The Massachusetts prosecution of Lindsay Clancy, a high-profile criminal case involving the tragic deaths of her three children, brought postpartum psychosis into public focus and highlighted the complex role mental health can play in legal proceedings. Just as the diagnosis raises questions about criminal culpability, it may also prompt a distinct inquiry in family court: whether and to what extent a parent’s mental health affects their ability to adequately care for a child. Clancy’s first trial ended in a mistrial on September 4, 2026, leaving her criminal responsibility for alleged past actions unresolved. A Georgia court deciding custody is charged with balancing the child’s present best interests and the custodial arrangement that offers the greatest protection, stability, and support.
First, what is postpartum psychosis? Postpartum psychosis is a rare psychiatric emergency that is characterized as a sudden loss of contact with reality and may involve delusions, hallucinations, confusion, insomnia and/or irritability. Postpartum psychosis is regarded as the most serious mental health disorder associated with childbirth, with symptoms developing anywhere from the first few days post-birth to several months after childbirth. The Clancy case shows the potential severity of this acute crisis and highlights the importance of immediate intervention for the temporary, treatable condition. Currently, postpartum psychosis is not listed as a disease in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (“DSM-5”) which creates quite the conundrum for legal proceedings, as demonstrated by the Clancy trial.
How is the issue of custody determined in Georgia? Under O.C.G.A. § 19-9-3, neither parent has an automatic right to custody. The Court is required to do a “best interest of the child” analysis and issue a custody determination that will best promote the child’s welfare and happiness. As part of its analysis, the Court will make inquiries into the fitness of the parents subject to the custody proceedings. In addition to the mental and physical health of a parent, a court may consider any relevant factors of parental fitness including but not limited to: emotional bond between the parent and child; capacity for the parent to understand the needs of the child as well as provide stability, love, support and facilitate the education of the child; capacity for the parent to provide necessities such as food, clothing and shelter; and parent’s past performance and abilities for future performance of parental responsibilities.
How specifically does a mental disorder factor into Georgia custody proceedings? A mental disorder is not a shortcut to unfitness. The relevant questions are how the condition, such as postpartum psychosis, has affected and how it might continue to affect the child(ren); whether the parent has insight and appropriate treatment and whether safety planning, reliable support, and objective history demonstrate stability. When evidence shows a specific risk, courts may use proportionate measures such as temporary supervision, treatment conditions or crisis protocols and reconsider them as circumstances improve. Seeking therapy, medication, or hospitalization can show insight and responsibility, not danger.
The Clancy case lies at tragedy’s farthest edge. Further research and greater public awareness of postpartum psychosis are needed to strengthen prevention and early detection efforts and to help develop a more informed framework for addressing the condition in the legal realm. Postpartum psychosis can be severe and alarming, but a diagnosis alone does not establish parental unfitness under Georgia law. Custody courts must focus on the child’s best interests by assessing concrete risks, the parent’s treatment and recovery, available support, and demonstrated ability to provide safe, stable care. This individualized approach protects both child safety and parental dignity.
By Kourtney Bernard-Rance