Lindsay Clancy case: was it evil, or severe mental illness?

Yes, unfortunately. It’s such a sad story.

Are you seriously saying that philanthropy focusing on murdered children, at the exclusion of their mother, the murderer, is misogynistic?

SM is one way a good thing, in that people can share views and opinions, but it's also terrifying to find out how some people think!

Why are you saying this to me? I’ve never blamed him in any of my posts.

It’s interesting you’re so sensitive to blame on PC but super happy to heap blame on LC.

Yes, because it’s failing to understand the extent of LC’s serious mental illness and torment. Can you even imagine what it would feel like to wake up from a psychotic state to find you had killed your own children? It’s unimaginable. And that’s the problem.

Before this mental health crisis she was by all accounts a loving mother, competent nurse.

I have listened to the testimonies and what you say does not correlate with my recollection. They all said that this treatment aligned with the accepted approach. Her ridiculous bully of a lawyer tried to make out that they should have 'investigated' her interactions with other hospitals. She was responsible for informing them of this.

She was competent to give her own account and they saw her in this way. They all followed and applied the diagnostic criteria for PPP as per the DSM V and she did not meet it.

You are casting assertions on their competence because they were not experienced in PPP but they were well aware of the diagnostic criteria. They are all board certified psychiatrists but everyone here knows better seemingly..

I would argue that ANY parent who murders their children is in a 'psychotic state'.

It's certainly not something a sane parent would do.

So do you feel the same about fathers who murder their children, family annihilators?

Are you replying to the correct poster?

She did actually do it so yes it is her that bears that. The NGRI verdict may still happen, and so be it if that’s what the jury decide.

PC is not on trial btw.

Apparently so as you’re the one who said to me:

“He’s already seen the worst thing imaginable, he doesn’t need internet blame for any of it.”

Now you’re telling me: “PC is not on trial btw.”

As I said, if you read my posts I have never blamed PC for anything.

JT wasnt experienced in any psychiatry let alone PPP.

In any case there’s a disconnect between the DSM-5 and clinical practice.

First of all, PPP is not entered as a stand alone diagnosis. Secondly it’s applied with a very rigid timeframe relating to the immediate perinatal period.

In practice thé post partum period is extended to the entire 12 months after delivery. Late onset episodes can be triggered by multiple factors.

Well yes reading back I agree with you in the first part of the post.

I still agree with @BingoJingoon PC which is a broader point on anyone blaming him.

As for ‘sensitive re PC’ and ‘heaping blame on LC’ that’s a bit strange given she did it.

Well yes reading back I agree with you in the first part of the post.

I still agree with @BingoJingoon PC which is a broader point on anyone blaming him.

As for ‘sensitive re PC’ and ‘heaping blame on LC’ that’s a bit strange given she did it.

@BruachAbhann

using long-distance, high-profile charity to ignore the immediate suffering of women close to home

Why would you think it meant that? I would have thought it self-explanatory from the sentence:

“I don’t personally indulge misogynist telescopic philanthropy which focuses on the children to the exclusion of LC”

I meant a narrowly directed concern focused solely on the children to the exclusion of their mother. That is the misogyny.

You did try to imply I was misogynist with the following words:

”you are indulging in 'misogynist telescopic philanthropy'”

There is nothing misogynist whatsoever in anything I have said.

As to the claim there’s not sufficient evidence to show she was psychotic - there was plenty of evidence at the trial of psychotic symptoms so either you didn’t bother to follow the evidence or you didn’t realise that’s what they were.

Uhuh, in the grip of mental illness.

You're obviously not bothered to read my posts properly and I'm not going to bother engaging with you any further.

My understanding is that they were familiar with the presentation of psychosis and were confident that she did not display such signs. And LC chose Jennifer Tufts so she could have swapped her out if she was not confident in her ability?

So until these experts are confirmed as being inept or incomptent, then I will believe in their judgement as board certified psyciatrists.

JT wasn’t familiar with anything, this was her first psychiatrist job ever.

In the U.K. nurse practitioners cannot diagnose bipolar - which is what seems to have happened later with LC - and then gave her a drug which made her much worse. They can shell out drugs here though, which perturbs the friends of mine who are psychiatrists as they don’t have full medical training.

Your confidence in LC’s practitioners indicates you either have a low bar or zero experience in this area.

And your relentless defence of a child killer is very very concerning to me.

Yeah I’m sure it is. That’s what posters said about LL. But they agree with me now.

I know.. Those jurors who listened to weeks and weeks of evidence and testimony and drew a distinction between cases where she was clearly guilty and those where the evidence was not compelling enough.. You of course know more than them.

And you know more than her KC defence counsel who only put up a plumber as the single defence witness.

Idk if this is uniformed or disingenuous.

If you read the testimony - each drug she was given caused severe side effects - nonetheless thé practitioner tended to increase the dose. When that produced even worse side effects thé drug was changed.

It’s not that they weren’t given long enough to work it’s that the side effects were too severe to continue.

She was prescribed 2 SSRIs which are contraindicated in bipolar, when those failed she was given a bipolar drug that caused even worse side effects. At that point she was admitted to hospital who took her off that drug to stabilise her, but then gave her another AD a which triggered suicidal ideation and thoughts of harming her children. That was shortly before the suicide attempt/killings.

Ok, well what’s coming will be a surprise then.

She didnt take all her drugs!! What are you on about?

What was each drug, how long had she taken them for, and what was the severe side effects reported?

Whom did she report them to?

I did listen to the testimony and she was given very very low and conservative amounts of drugs. She went to different practioners for her own reasons. If she is not open in her disclosures that is on her. She went to hospital and did not disclose she had taken a TCH gummy did she?

She did NOT disclose any thoughts of harming her children to the psychiatrists.

What is 'coming' then?

Are you being slightly delusional here as it sounds like it?

You sound as credible as Nigel Farage to be honest.