Why are people more sympathetic to Lindsay Clancy than Andrea Yates? (Child death mentioned)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Clancy has my sympathy. She is a Labor & Delivery RN now midwife in 5 days a week outpatient treatment for postpartum depression—she was trying mightily to help herself as was her husband. Sounds like crossover to postpartum psychosis—she will be heartbroken at what she did under SEVERE mental illness. My sympathies to her children deceased, her infant, her husband and yes to her. A nightmare.

I have sympathy and she tried to off herself as well. I think Yates killed her kids and didn’t do anything to herself. But..I believe this post partum psychosis is real. She is going to have to live with this forever. The sad thing is I think a lot of this is tied to lack of sleep and so many people judge if a new mom wants help. I remember I got a lot of judgement for having a night nanny. Luckily I have a great husband who basically told me to put myself first and I did. Without sleep and without an opportunity to exercise or meet with a friend then a severe depression and can develop. It seems like her husband tried and maybe things went sideways with all the meds. Seraqual is a really powerful drug and cannot believe she was on that with others. Maybe the best thing in retrospect would have been inpatient treatment. Anyway new parents should really prioritize sleep and well being. The best thing you can do for a new mom is offer to watch the baby’s so they can nap or offer to take their other kids (if they have them) out so less chaos in the house.

And maybe don’t have three kids in less than five years. Even though posters will jump on here to claim that their mom had 8 kids and didn’t kill any of them! Still, 3 kids under five in this day and age is bananas. And she wasn’t even old or facing a biological clock. What is the rush? The third clearly out her over the edge because she was seemingly ok with the first two.

So, forced abortions like in China?

You are intentionally being obtuse to PP's point, which I admit wasn't artfully made. But no, PP likely wasn't advocating for forced abortions. For a woman like Clancy--who is among the luckiest of us by having access to more knowledge, money, family/friends, and institutional support than the majority of new mothers--I think it isn't unfair to wonder why she would have so many children so closely given the difficulties she had adjusting to motherhood.

She had the kids because she wanted to them show off and brag about her easy pregnancies and brag about how fertile she is, this is an actual thing. It’s sick. She didn’t think it through, like this is a lifelong commitment, it’s quite messy and not at all glamorous. The babies were all for show, many people are doing this now, having prop babies and pets.

Or maybe she's.... Catholic

Isn’t that kind of old school? Like a woman becoming a nun? Who the hell becomes a nun anymore or a priest for that matter. Get w the times, Catholics use birth control now.

Shockingly, diversity isn't only trans. It's allowing people to choose to be old school

[Anonymous]

Before she killed them but after all of her mental health issues she was already plotting subsequent children!!

[Anonymous]

Could she be faking the paralysis

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Could she be faking the paralysis

No, there was a statement read from her spine surgeon. She is paralized from the t5 down (belly button) and not expected to regain meaningful use of her legs.

[Anonymous]

She was specifically told in front of her husband by her psychiatrist that she was did not have PPD or any symptoms of PPD. She was diagnosed with GAD.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow just watched the video of her arraignment. The State makes a compelling case. She was completely lucid and communicating normally with her husband, her pediatrician and everyone at the office, the pharmacist at CVS, the hostess at the takeout restaurant, etc. She also google-mapped how long it would take to drive to get the takeout (father than they normally went for takeout) right before asking her husband to go to this speciific restaurant.

When she came to in the hospital, the first thing she wrote on the whiteboard (she was intubated at that point) was "do I need a lawyer?"

Looks pretty bad for her.

As a PP has pointed out, none of this is at odds with psychosis or necessarily with whatever kind of insanity defense is available in Mass.

How convenient. She was fine until she decided to murder them and then was immediately fine right after. Very very convenient.

I didn’t follow this as closely as the posters here, but how can someone be fine if they’re spending 5 days a week in psychiatric treatment, taking several strong medications? To me that’s the antithesis of “doing fine”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow just watched the video of her arraignment. The State makes a compelling case. She was completely lucid and communicating normally with her husband, her pediatrician and everyone at the office, the pharmacist at CVS, the hostess at the takeout restaurant, etc. She also google-mapped how long it would take to drive to get the takeout (father than they normally went for takeout) right before asking her husband to go to this speciific restaurant.

When she came to in the hospital, the first thing she wrote on the whiteboard (she was intubated at that point) was "do I need a lawyer?"

Looks pretty bad for her.

As a PP has pointed out, none of this is at odds with psychosis or necessarily with whatever kind of insanity defense is available in Mass.

How convenient. She was fine until she decided to murder them and then was immediately fine right after. Very very convenient.

I didn’t follow this as closely as the posters here, but how can someone be fine if they’re spending 5 days a week in psychiatric treatment, taking several strong medications? To me that’s the antithesis of “doing fine”.

Maybe that was true months ago (they didn't say) but it definitely wasn't true when this occurred. In fact she was the primary caregiver for the children while her husband was at work. She was only taking 3 medications at the time of the murders. She took her 5 year old to the pediatrician that morning and was allowed to leave with her - no concerns.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow just watched the video of her arraignment. The State makes a compelling case. She was completely lucid and communicating normally with her husband, her pediatrician and everyone at the office, the pharmacist at CVS, the hostess at the takeout restaurant, etc. She also google-mapped how long it would take to drive to get the takeout (father than they normally went for takeout) right before asking her husband to go to this speciific restaurant.

When she came to in the hospital, the first thing she wrote on the whiteboard (she was intubated at that point) was "do I need a lawyer?"

Looks pretty bad for her.

As a PP has pointed out, none of this is at odds with psychosis or necessarily with whatever kind of insanity defense is available in Mass.

How convenient. She was fine until she decided to murder them and then was immediately fine right after. Very very convenient.

I didn’t follow this as closely as the posters here, but how can someone be fine if they’re spending 5 days a week in psychiatric treatment, taking several strong medications? To me that’s the antithesis of “doing fine”.

I was taking care of my kids with diagnosed PPD , on medications, in a 5day a week outpatient program. I insisted we spend all of our money on help because I was afraid to be alone. We were able to swing it

The good news is that this is news, because it so rarely happens. Most women in 5 day outpatient programs go on to normal lives. Even people with full blown postpartum psychosis are usually fine, as long as they follow recommendations.

Just like many people get really annoyed at other people, but don't go on to kill them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow just watched the video of her arraignment. The State makes a compelling case. She was completely lucid and communicating normally with her husband, her pediatrician and everyone at the office, the pharmacist at CVS, the hostess at the takeout restaurant, etc. She also google-mapped how long it would take to drive to get the takeout (father than they normally went for takeout) right before asking her husband to go to this speciific restaurant.

When she came to in the hospital, the first thing she wrote on the whiteboard (she was intubated at that point) was "do I need a lawyer?"

Looks pretty bad for her.

As a PP has pointed out, none of this is at odds with psychosis or necessarily with whatever kind of insanity defense is available in Mass.

How convenient. She was fine until she decided to murder them and then was immediately fine right after. Very very convenient.

I didn’t follow this as closely as the posters here, but how can someone be fine if they’re spending 5 days a week in psychiatric treatment, taking several strong medications? To me that’s the antithesis of “doing fine”.

Maybe that was true months ago (they didn't say) but it definitely wasn't true when this occurred. In fact she was the primary caregiver for the children while her husband was at work. She was only taking 3 medications at the time of the murders. She took her 5 year old to the pediatrician that morning and was allowed to leave with her - no concerns.

Why take a kid you're planning to kill to the pediatrician?

[Anonymous]

https://www.necn.com/news/national-international/she-killed-the-kids-prosecutors-outline-chilling-timeline-in-duxbury-tragedy/2924108/

Here is the detailed timeline of the day of the murders. It is bone chilling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Clancy has my sympathy. She is a Labor & Delivery RN now midwife in 5 days a week outpatient treatment for postpartum depression—she was trying mightily to help herself as was her husband. Sounds like crossover to postpartum psychosis—she will be heartbroken at what she did under SEVERE mental illness. My sympathies to her children deceased, her infant, her husband and yes to her. A nightmare.

I have sympathy and she tried to off herself as well. I think Yates killed her kids and didn’t do anything to herself. But..I believe this post partum psychosis is real. She is going to have to live with this forever. The sad thing is I think a lot of this is tied to lack of sleep and so many people judge if a new mom wants help. I remember I got a lot of judgement for having a night nanny. Luckily I have a great husband who basically told me to put myself first and I did. Without sleep and without an opportunity to exercise or meet with a friend then a severe depression and can develop. It seems like her husband tried and maybe things went sideways with all the meds. Seraqual is a really powerful drug and cannot believe she was on that with others. Maybe the best thing in retrospect would have been inpatient treatment. Anyway new parents should really prioritize sleep and well being. The best thing you can do for a new mom is offer to watch the baby’s so they can nap or offer to take their other kids (if they have them) out so less chaos in the house.

And maybe don’t have three kids in less than five years. Even though posters will jump on here to claim that their mom had 8 kids and didn’t kill any of them! Still, 3 kids under five in this day and age is bananas. And she wasn’t even old or facing a biological clock. What is the rush? The third clearly out her over the edge because she was seemingly ok with the first two.

So, forced abortions like in China?

You are intentionally being obtuse to PP's point, which I admit wasn't artfully made. But no, PP likely wasn't advocating for forced abortions. For a woman like Clancy--who is among the luckiest of us by having access to more knowledge, money, family/friends, and institutional support than the majority of new mothers--I think it isn't unfair to wonder why she would have so many children so closely given the difficulties she had adjusting to motherhood.

She had the kids because she wanted to them show off and brag about her easy pregnancies and brag about how fertile she is, this is an actual thing. It’s sick. She didn’t think it through, like this is a lifelong commitment, it’s quite messy and not at all glamorous. The babies were all for show, many people are doing this now, having prop babies and pets.

Or maybe she's.... Catholic

Isn’t that kind of old school? Like a woman becoming a nun? Who the hell becomes a nun anymore or a priest for that matter. Get w the times, Catholics use birth control now.

No, practicing Catholics do not. But I'm not that sure they were fully practicing. I've read news stories where their parish priest mentions that he didn't know the Clancys, which tells me they probably didn't go to mass regularly or participate in church ministries/activities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I love the new fad of moms with an infant strapped to their chest and pushing a toddler or two in a stroller, walking multiple rowdy dogs. there are a few of these crazy lunatics in my neighborhood. Like, why girl? Why? Just why? Is there a FB group for this or something? Moms of multiple babies under three with multiple dogs? And all walking at the same time, like look at me, look at me, please look at me.

Project much? I did this when I had an infant and a 2.5 year old because the dogs had to get walked, and the kids aren’t gonna babysit themselves. Never been on social media and I wasn’t interested in whether people looked at me.

[Anonymous]

He literally called her from CVS mid-murders and he said she sounded totally normal but that she was in the middle of something.

[Anonymous]

She should get the death penalty

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow just watched the video of her arraignment. The State makes a compelling case. She was completely lucid and communicating normally with her husband, her pediatrician and everyone at the office, the pharmacist at CVS, the hostess at the takeout restaurant, etc. She also google-mapped how long it would take to drive to get the takeout (father than they normally went for takeout) right before asking her husband to go to this speciific restaurant.

When she came to in the hospital, the first thing she wrote on the whiteboard (she was intubated at that point) was "do I need a lawyer?"

Looks pretty bad for her.

As a PP has pointed out, none of this is at odds with psychosis or necessarily with whatever kind of insanity defense is available in Mass.

How convenient. She was fine until she decided to murder them and then was immediately fine right after. Very very convenient.

I didn’t follow this as closely as the posters here, but how can someone be fine if they’re spending 5 days a week in psychiatric treatment, taking several strong medications? To me that’s the antithesis of “doing fine”.

Maybe that was true months ago (they didn't say) but it definitely wasn't true when this occurred. In fact she was the primary caregiver for the children while her husband was at work. She was only taking 3 medications at the time of the murders. She took her 5 year old to the pediatrician that morning and was allowed to leave with her - no concerns.

Why take a kid you're planning to kill to the pediatrician?

Maybe she wasn't planning to kill her yet at that point. Premeditation can be seconds or minutes. She clearly sent her husband on these long errands deliberately. She literally google the drive length to the restaurant.