DH says I’m censoring him when he talks about disturbing things in front of our teen (13)

YANBU. This is really horrible, letting a 3 year old see violence like this. Actually a form of child abuse.
In terms of now with him at 13, I think it's very odd and damaging behaviour to normalise such horrific things by talking about them almost casually it sounds like. I wouldn't be able to read the details of the James Bulger case and then discuss them with someone without being very distressed and it doesn't sound like either your DH or DS are having that appropriate reaction. Does your DS now play the same sort of ultra violent games that your DH does? Sounds like they're both desensitised to extreme violence which would seriously worry me. Your DH is absolutely in the wrong.

This is really concerning OP.

It is likely your husband has been influencing your son with his unhealthy interest in violence.

'@pikkumyy77
I think your dh is—and always has—been abusing your child by exposing him to graphic images and discussions of violence and torture. Some people get off on that.'

I completely agree with the above.

There is a big difference between being aware of the murders and relishing retelling every sordid and brutal details.

I would not want to live with a man like that OP and I think he is damaging your kids.

Your DH was very inappropriate, I don’t think it’s an appropriate thing to discuss with anyone really let alone a child.

I’d also be a bit concerned about what your son is searching for online, perhaps he came across it by accident but it happened a long time ago now so it’s not something that pops up online regularly. Maybe this is a good opportunity to check search history or have a chat with your son, he’s probably just over curious but I’d personally want to shut it down.

Personally I think the real issue is not your DS's age (although I agree with you that at 13 I would still be keen to protect him from some of the most gruesome aspects of what humans are capable of doing to one another).

To me, the issue is that it's just an incredibly distressing and unnecessary subject to be discussing full stop. The fact that they both actively want to discuss the precise details of how a toddler was tortured is deeply unpleasant.

Ugh, I’m still annoyed by a colleague sending an email with graphic details of this terrible murder (she was sharing a petition) and it was 25 years ago. I didn’t want to know then, I can’t forget it now and I was a fully grown adult.

Anyway, agree with the many comments about your husband prioritising his ego over being a caring parent. Citing freedom of speech is the defence of the belligerent

Just to say I think you are right to be concerned and I think your husband is unreasonable and it’s pretty poor behaviour on his part to say you are censoring or controlling him if you disagree with him.

Ash copilot or similar AI or even just google the link between exposure to violence and outcomes and you will find plenty of research on it finding extremely strong correlations between violent exposure and poor behavioural outcomes, especially in males.

Males exposed to very violent content (ie games or movies) when aged 3.5-4.5 showed a higher rate of antisocial personality and lower empathy.

Males exposed to violent content as teens showed 2 different negative patterns - higher rates of craving violent stimuli and desensitisation, or conversely a fear of the world and poor sleep. Girls didn’t show as much of the same pattern.

Once boys get to 20s it’s not as harmful as they are able to critically judge content and not have it embed so deeply in their psyche.

So it does matter in the same way that boys watching Andrew Tate or how to build bombs does matter. Plenty won’t be radicalised but these are formative years and some will be but even just some will be intrinsically shaped by this content even to a small degree.

Your son is watching this or reading it anyway so it’s a chance to discuss it and definitely a chance to talk about how poor childhoods and certain personality types lead to the creation of psychopaths and narcissists. But I don’t agree it’s an opportunity to discuss in detail the violence. You are right to feel this is inappropriate and I think your husband is sadly clearly one of those men exposed to ultra violence early on who now craves it and finds this normal.

If you find him the studies and show him the evidence it is actually factually proven harmful in boys would he listen? If no then you have a DH problem. I would personally stand my ground as sometimes when you are right - which you are - you do have to take a stand. I would also actively get your son involved in the psychology of these sorts of crimes but also try find good male role models to expose him to. Lots of true life crime stuff involves really tenacious male and female police or even parents and to me that’s a better way to learn about true crime and the world rather than the details of the torture which is let’s face it gratuitous.

Just listen to some 13 year olds talk. They can be graphic in all kinds of dreadful ways - they pick stuff up online and from reading material and they often misunderstand and misinterpret. Look at porn, for example - they shouldn't see it but they do and then they talk about it among themselves and it becomes totally warped because they are talking into an echo chamber.

I think speaking to them factually about things actually can help.

I mean; the fact that your DS had read about it online and knew the graphic details entirely undermines your point. You have to control what he’s looking at, especially if he’s reading incorrect things… not many well-meaning sites are going to have graphic and incorrect descriptions.

It’s not something I’d want my 13 year old particularly knowing the intricate details of, but you seem to allow yours fairly free reign of the internet, and he will be coming across far, far worse.

Separately your husband sounds like a knob, but I can see his point that you’re unhappy him discussing what happened as you think your DS is too young, but have accepted that DS will look it up himself… if he is going to be exposed to that stuff, he needs to be able to talk about it to process it. DH was not introducing the topic to him.

Your 13 year old knows something so graphic that you didn’t want him talking about it, so you shut him down. He should have absolutely no access to anything that unsuitable. If you facilitate access to it; you have to be prepared to talk about it.

We all live in the real world, but there's still no need for anyone to be going into graphic detail about children being abused, tortured and murdered.

What a load of bollocks. You do realise it was the OP watching a show about child killers with her 13 year old son - do you think she was also "inducting the child ...into an obsessive interest in torture porn"?
The son already knew lots about the case because clearly neither of his parents are paying any attention to what he looks at online. It's better to at least correct misinformation he has heard than let him spread lies about a child's murder.
As for the whole rape being encoded in her husband, like I said before what a load of bollocks.

If your son has unrestricted internet access then unfortunately there’s not much point in censoring the details as he has undoubtedly seen much worse online. It sounds like he initiated the conversation and your husband was just correcting him. I think the bigger issue is what he’s accessing online rather than your husband providing information that’s widely known about a high profile case.

I started reading newspapers at 9 and watching the news with my parents from a very young age, I don’t think at 13 it’s going to do him any harm to know information that was widely available to the public anyway, even if it is very disturbing.

Just out of curiosity, how is this different from other nasty things children are told without a second thought, such as fairy tales, or Bible stories? I remember my brother crying (aged 8) on hearing the story of Abraham and Isaac. Not because God ordered Abraham to kill his own son, but "what about the poor ram?", which God then told Abraham to kill instead. I recently heard a 6-year-old girl cry on hearing about how Jesus was betrayed by his friends. There's also the book Struwwelpeter: originally published in the 19th century, of stories of quite horrible things happening to children (Little Suck-a-Thumb, anybody?), which was at the time, entertainment for children.

Is it is because stories such as James Bulger are more recent, more "real", closer to home, or that the killers were children themselves?

I had parents like this, it was very traumatising. They would tell me about child abuse cases, watch horror movies with me, played violent video games in front of us. It was absolutely awful and it's affected my siblings too.

I never exposed my children to these things.

I was too. And my parents also talked about the case with us children around the table.

I knew that James was abducted, tortured and then murdered. They didn’t tell me the awful details of exactly what was done to that poor little boy, because I didn’t need to know. What we knew was what was shared in the papers and evening news. That was enough, the details were not necessary to know. And I actually still don’t know, and I still don't need to.

If you look at the top of the Wikipedia page for James, it says that he was bludgeoned, mutilated, tortured and dismembered. A range of weapons were used including a fishplate.

Do you really want to know exactly how he was mutilated? How the fishplate was used to torture or dismember him?

I can’t imagine why anybody other than the jury would need to know these disturbing details. And still less why they would want to discuss them as point of fact with their teenage son.

This isn’t about ‘pretending it didn't happen’.

It’s about what is suitable for normal conversation, and in my opinion the details of what was done to James is way over the line.

@SpottyDottyD you're not censoring the giant man-baby you call a husband - you are parenting your child.

He is 13 and is brain is not fully developed. His ability to rationalise gory details the way an adult can isn't there yet. This stuff will cause bad dreams and anxiousness.

Your DH is an idiot and shitty to you both. His want to speak his mind, no matter what, does not top the needs of your emotionally immature child who is trying to grow and develop in a world where these horrid things exist without coming out the other end traumatised.

Your DH is a dick.

I agree.

Is your husband the sort of person who thinks that his right to ‘free speech’ trumps everything and everyone else?

Seems to me that whether or not it’s okay for your 13 year old to ask / know about the details of the Bulger case is a bit of a red herring. Morbid curiosity is natural, unfortunately.

The issue to my mind is that your husband, being fully possessed of all the horrific details, wanted to relate these graphic details as a point of conversation.

Agree it’s inappropriate to talk about it with a child, but to be honest I’d be almost equally as shocked if he was speaking to his mates down the pub.

Does your husband lack empathy? Or does he get some sort of gratification from sadistic violence and suffering?

I was a teenager when that case happened and remember seeing it on TV and reading it in the newspapers. Should my parents have hidden the newspaper, switched off the TV and radio for weeks on end? No. We sat round the TV or dinner table and talked about it. The TV news and papers aren't censored and anyone can buy them. You need to have conversations with your child not shut them down. Maybe your husband isn't handling that part well but it's better than pretending it didn't happen.

He needs to be showing empathy when talking about violent acts - your son is at a crucial age when he needs good role models

YANBU. I think you need to have a serious talk with your husband and also look carefully at what your son is accessing online. He's old enough to be curious about things and obviously can't be protected from everything, but there are age appropriate ways of accessing information and I can't think of any reason why a thirteen year old would need to know graphic details about such a horrific crime.

Don't shut him down if he wants to talk about something because it might be important to hear. I would suggest you might want to seek further advice because your husband is being very inappropriate and it sounds like this started a long time ago, and your son might need to speak to a counsellor about some of what he's been exposed to to help him make sense of it.

Very concerning behaviour on your husband's part. You need to take action here to protect your child.

Sure being over protective is bad too. It’s our job as parents to prepare our kids to be safe and thrive in the world we live in, not a fantasy.

But most parents see that eg. there’s quite some space between allowing children unrestricted access to view violence or porn or whatever or discussing the goriest details of child abuse or violence and the alternative of taking action to block the age inappropriate and introduce topics in a responsible way.

You started the conversation by what you were watching, your son then joined in and your husband added some additional information. That tends to be how discussions work.

was your husband gleeful when he added the information or was it just said in a factual way? How it was said could make a huge difference.

OP if he has unrestricted internet access and a father who is into gore and violence he could be doing god know what and watching some awful stuff.

you need to have a look. And probably have more open conversations with him as pretending these things don’t exist isn’t working and his interest is piqued