The media response to Lindsay Clancy’s trial is insane

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the MSU Exponent, its editorial staff, advisers, or Montana State University.

The content of this article may contain graphic descriptions of postpartum psychosis, filicide and self-harm. 

In January of 2023, Patrick Clancy returned home from running errands to find his wife, Lindsay Clancy, with her wrists slit, lying on the ground below an open second-story window. She was still very much alive at their home in Duxbury, MA, and she indicated their children were in the basement. Patrick went in to discover the bodies of all three of their kids — ages five, three and eight months — strangled to death with an exercise band. 

Evidence led prosecutors to charge Lindsay with three counts of first degree murder, which resulted in a case that ended in a mistrial on Sept. 4 of this year. However, another trial has been unfolding in the court of public opinion. Many people support Lindsay and cast blame on the medical system that they say failed to treat her postpartum psychosis (PPP) and spiraling mental health.

Turning the case into a media phenomenon or jumping to make Lindsay a martyr of inadequate health care distracts from the legal justice her children deserve and undermines a serious evaluation of the weak points in postpartum care.

To put the amount of support for Lindsay in perspective, a GoFundMe has already raised more than $1 million for her parents to cover fees related to supporting her. Hundreds of people stood outside of the courthouse, clapping as she was transported to and from the trial and taking pictures with her defense lawyer to show support, according to NPR.

On top of this, thousands more have taken it upon themselves to identify who they think the real killer is, whether that be Patrick himself or the medical providers helping to treat Lindsay. These social media sleuths have turned a devastating situation into a distracting goose chase, despite the fact that she and her legal team have not denied the murder allegations and all evidence points toward her.

The outpouring of support from jurors — 11 of whom sought to find Lindsay not guilty by reason of insanity — and the public alike raises important concerns about justice, especially in the face of such a brutal situation. 

If Lindsay was found not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility, she would be committed indefinitely to a secure psychiatric facility. Incarceration in a state penitentiary would occur only if she was found guilty.

Lindsay’s supporters and legal team have argued that she should hold no criminal liability due to her mental state. With that said, two things can be true at once. 

Belgrade resident and physician assistant Kate Worcester has spent her career in adult and emergency medicine, and said that letting psychiatric diagnoses serve as a legal defense would have negative impacts. “What we do know is that she was not well, and she caused the deaths of her three children. That’s the bottom line,” Worcester said. 

Lindsay may have received inadequate care for her postpartum mental health struggles and was in the throes of mental illness. However, she murdered her three children. People seem eager to ignore this fact and think that her fractured mental state and complicated treatment history should take precedence over her children’s killings. 

According to environmental science student Finn Miles, the media response to the case has been damaging to the pursuit of justice. “[It] serves to distract from the justice that is supposed to, by law, be served,” Miles said.

“We elevate them to being a hero and we oftentimes will glamorize something like this instead of sticking to the facts,” said Worcester. According to her, the current discourse serves no productive purpose. “What they’re doing is gossiping about something that is brutal and cruel and terrible and tragic,” she said.

However, like many of Lindsay’s supporters, Miles thinks that it isn’t as cut and dry as just casting blame. “There is a lack of postpartum care and appreciation for women in society, especially in the United States, for sure,” he said. 

Miles’ response captures the tightrope at the forefront of this case: acknowledgment that justice must be served but also recognition that maternal support could be improved upon.

By enshrining Lindsay as a victim and martyr of the American medical system rather than a worst-case scenario of PPP and mental illness, we take away our ability to meaningfully evaluate the state of postpartum care. 

According to the National Institute of Health, PPP affects between 0.89 and 2.6 women per 1,000 live births. With roughly 10,000 live births each day in the U.S., according to the CDC, this means that between nine and 26 women develop this psychosis each day. Symptoms can include hallucinations, paranoia or other behavioral changes and harming oneself or one’s newborn has been observed in severe cases.

Even so, Lindsay is in a very small minority of these women who are on trial for triple homicide. If she is just a statistical anomaly, it is not necessarily valid to put the entire medical system on blast.

“I’ve taken care of patients with this diagnosis before,” Worcester said. “Even those that have postpartum psychosis, you still have your moral compass. You still know to stop at a stop sign, to go when it’s green.”

Lindsay’s defense lawyer said she was prescribed 13 different medications prior to the murder of her children, according to The New York Times. She was also reportedly receiving care from at least four different facilities and four different medical practitioners, according to a wrongful death lawsuit filed by her husband.

“Anyone that’s targeting a healthcare provider is operating from a place that they have no idea what was actually reflected in their decision making,” said Worcester. 

According to her, the truth behind Lindsay’s mental health will likely never be uncovered, and creating a culture that blames medical professionals would worsen the medical system. “If we had healthcare providers everyday operating from a place of fear, they would not make clear medical decisions,” Worcester said.

This concoction of drugs and assemblage of providers is concerning, and perhaps indicates that Lindsay’s care was mismanaged. With that said, her situation is not representative of the average experience. Being prescribed 13 different medications from four different providers is not characteristic of the medical system, even in fringe cases. 

Establishing Lindsay as a typical patient improperly frames the state of postpartum care for the vast majority of women. While it’s true that extreme cases can expose weaknesses in a system, Lindsay is an ineffective figurehead for a movement that needs as much support as it can get. 

“Our healthcare providers are working to serve you, to help you, and we are going to lose more and more of them out of pure exhaustion and fear,” Worcester said. Targeting the providers themselves will only serve to make the system less effective.

The outcomes of cases like these can significantly shape public opinion on similar trials in the future. Writing off the brutal killing of the Clancy children as a freak accident caused by the negligence of the healthcare system not only vilifies the wrong actors, but establishes an unproductive rallying point for improving a potentially inadequate sector of health care. 

 It is my hope that people will learn what not to do from this case. The media response, the targeting of healthcare providers and the deification of Lindsay all work against justice and the  improvement of postpartum care. 

The three Clancy children had their chance at life taken from them. Their deaths can help us as a society learn to make better decisions in the future.