The Lindsay Clancy trial should make us ask: what happens when a mother’s mental health crisis becomes a catastrophe?

The Lindsay Clancy trial has been difficult to watch from Australia

For many people, the facts of this case are almost impossible to comprehend: a mother accused of killing her three young children, after a period of profound psychological distress and amid competing claims about the extent of her mental illness

For me, the most confronting part has not simply been the question of what happened in that Massachusetts home

It has been watching a woman who appears profoundly broken sit through a criminal trial while the court attempts to answer an extraordinarily difficult question: where does criminal responsibility end and severe mental illness begin?

Clancy has pleaded not guilty on the basis that she was not criminally responsible because of her mental state. Her defence has argued that she was experiencing postpartum psychosis, a rare but devastating psychiatric emergency that can involve hallucinations, delusions, confusion and rapidly changing moods. Prosecution experts have challenged that account, arguing that she understood what she was doing and was criminally responsible

That disagreement matters

But beyond the verdict is another question that deserves far more attention: could more have been done before this tragedy occurred?