Lindsay Clancy faces first-degree murder charges over the deaths of her three young children. But if her case had happened elsewhere, the charges might have looked very different.
Clancy’s trial in Massachusetts has captured international attention. It has divided public opinion and ignited debate over how the US prosecutes cases involving mothers who kill their children — and the charges brought against them.
Other countries, including the UK, Canada and Australia, have specific statutes that allow mothers to be charged with infanticide — a conviction that’s more lenient than murder and often results in mental health treatment rather than prison time. So, why is US law different?
The Global Story’s Asma Khalid speaks with Dr Karen Brennan, a senior lecturer in law at the University of Essex, to discuss what the Lindsay Clancy case reveals about how American law understands motherhood, mental illness and criminal responsibility.
Subscribe to our channel here: https://bbc.in/bbcnews
For the latest news download the BBC News app or visit BBC.com/news
#LindsayClancy #USA #ClancyTrial
Timecodes:
0:00 Disclaimer
1:13 Karen Brennan Introduction
2:20 Would the charges have been different if she was tried in another country?
5:43 Infanticide sentencing history
6:15 The Infanticide Act 1938
8:58 The arguments against the infanticide law
13:25 Motherhood and mental health
15:05 The perceptions of the US and parenthood
18:07 How are the public reacting to the case?
