A North Carolina mother charged with murdering her three-year-old son and attempting to murder her two-year-old is planning to mount an insanity defence, in a case drawing comparisons to the ongoing trial of Lindsay Clancy in Massachusetts. A retired judge has said he expects such mental-health-based defences to become more common as the high-profile Clancy case brings greater public attention to postpartum psychiatric conditions and their bearing on criminal responsibility.

Andrea Faust, 41, is accused of killing her son and attempting to kill his younger brother at their Durham home on 12 February; her lawyers have filed notice of intent to argue not guilty by reason of insanity and diminished capacity, with an expert reportedly concluding she could not distinguish right from wrong at the time. Her attorney, Nicole Galinsky, drew parallels with Clancy's case, saying both women were caring mothers whose mental health struggles and pleas for help went unheeded, though she noted Faust was not suffering from postpartum psychosis as Clancy's defence alleges. Faust was initially ruled incompetent to stand trial in March but was later found capable as of 21 May, with a further evaluation planned into her mental state at the time of the alleged offences. Retired Massachusetts judge Jack Lu noted that such insanity defences rarely succeed but said the Clancy trial, where jurors remain deadlocked after a second day of deliberations, has reshaped his own understanding of postpartum mental illness.