Lindsay Clancy went on trial Monday in Plymouth, Massachusetts, for the deaths of her three children — Cora, 5; Dawson, 3; and Callan, 8 months — whom she is accused of strangling on Jan. 24, 2023. The case centers on whether postpartum psychosis, a rare psychiatric condition linked to childbirth, negates criminal responsibility for infanticide.
Clancy, a former labor and delivery nurse at Massachusetts General Hospital, had been receiving psychiatric care for approximately four months before the killings, her lawyer said. She has acknowledged killing the children but argues she was experiencing postpartum psychosis at the time, rendering her incapable of forming criminal intent. Prosecutors contend she acted deliberately and bears full responsibility.
What the Left Is Saying
Mental health advocates and progressive legal experts argue that Clancy's case illustrates systemic failures in how the medical and legal systems address postpartum mental illness. Dr. Catherine Birndorf, CEO and founder of The Motherhood Center in New York City, which treats mothers with perinatal mood disorders, said women who harm their children during postpartum psychosis are profoundly ill, not criminal.
"Women who kill their children in the throes of this medical illness, postpartum psychosis, are seriously and profoundly mentally ill. They are not evil," Birndorf said. "To me it's illness until proven otherwise. The fact that we consider it criminal until proven otherwise is problematic."
Dr. Nicole Cirino, director of reproductive psychiatry at Baylor College of Medicine who has served as a defense expert in infanticide cases, said women experiencing postpartum psychosis often believe they are helping their children. "In their own minds, they may be saving their children from damnation," she noted.
Advocates point to Illinois as the only state with laws allowing undiagnosed or untreated postpartum depression or psychosis as a mitigating factor in sentencing. They argue more states should adopt similar approaches that recognize maternal mental health crises as medical conditions warranting treatment rather than solely criminal punishment.
What the Right Is Saying
Prosecutors and some legal observers counter that criminal responsibility cannot be dismissed simply by citing a defendant's mental state at the time of a crime, particularly when children are killed. Plymouth County Assistant District Attorney Shanan Buckingham told jurors that Clancy "acted intentionally, rationally and swiftly."
"This was not a woman in the throes of psychosis," Buckingham argued. "This is not a public debate about women's mental health and how the medical system treats women. This case is about this defendant, Lindsay Clancy."
Boston criminal defense attorney Elyse Hershon, a legal analyst not connected to the case, said juries often struggle with such cases because of their emotional weight. "Whenever there are deaths of children, it rattles emotions," she noted. "Some people naturally will identify and sympathize with Clancy and her postpartum depression, and others will not be able to understand how one could end their children's lives, and demand responsibility."
Conservatives have also emphasized that Clancy was a trained medical professional who worked in labor and delivery — arguments that she should have understood the severity of her condition and sought more aggressive intervention. Some argue that recognizing postpartum psychosis as a complete defense could create problematic precedent for how courts assess mental illness claims.
What the Numbers Show
Postpartum depression affects a significant portion of mothers who give birth, but postpartum psychosis is far rarer. According to clinical estimates cited in court filings and maternal health research, only 1 to 2 per 1,000 women who deliver experience postpartum psychosis. Symptoms include hallucinations, delusions, paranoia, mood changes, and thoughts of harming oneself or others.
However, experts stress that the vast majority of women who experience postpartum psychosis do not harm their children. The condition typically emerges within days to weeks after childbirth and is associated with sleep deprivation, hormonal fluctuations, and pre-existing mental health vulnerabilities.
If convicted of murder, Clancy faces life in prison without parole. If found not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility, she would be committed to a state mental health facility — potentially for years or decades if her condition persists.
The case draws comparisons to Andrea Yates, who drowned her five children in Texas in 2001 and was initially convicted before her conviction was overturned on appeal. In retrial, she was found not guilty by reason of insanity. Similarly, Dena Schlosser was found not guilty by reason of insanity in 2006 after killing her infant daughter in Texas.
The Bottom Line
The trial is expected to last several weeks as both sides present psychiatric experts, medical records, and testimony about Clancy's mental state before and during the killings. Patrick Clancy, who found his children deceased upon returning home, has said in interviews that he forgives his wife — a perspective jurors may hear referenced during proceedings.
The verdict will likely hinge on how jurors interpret conflicting expert testimony about whether Clancy could distinguish right from wrong at the time of the killings. The case also reignites debates about whether the legal system adequately accounts for rare but severe postpartum mental health conditions when assigning criminal culpability.
Clancy and her former husband have filed civil lawsuits alleging her medical providers failed to properly diagnose and treat her condition — a separate proceeding that could affect how aggressively prosecutors pursue the criminal case.