicts. Co-dependency is the term used to describe women who not only support their addictive spouse, but actually add to his continued addiction by never challenging his antisocial behaviour. My belief is that Primrose was too dependent on her husband to let herself see the truth of the situation. Poorly educated, financially dependent, shy, she played the role of stalwart doctor's wife. Who would she be on her own? If she left him, how would she provide for four children without education, social standing or a job?

The most dangerous time for those suffering from denial is when the truth begins to dawn. Accepting reality can be shattering, given that a state of denial has served the purpose of self-preservation. The result can be madness, addiction, even self-destruction. A common response to coming out of denial is suicide. Shipman's self-murder has been portrayed as an act of self-sacrifice to give Primrose his pension, but it may indicate a chink in his own psychological armour.

There is a possibility that Primrose was beginning to confront the reality of her husband's crimes at the end. According to Tony Fleming, Shipman's ex-cellmate, Primrose recently wrote her husband a letter, exhorting him to "tell me everything, no matter what". If this account is true, Primrose may have decided that being lied to was worse than anything her husband could have done and, assuring him of her loyalty, she had braced herself to know the worst.

From a therapist's point of view, if Primrose continues to protest Shipman's innocence in the face of the overwhelming evidence and now his death, she may continue on a path of destructive self-denial. Whether she ever learned the truth, we will probably never know.

Corinne Sweet is a relationship psychologist and counsellor. Seewww.corinnesweet.com

Today's best video

Today in pictures