- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Posted on 8/14/26 at 1:40 pm to LSUBFA83
quote:
Two things can be true at once:
1. She is guilty and needs to be held accountable. Death penalty would be appropriate.
2. Post-partum issues need more attention and to be taken seriously.
This. I'm not going to get into the issue of whether the husband did it since everything I've seen in a lot of Tik Tok sluthing and at the end of the day she (and her defense) has said she admits she did it.
There were definitely flaws in how the psychiatric professionals handled what she did report (and she didn't verbalize everything she was experiencing). Some of the big ones:
1. An issue in the field is people claiming specialization without being specialized. I don't know that any of the folks treating her had real specialization in post-partum.
2. Don't even get me started on the medications prescribed and how they went about that. It's a hot fricking mess.
3. Mother-baby treatment (in-patient) units are super uncommon and it sounds like the one they found wouldn't admit her because of the medication she was on (which is WILD to me). New mothers don't want to risk being separated from their kids.
4. She ended up treated by a bunch of Psychs who don't typically do your hour long, Psychotherapy sessions like a Master-level clinician. This has been a growing issue in the field where PsychNPs are available to prescribe but have started doing "15 minute" sessions for increased billing. It's not comprehensive enough therapy.
5. Working with some women who have had post-partum, you have to have training to work with that condition as it doesn't present like typical depression or anxiety.
,
6. You also have to know when something is outside of your scope of practice and when to refer out. Period.
All of that said, lawyers are there to poke holes in order to build a defense for their client. It can be easy for folks who don't under the mental health system (or the limitations of that system) to point fingers at the mental health professionals.
They're also not mind-readers and it's not uncommon at all for people to under report suicidal symptoms or homicidal symptoms because they know they're going to get sent to an inpatient facility as a result.
It can also be difficult to do follow up with clients when they get admitted and I've personally experienced hospitals not honoring releases of information in a timely manner. I've had clients where they were hospitalized, they filled out a release for me to coordinate with their in-patient psych and to receive their notes/records, and I either never see it or it comes 6 months later.
Posted on 8/14/26 at 1:45 pm to ThePoo
I can see your point. My initial response was more to OP who seems to be in their “burn them at the stake” era.
But because I’m slow this Friday afternoon let’s discuss: I believe the flaw in your reasoning (correct me if I’m wrong) is that sympathy = justification. Which (at least for me personally) it is not.
Why does sympathy require believing the act was justified? Those are completely different moral judgments. I can have enormous sympathy for the children, believe what happened was horrific, and still feel for a human being whose mind was severely diseased at the time.
The whole point of recognizing serious mental illness is that ‘reasonable accordance’ is not always the appropriate standard, because illnesses involving psychosis can fundamentally distort a person’s perception of reality. Sympathy is not acquittal, approval, or an excuse. In my opinion, it is recognizing human suffering even when the outcome of that suffering is something I find horrifying. Keep in mind that I am intentionally avoiding this trial because I can’t stomach the details. Same as the Athena Strand case - I could NEVER bring myself to learn about that trial.
Anyway.. you are free to say your disgust outweighs your sympathy personally.
But my point to the OP is that it doesn’t make someone else irrational or immoral for being capable of holding both feelings at once.
But because I’m slow this Friday afternoon let’s discuss: I believe the flaw in your reasoning (correct me if I’m wrong) is that sympathy = justification. Which (at least for me personally) it is not.
Why does sympathy require believing the act was justified? Those are completely different moral judgments. I can have enormous sympathy for the children, believe what happened was horrific, and still feel for a human being whose mind was severely diseased at the time.
The whole point of recognizing serious mental illness is that ‘reasonable accordance’ is not always the appropriate standard, because illnesses involving psychosis can fundamentally distort a person’s perception of reality. Sympathy is not acquittal, approval, or an excuse. In my opinion, it is recognizing human suffering even when the outcome of that suffering is something I find horrifying. Keep in mind that I am intentionally avoiding this trial because I can’t stomach the details. Same as the Athena Strand case - I could NEVER bring myself to learn about that trial.
Anyway.. you are free to say your disgust outweighs your sympathy personally.
But my point to the OP is that it doesn’t make someone else irrational or immoral for being capable of holding both feelings at once.
Posted on 8/14/26 at 1:48 pm to ell_13
Same reason why liberal white women are a cancer
Posted on 8/14/26 at 1:52 pm to Fat and Happy
Nvm
This post was edited on 8/14/26 at 1:53 pm
Posted on 8/14/26 at 1:53 pm to lionward2014
quote:
Haven't really kept up with the trial but was it really "hey husband go to the grocery store" or was it that he said he was going to the grocery store and she didn't stop him? That's a massive difference.
She asked him to go pick up dinner and also go to CVS. She also used Apple Maps to plot the distance and calculate travel time to the restaurant and pharmacy she sent her husband.
100% premeditated.
This post was edited on 8/14/26 at 1:56 pm
Posted on 8/14/26 at 1:56 pm to ell_13
I’m not gonna say there’s not a lot of fricked up men in this life, bc there definitely are. But there are also a lot of fricked up women
Posted on 8/14/26 at 2:01 pm to tylercsbn9
quote:
She asked him to go pick up dinner and also go to CVS. She also used Apple Maps to plot the distance and calculate travel time to the restaurant and pharmacy she sent her husband.
100% premeditated.
Yikes that's a bad look, and cuts against a full on psychotic break defense IMO.
Posted on 8/14/26 at 2:03 pm to ell_13
quote:
Why are so many women defending Lindsay Clancy?
Over the past few years, it’s really beginning to dawn on me that white women are fricking batshit insane.
Posted on 8/14/26 at 2:04 pm to BluegrassBelle
She was lying to her therapist. She could have gone to the best facility and still they would have struggled medicating her correctly because she kept lying. She was convincing with her lies. She was a sociopath. She admits to murder. She should fry. End of story.
Posted on 8/14/26 at 2:05 pm to Giantkiller
You have people in this thread denying that women are like this when there are multiple women posters in this thread coming to her defense. It’s wild.
Posted on 8/14/26 at 2:05 pm to alexahet
quote:
But because I’m slow this Friday afternoon let’s discuss: I believe the flaw in your reasoning (correct me if I’m wrong) is that sympathy = justification. Which (at least for me personally) it is not.
My argument is that sympathy must be gauged on the entirety of the situation. You cannot separate the person from the disorder from the act. You take it all into account and determine if the circumstances are worthy of sympathy
for instance, I can sympathize with the thousands of women that go through post-partum a year and suffer through it and and do not harm their children.
I cannot sympathize with the woman that goes through it and murders her chidlren while doing so. Just as I assume most would not sympathize with a severely depressed father murdering his children or his wife, it deserves no sympathy. Society rarely gives these people sympathy and I see no reason why the instance on this current case is an different
You can recognize the realities of mental illness without sympathizing with the perpetrator. You can feel sadness for the situation, you can view the situation as a social commentary on society and life, you can do that without sympathizing with the perpatrator
I feel like the term sympathy is being used very loosely by a lot of people
Posted on 8/14/26 at 2:07 pm to ThePoo
Posted on 8/14/26 at 2:07 pm to HoustonChick86
quote:
HoustonChick86
social media has truly fried you women's brains.
Posted on 8/14/26 at 2:08 pm to Payne Avis Stewart
If a man had done this exact thing with PTSD from being in a war, no woman would defend him because of his mental state or an abusive wife. Not one.
Posted on 8/14/26 at 2:10 pm to ThePoo
I agree with your point of view and if she did it, I agree that sympathy is likely the wrong choice of words on my part.
Touché Poo
Touché Poo
Posted on 8/14/26 at 2:13 pm to alexahet
I am not saying there is no sympathy to be had from this story, the sympathy I have is just not for her
Posted on 8/14/26 at 2:18 pm to Bjorn Cyborg
Trying to compare severe mental illness to willingly getting drunk is almost as dumb as the type of people the op is talking about
Popular
Back to top


0









