Mental Health Expert Outlines Possible Outcomes if Clancy Found Not Criminally Responsible

A retired Massachusetts judge has outlined what would happen to Lindsay Clancy if jurors determine she was not criminally responsible for strangling her three children due to mental illness. Carol Erskine, a former judge and child welfare advocate, explained that Clancy would not necessarily face a permanent commitment but instead could face annual reviews to determine her continued hospitalization. The length of any civil commitment would remain uncertain, contingent on whether legal standards for involuntary hospitalization continue to be met.

Should the trial judge order it, Clancy would first undergo a 40-day psychiatric evaluation in a locked facility, Erskine told Fox News Digital. Following that assessment, if the evaluation recommends civil commitment based on likelihood of serious harm, the court would order an initial six-month commitment period in a secured psychiatric unit, she said.

After the initial commitment period, Clancy would face yearly reviews to assess whether serious harm remains a genuine risk and whether continued hospitalization is warranted. Either the facility’s superintendent or the district attorney’s office could petition for her discharge, with both sides entitled to be heard during court proceedings addressing such requests.

Clancy faces three murder counts in the deaths of her children: Cora, 5; Dawson, 3; and Callan, 8 months old. Following the strangulations, she attempted suicide by cutting herself and jumping from a second-story window, injuries that have left her paralyzed. Erskine noted that her current physical limitations would likely have minimal impact on future evaluations of whether her mental illness poses an ongoing threat to herself or others.