If she uses anything like this as her defense,she'd better have proof....police reports,photos,testament from non-relatives,etc,etc (kinda like what Nicole Simpson had).If she has such proof,a jury/judge may well go easy her,or even find her not guilty (as I would probably do...*with* strong evidence).
If there's no evidence of this sort,fry her!
"If" he was abusing the children in some way, wouldn't there be physical evidence of it?
I do believe she'll go with the "post partum psychosis" defense.
"If she uses anything like this as her defense,she'd better have proof...."
Honestly, these days I think all that need be done is that SHE point out HE and unless HE can prove 'no' HE is guilty and will be found so in court with a jury. Look at how many guys go up on an ID alone.