During a recent episode of his podcast, "The Joe Rogan Experience," host Joe Rogan expressed sharp disapproval for individuals who have publicly shown support for Lindsay Clancy. Clancy, a former nurse, is currently facing trial for the alleged murders of her three young children.
Clancy, who worked as a labor and delivery nurse in Duxbury, Massachusetts, is accused of killing her children — Cora, 5; Dawson, 3; and 8-month-old Callan — at their family residence on January 24, 2023. She faces three counts of first-degree murder. While Clancy does not dispute that the deaths occurred at her hand, her defense asserts she was suffering from postpartum psychosis at the time and therefore should not be held criminally responsible.
Rogan Questions Public Sympathy
A notable aspect of the ongoing legal proceedings has been the significant outpouring of support for Clancy, particularly from women who have organized online groups and social media discussions, some even proposing alternative theories about the case.
"This lady killed her kids and everyone's like, ‘Oh my God, she needed help.’ Imagine if a single father killed his kids. Do you think there'd be any dads out there? ‘We get it. We understand. I also get sad!’"
He further criticized those offering sympathy, remarking,
"If those ladies could see the crime scene and see those dead kids with their f---ing vacant eyes staring up because their mother took their life, the last f---ing thing that they saw was their mother standing over them, choking them to death, I don't think they would feel so bad."
Rogan also reflected on the broader state of contemporary society and politics, describing the public discourse surrounding this case as another instance of events that seem absurd and unbelievable.
"People are out of their f---ing mind right now. She's out of her f---ing mind. The world is out of its f---ing mind. It's like more of these things come up where you're like, ‘This can't be real. This can't be real.’ And it is real," he commented. "More of these things where, like, people are showing up in support of a woman who killed her children. I don't care how rough it was. The ability to kill your children is crazy."
He contrasted the public's reaction to Clancy's situation with the commonly held belief that parents are instinctively driven to protect their offspring from any harm.
Later in the discussion, Rogan suggested there is a growing trend of polarization, particularly among what he termed "childless liberal women," which he believes cannot be ignored.
"I don't want to generalize, but it seems like it's Republicans too, but it's a lot of liberal women," Rogan observed. "Liberal women with no children want to turn the world into their children. They want to, like, scold the world like they're doing the wrong thing, and they're worried about the environment. And they're worried about the future. And they're worried about voting. And they're worried about rights. And they're worried about immigrants. They're worried about this, and they're worried about that. They're taking care of the world like it's the child that they don't have."
Expert Perspectives on the Case
Dr. Josef Witt-Doerring, a board-certified psychiatrist and the CEO and medical director of TaperClinic, indicated that the prevalence of social media has indeed added a disturbing public display to this tragic case.
"Rogan is right about one thing: People can turn cases like this into teams. That is not healthy. Lindsay Clancy should not be treated like a hero or celebrity. Three children died. And some of the TikTok commentary around this case is just dumb. People are defending her for reasons that have nothing to do with the evidence or acting as if her husband must somehow be the real villain," Dr. Witt-Doerring stated. "That is ignorant and deplorable. It reminds me of the Luigi Mangione case, where people rushed to turn someone into a symbol before they even understood the facts. If you are going to defend Lindsay, defend her based on the actual medical and legal evidence, not because of some viral narrative."
However, Dr. Witt-Doerring also offered a more nuanced view regarding the motivations behind some of the public support.
"I think this is where a lot of people misunderstand what the support for Lindsay actually represents. They see a few extreme voices online and assume that is what everyone supporting her believes. Most women supporting Lindsay are not saying, 'It’s OK that she killed her children.' They are saying the postpartum period can be extremely hard, and many women understand the anxiety, lack of sleep, financial stress and pressure to return to work."
He further added,
"They are also angry at a mental health system that often seems to rely too much on medication. Lindsay was prescribed 13 different psychiatric drugs in the months before the deaths, and there is evidence that those medications may have played a role in making her worse. Would a father get the same sympathy? Probably less. But if a father came home from war, became depressed, trusted his doctors, was put on drugs that pushed him into psychosis and killed someone while unable to understand what he was doing, I would make the same argument for him."
Dr. Witt-Doerring also clarified common misconceptions about legal outcomes, saying,
"I also think it is wrong to say that if Lindsay is found NGRI [not guilty by reason of insanity] then anyone with mental illness can commit a crime and avoid prison. That is not how it works," he explained, emphasizing that cases like Clancy's are "rare, extreme cases."
Mary Marslender, a former political consultant for the GOP, echoed Rogan's sentiment regarding a clear double standard in how men and women are perceived in similar criminal cases.
"Joe Rogan is spot on. Would there be a supporter rally for a father who committed the same act? Of course not. If a man mapped how long his wife would be gone, sent her out for takeout and then violently strangled his three children in the basement, no one would be posting 'I am him,'" Marslender asserted. "There would be no GoFundMe campaign framed as solidarity. He would be labeled a monster, and these same women in pink would be the first to condemn him. The double standard is not a surprise; it is the hypocrisy of feminism."
Marslender concluded by emphasizing the importance of acknowledging the victims' humanity.
"It is possible to acknowledge that Clancy was ill and that our psychiatric system is deeply flawed, while also refusing to idolize someone who brutally killed her own children. This is not a story of misplaced compassion; it’s one of deep moral confusion. These children were not merely statistics or a talking point; they were a 5-year-old, a 3-year-old and a baby. A movement that needs to be reminded of these children’s humanity clearly is not to society’s benefit."