Lindsay Clancy: Postpartum Psychosis, Mental Illness & Criminal Responsibility - Ep371Lindsay Clancy: Postpartum Psychosis, Mental Illness & Criminal Responsibility - Ep371
Through a Therapist's Eyes Podcast
Therapists examine the Lindsay Clancy case, comparing postpartum depression and psychosis while discussing how mental illness intersects with criminal responsibility. The panel also reflects on fear, stigma and the legal framework that shaped the jury’s difficult decision.
1:13:59•15 Sept 2026
Postpartum Psychosis, Murder and the Law: Therapists on the Lindsay Clancy Case
Episode Overview
- Postpartum depression and postpartum psychosis are distinct conditions, and severe depression does not automatically mean psychosis.
- Postpartum psychosis is described as very rare, affecting roughly one to two percent of women, with an even smaller fraction committing infanticide.
- In Massachusetts, juries must choose between guilty, not guilty, or not guilty by reason of insanity, and prosecutors carry the burden of proving criminal responsibility.
- Someone can be severely mentally ill yet still be considered criminally responsible, which makes cases like Lindsay Clancy’s exceptionally complex.
- The therapists urge people not to let fear of rare psychiatric emergencies deter them from pregnancy or from seeking mental health support.
“We really do have to separate extreme psychological suffering from what is considered a complete and total psychotic break.”
What remarkable journeys have people faced head-on against addiction? This episode shifts the spotlight to a different yet related kind of struggle: extreme mental illness, postpartum distress, and the heartbreaking question of criminal responsibility. A panel of four therapists – Chris Gazdik, Victoria Pendergrass, John Pope, and Casey Morgan – unpack the tragic Lindsay Clancy case, where a Massachusetts mother killed her three children during what her defence claimed was postpartum psychosis.
Right from the start, they flag the content as deeply sensitive, with frank references to murder, suicide and psychosis, and stress the importance of looking after yourself while listening. You’ll hear the team carefully separate postpartum depression from postpartum psychosis, stressing they’re “exclusively two different things” and that psychosis involves losing touch with reality, not just feeling severely low.
Casey points out, “We really do have to separate extreme psychological suffering from what is considered a complete and total psychotic break,” while John underscores that “postpartum psychosis is very rare. It's only one to two percent of women develop it.” The conversation also breaks down the legal context in Massachusetts – including the burden on prosecutors to prove criminal responsibility and the limited verdict options of guilty, not guilty, or not guilty by reason of insanity.
The therapists wrestle with tough questions: Can someone be both severely mentally ill and still criminally responsible? What kind of precedent does this case set for how society views maternal mental health and women in general? Alongside clinical explanations of hormones, psychosis and diagnostic coding, there’s a strong thread about fear.
The panel repeatedly push back on the idea that this case should scare people away from pregnancy or seeking help, emphasising that hormonal upheaval and postpartum distress are real but usually manageable with support. If you’re curious how therapists genuinely wrestle with the intersection of mental illness, justice and parental responsibility, this conversation might give you a lot to think about – and perhaps prompt you to talk openly about your own experiences and fears.
Do you want to link to this podcast?
Get the buttons here!
More From This Show
The latest episodes from the same podcast.