abortion

When it comes to the trial of Lindsay Clancy, the Massachusetts labor and delivery nurse currently facing three counts of first-degree murder for the death of her three children, there is no dispute over the primary tragic facts of the case.

On January 24, 2023, Clancy strangled her three children with an exercise band. Cora, age 5, and Dawson, age 3, died that day. Callan, 8 months, died three days later.

While Clancy has never formally confessed to the murders (she pleaded “not guilty”), neither she nor her defense attorneys have ever disputed that she did it. When her husband, Patrick, called 911, he told the dispatcher, “She killed the kids.”

Instead, Clancy’s attorneys have argued that she was mentally ill, suffering from postpartum depression and psychosis, and therefore incapable of understanding that she was killing her three children.

As of Tuesday morning, the 12-member jury was in its fourth day of deliberations and reported back to the judge that it had been unable to come to a unanimous decision. The jury could find Clancy guilty of first-degree murder, second-degree murder, manslaughter or not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility.

Informed of the deadlock, Judge William Sullivan told the jury to keep deliberating. One woman juror reportedly shook her head in a sign of apparent exasperation. 

An individual can be mentally ill and still criminally responsible. But Judge William Sullivan, who charged the jury, instructed the 12, “A person is not criminally responsible for her conduct if she has a mental disease or defect. And as a result of that mental disease or defect, she lacks the substantial capacity either to appreciate the criminality or wrongfulness of her conduct or to conform her conduct to the requirements of the law.”

The prosecution in the case alleges that Lindsay Clancy had the capacity to know what she was doing and planned the murders by arranging for her husband to run errands – during which time she killed the three children. The prosecution also alleges she killed the oldest first because she was most likely to resist. She then also attempted suicide by cutting her wrists and neck and jumping out of a second-story window. 

Beyond the heartbreaking details of this horrific story lies an additional and disturbing development – a gathering, grassroots contingent of supporters who are sympathetic and perhaps even willing to forgive Clancy due to her reported post-partum depression.

In a piece published yesterday in The Atlantic titled, “The Women Obsessed With Lindsay Clancy,” we meet several of them.

Dottie Kiley told the reporter that she could relate to Clancy. “I had suicidal thoughts, clear as a bell,” she said. “So bad I called the police and told them, and they had a cop come down and sit with me. It was a small town, and they had time to do that.”

Women like Kiley have been traveling great distances to witness the trial in person.

NBC reported on Monday that Clancy had received enough letters from supporters to fill three boxes. Her attorney, Kevin Reddington, told reporters, “She knows that there are people out there that have not judged her and know that she is a wonderful, wonderful person.”

Where does such moral confusion and poor discernment stem from? 

Post-partum depression is real, and mental illness is devastating, but how does one jump from recognizing those two truths to expressing admiration or even moral support for a woman who murdered her three children?

Moral confusion doesn’t usually develop suddenly but incrementally. It begins when we blur distinctions that are crystal clear, especially between matters of life and death. A culture that refuses to recognize the sanctity of life will inevitably excuse away or struggle to respond with moral clarity when that life is violated, diminished and destroyed. 

In the United States, more than 60 million innocent children have been killed inside the womb since the Supreme Court legalized abortion in all fifty states back in 1973. Roe’s reversal has helped partially right the wrong in some states, but in Massachusetts, where the Clancy trial is being held, a so-called “right” to abortion was recently expanded.

Back in August, Gov. Maura Healey signed a deceptively named wicked bill, “An Act Prioritizing Patient Access to Care,” into law that permits abortion up to the moment of birth. 

What does this have to do with the Clancy murders?

If killing a fully formed baby inside the womb doesn’t elicit moral outrage, is it any shock that some might morally excuse the act of killing a baby outside the womb just eight months later?

Wrote journalist and author Caitlin Flanagan in The Free Press, “What began as admirable compassion for a woman who says she was driven by mental illness to commit the world’s greatest form of evil has turned into something strange: an almost exultant, fan-like celebration of Lindsay Clancy.”

Indeed. And it is awful and horrifically reckless and dangerous. 

Moral confusion is a sin and sickness with devastating consequences. When you rationalize away immorality regarding one evil act (abortion), it can become easier and more likely to somehow excuse it in another. The failure to distinguish between what is evil and what is good is what drives and multiplies cultural confusion, dysfunction, and devastation. It’s also what contributes to some people ignoring the deaths of three beautiful children and then writing letters of support to the woman who killed them.

Please join us in praying for justice in the Lindsay Clancy trial.

In the wake of Dobbs, Planned Parenthood, our nation’s single largest abortion provider, developed and released a 14-point plan directing Democrat state attorneys general to target pro-life pregnancy resource centers and promote abortion.

The U.S. Supreme Court decision Dobbs v. Jackson, which overturned Roe v. Wade, was leaked to the press in May 2022, before the final decision was published the next month. Planned Parenthood may have been preparing to campaign against pro-life centers even before Dobbs was released.

The plan, published July 12, 2022, was sent by Rachel Sussman, vice president of State Policy and Advocacy at Planned Parenthood Action Fund (PPAF), to the Democratic Attorneys General Association. PPAF is the political and lobbying arm of Planned Parenthood Federation of America.

On July 25, Brittany Jenkins, policy director of the Progressive State Leaders Committee, forwarded the memo to Democrat state attorneys general, the Daily Signal reported.

The plan included marching orders to the attorneys general to go after pregnancy resource centers which provide care, food, clothing, diapers, ultrasounds, STI testing and more to pregnant mothers.

“Provide information to the public about CPCs (crisis pregnancy centers) and take steps to curb their misleading and deceptive practices,” the memo requests, including California’s consumer alert about the centers as an example.

The document also called on the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to “target misinformation perpetuated by crisis pregnancy centers regarding medication abortion.”

In the months after the memo was sent, the attorneys general of Minnesota, New Jersey and California all acted against pregnancy centers, acceding to Planned Parenthood’s request, the Daily Signal noted. California Attorney General Rob Bonta also led a coalition of 15 other attorneys general in issuing an open letter against pregnancy resource centers.

Robyn Chambers, vice president of Advocacy for Children at Focus on the Family, told the Daily Citizen that Planned Parenthood’s memo itself is riddled with misinformation and deception.

“Same old lies told in a new way are still lies,” she said. “The work that Focus on the Family has done for nearly 50 years to equip pregnancy centers is core to who we are as a ministry.”

Chambers shared the truth about pregnancy centers:

It’s no surprise Planned Parenthood doesn’t want expectant mothers visiting pro-life pregnancy centers. Each child born to a pregnant mom is less money Planned Parenthood makes from aborting the child.

According to Planned Parenthood’s latest annual report, the abortion giant killed 434,500 preborn children in one year, earning over $2.1 billion for its dark deeds. It’s 2024 report had shown the organization earned a $206 million profit in the preceding two years.

In contrast, pregnancy resource centers don’t make money off women in need. Instead, they provide around $368 million in free services to clients every year.

“The services at these centers are free,” Chambers said. “They, unlike the abortion industry, never make money from a decision a woman in an unexpected pregnancy is making. They provide true healthcare with compassion and excellence.”

If you are experiencing an unexpected pregnancy and want to learn more about your options, you can visit My Choice Network.

Please considering supporting Focus on the Family’s Option Ultrasound program to place ultrasounds in pregnancy centers around the country. To date, we’ve helped save over 500,000 preborn babies from abortion.

Related articles and resources:

My Choice Network

I’m Pregnant, Now What?

Dealing With Unplanned Pregnancy

Become an Option Ultrasound Life Advocate

New Insights on the Dangers of the Abortion Pill

Overcoming Abortion and Becoming a Force for Life

How You Can Join the Pro-Life Movement

Scriptures Advocating For The Pre-Born

The History of Christianity and Abortion

Pregnancy Resource Centers Provide Faster, Less Expensive Services to Women Than Abortion Facilities: National Study

Photo from Shutterstock.