Can biotech predict postpartum depression, psychosis?

Latest article by David Stephen where he looks at possible techniques to help with postpartum depression.

There is a recent report on AP, Lindsay Clancy’s attorney says she was in a deep psychosis when she killed her 3 children, stating that, “Lindsay Clancy was in a deep psychosis when she strangled her three children in their Massachusetts home, her lawyer said Thursday, telling jurors that she had been a loving mother before her mental health spiraled.”

“Prosecutors contend that Clancy acted intentionally and sent her husband out on an errand before killing her young children and attempting suicide, rejecting her lawyer’s claims that Clancy was in the throes of postpartum psychosis, a rare mental illness linked to stress, sleep deprivation and hormonal changes following childbirth.”

Can biotech predict postpartum depression?

“Clancy’s mental state is at the center of the closely watched trial that has drawn attention to maternal mental health after childbirth. The debate has stirred deep divisions among the public over whether she should be held criminally responsible.”

“Clancy, who has pleaded not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility, did not testify during the trial, now in its fifth week.”

“Clancy’s mental health is a key issue at her trial. Prosecutors have said she deliberately killed her kids, while her defense team has said she was experiencing postpartum psychosis and was unable to appreciate the wrongfulness of her actions.”

“The prosecution’s final witness, forensic psychologist Dr. Gregory Saathoff, testified on Wednesday that she had the “capacity to appreciate right from wrong” at the time of the killings.”

What is different in the brain whenever there is an episode of postpartum psychosis?

This is the sole question that the American Psychiatric Association [APA] should be asking amid the high-profile trial.

There are several established neuroimaging techniques that provide leads, but the clarity [that is] sought is not simply brain activity area, brain wave type or anything related, but what [the correlated] components of the brain are doing in those moments to decide psychosis – as an outcome.

In the brain, while every component is important, there are some that are more closely related to [or directly implicated in] functions, than others. These components have mechanisms that ultimately structure [or organize] functions into experiences.

Simply, some components and their mechanisms in the brain give functions. They can act in a certain way for one function and otherwise, for another.

What are they and how can they be displayed, at least, conceptually to bifurcate postpartum psychosis from others?

In general, the term postpartum psychosis is a psychiatric label. The explanation of what it is and does is a description. The quest is to move beyond labels and descriptions, to how the mind determines the condition.

The question, simply, is what exactly is different in the brain whenever there is an episode of postpartum psychosis? Seeking out an answer can change how the condition is understood, and how care is delivered.

Such that even if this is ambitious for contemporary neuroscience and psychiatry, it is possible to project postulates and then prospect answers, amid the urgency.

In part, because, in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, Text Revision [DSM-5-TR] this is not clear. So, the direction will be postulation in electrochemical psychiatry, a division of conceptual brain science.

In the brain, what components could be responsible for postpartum psychosis and why? Then how? The same can be asked about postpartum depression.

Conceptual brain science

Neuroscience has established thoroughly that all functions of the brain – for human life and experiences – involve neurons. But neurons do this, with their electrical and chemical signals. So, isolating biological factors for the human mind could include neurons and their electrical and chemical signals.

Now, neurons are cells, while they are adapted to information function, they are anatomically similar to other cells across the body. Cells are not as flexible to organize the large number of functions that the mind does. This means that because several functions of the mind are distinct, neurons will not be able to change in too specific ways to define one from the other.

This leaves the option as electrical and chemical signals. Signals are flexible enough to organize several types of functions of the mind. This means that the option for the components of mind and mental health are primarily electrical and chemical signals, conceptually.

But how would they do that? It is postulated that electrical and chemical signals interact, in sets, to specify functions.

Neuroscience has established that neurons are in clusters. Conceptual brain science says that in those clusters electrical and chemical signals are in sets or in loops. It is where they make specific interactions, to define one function from the next.

But what makes their interactions distinct? It is postulated that they have states at the time of the interactions that determine how much they interact. These states are sometimes ubiquitous, while others are special to an area.

So, electrical and chemical signals interact, their interactions have attributes or states that grade, measure or qualify how much they interact.

It is the attributes that can be used to display why postpartum psychosis is different from another mental disorder.

How should postpartum psychosis be measured?

If there is a loss of will, in postpartum psychosis, then what is will, intent or control in the brain?

It is postulated that in some sets of signals, there are spaces of constant diameter where certain functions are instantiated.

This means that when the hand is moved, or the legs or the body, the instantiation of it, is from respective sets. And those sets have that space of constant diameter. Other sets that do not have these spaces cannot be controlled. So, even while all functions at some instances can be operated autonomously, some can also use intent, to play out.

There situations that might make intent to fail: that is [for the space] to close out and be inoperable. For example, some pleasure can cause a deluge of chemical signals in a set and close the space or even some substances and so forth. It is also possible that in some mental disorders, some of those spaces will not be available. When the spaces are not available, heeding to caution can be tough. There is necessity for the space to be available, for balance, across many cognitive, motor and interoceptive functions.

Thoughts, for example, are sometimes from these spaces, imagination, speech, typing and so forth. Even when they might not be, the spaces can be used to hold some back or deviate. While some neuroimaging studies have shown similar brain activities between imagining and doing something, both are done with intent from the space.

It is possible to test intent, with this concept, in a case of postpartum psychosis, especially where some intrusive thoughts went and how they were either countered or safety barriers were forced to not allow them fester against intent.

Aside from the intent problem, for the hallucinations and delusions of postpartum psychosis, attributes like splits of electrical signals, sequences of relay [old/new], then volume variations from side-to-side may determine extents.

For postpartum depression, principal spot is a measure as well for direction of heaviness.

These attributes are extensive in the postulate in Conceptual Biomarkers and Theoretical Biological Factors for Psychiatric and Intelligence Nosology.

As Neutrogena is seeking answers towards how to support individuals experiencing postpartum depression after their statement about Hayden Panettiere, and also as the Lindsay Clancy trial and deliberations are finalized, the objective is to explore electrochemical psychiatry, as a new direction, ahead of outlook the distant view of seeking biomarkers for mental disorders, like the APA is exploring.

C-reactive protein and genetic risk factors are directions that American Psychiatric Association is seeking answers, but those may be longer term, as it is possible to use established biological factors, electrical and chemical signals, to be able to seek answers by as soon as September 9, 2026.

David Stephen does research in conceptual brain science and served as a visiting scholar in medical entomology at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. He did computer vision research at Rovira i Virgili University in Tarragona.

See more breaking stories here.