Some things I'm trying to work through wrt Lindsay Clancy:

1. I don't think that Lindsay being incarcerated the rest of her life is mutually exclusive of her not being responsible for her actions while in a psychotic state. I think psychosis sufficient to killing your children ought to be treated by society as a permanent state or defect of the human brain that could lay dormant and announce itself at any time in response to environmental stressors or hormonal changes. Given the hopelessness of her situation, the fact she cannot on any planet provide sufficient atonement/bring three souls back, I'm not going to lose any sleep if she gets the death penalty. But if I were on the jury, I'd be ready to listen to the deets surrounding her medical care and be generally open to the suggestion she does not have the same moral culpability as some would-be robber desirous of leaving no witnesses.

2. I don't know how so many pundits (e.g. Matt Walsh) can spend literal weeks of their pods talking about the unintended consequences of SSRI's and other psych meds, then when a woman behaves in psychotic fashion while on 10 such meds after confessing her psychosis to doctors, act like it's slam-dunk moral culpability on her part. Standing in the way of this, imho, is her actually seeking help from professionals and being upfront about what she was experiencing prior to the murders. My hope is that the coverage of this saves lives, in that other such moms reporting hearing voices to their caregivers are subject to the removal of their children from their care, for obvious reasons.

3. The "same, Lindsay!" women are performative wretches and my guess is their venn circle is all but fully consumed by that of the moms who create trans kids.

The average, in my estimation, cannot parse the moral culpability question in any case.