I've heard it. It was very interesting, but it wouldn't convince me that he had a psychotic break.Have a listen to the Lines Of Enquiry podcast about Hawe. Loads of facts presented that weren't in media at time.
I've heard it. It was very interesting, but it wouldn't convince me that he had a psychotic break.Have a listen to the Lines Of Enquiry podcast about Hawe. Loads of facts presented that weren't in media at time.
I thought the podcast was suggesting he didn't have a psychotic break.I've heard it. It was very interesting, but it wouldn't convince me that he had a psychotic break.
Sorry I misunderstood you, I thought you were saying that thd evidence in it made you think he was psychotic.I thought the podcast was suggesting he didn't have a psychotic break.
On a separate note Drew Harris comes across terribly as usual. He hasn't a shred of humanity.
I don't think that is always true. I think sometimes we find evil so hard to comprehend that it is easier for us to say that they person must have been mentally ill.
Again, I would think that the lengths that she went to to try and get help make a big difference in terms of the support she is receiving. Do you not see that as in any way mitigating?
While that's a really interesting question in general, and will be very relevant for the civil case, but for the criminal case I am not sure it really matters.I’m not convinced Lindsay Clancy had a psychotic episode that should wipe out criminal responsibility. None of us have every fact from the trial, but from what’s been made public she was not left to struggle alone.
Her husband took paternity leave and then worked from home. He ran errands, picked up food and medication, and tried to support her. They hired a nanny. Both sets of grandparents helped. She attended an outpatient postpartum program five days a week, saw multiple doctors and nurse practitioners, and was prescribed a long list of medications. She was herself a labor and delivery nurse with access to medical professionals. What she apparently did not follow through on was sustained talk therapy.
That raises a hard question: if this level of help is not enough, what would be?
I am so sorry to hear you went through that. It must make all the discourse around this case really distressing.I’ll say up front that this case hits close to home, so I’m not claiming perfect objectivity. After our second child, my ex-wife went through a long period of depression. I hired a nanny and cleaners, asked her parents and friends to help, did night feeds, got the kids dressed and washed, made lunches, took them to school, and kept working. When she had a heart attack I was already running on empty, trying to manage work and sick children at the same time. If I slipped even slightly under that strain, it was treated as unforgivable. I tried to get her into proper psychotherapy. She saw a psychiatrist a couple of times and stopped. There was never any real accountability for how she treated the people around her. After three and a half years we split. I still don’t know whether something was medically wrong, or whether she simply could not handle motherhood. What I do know is that I would have given a great deal for even a fraction of the support Lindsay Clancy received.
To be honest, to my mind she was clearly very mentally ill. If that mental illness meets the very strict criteria for legal insanity then she needs to go to a mental health facility for a long time. If she doesn't meet that criteria then I would say that she certainly meets the criteria for diminished responsibility. In that case, I would much rather see her in a secure unit mental health facility than a prison. I can't see any evidence of this being a calculated premediated crime, or the actions of a mental well and evil person.Whatever her state of mind, three children are dead. I don’t think we can treat that as something to be explained away. She killed them, and she should be held responsible for that.
Mind yourself.All the best,
DAB
