So what did the Adolescence psychologist’s report state?

[sideeyes]

I have been thinking about this for a few days. What do you think?

I loved it but my disappointment with it is that the final episode entirely abandoned what appeared to me at least as the core purpose of delving deep into the process of how he became someone who stabbed a girl to death - exploring masculinities, influencers, family that sort of thing. Instead the last episode became about Stephen Graham’s impact statement in a way and a chance for him to (over)act.

i would love to know what the report said !

I thought episodes 2 and 4 were a lot weaker but 1 and 3 were brilliant. Just really want to read that bloody report!

'Do not release.'

I really enjoyed it until the last episode. I wish they’d either dropped all the “got to sort the van” stuff and finished off the prosecution of Jamie, or made it a 6 part series if they wanted to cover the family stuff.

i also want to know what the report said, and the background to Jamie/the rest of youth’s brainwashing, and how the court might have dealt with Jamie. There was plenty of potential material there for a 6 part series.

More I think about it the more I agree that the final episode was just absolutely pointless and was nothing more than a platform to showcase Stephen Graham‘s acting skills which we all might agree are great. I don’t understand why that one episode could not have been used for other purposes, for example the trial and sentencing, or a further respiration of how the influence of the Manosphere worked in practice, or a conversation between the parents and A therapist or something to do with the report or just about anything that offered an insight into what went on. Instead we got a disappointing final episode that pretty much was about the fact that Stephen Graham can act.

I also really wanted to know! And did I miss it, but what did she see when she went to look at the security camera? I’d have loved them to delve more into the boy’s psyche. Last episode felt very weak. I know everyone raves about SG but I feel like I’ve seen him playing similar roles so I wasn’t particularly interested in his black pudding or his van.

Honestly, I was bored stiff throughout all of the episodes.

I felt it ended prematurely. I also wanted to know about the report and the trial. I also wanted to know about what happened to his friend. I think it was good to see the family impact. 6 episodes would have been better.

Agree, the last episode was a let down tbh. We didn’t need 15 mins of them chatting in the van about when they met, such a waste of screen time. I also would’ve liked to have seen the trial/sentencing.

Thought the last episode pretty much showed that parents ignored his internet use, hadnt really engaged with him for some time and finally accepted that they could have done more, but the call from him then demonstrated that there was still no real communication between son and parents, other maybe than over the picture he drew. . It was sad though, only way parents seemed to communicate with him was by buying him stuff, and then ignoring what he was doing with it. All very shallow.

Jamie is an articulate 13 year old boy who lives with his mother, father and older sister. Much of his early identity formation is based on his experience of "the family". Jamie's family is one of traditional gender roles and generational respect. His picture of the family is what many would refer to as "traditional". Jamie's sense of himself is compromised by the juxtaposition of his talents and interests, with these traditional family values and a desire to be "masculine". He believes that parental love/interest is dependent upon fulfilling his role as 'son' within the boundaries of this masculine identy. It is unfortunate therefore that Jamie's talents and interests are not in sports and masculine creative pursuits (eg woodwork) but instead in more traditionaly feminine creative pursuits such as art. Jamie believes his parents and in particular his father are therefore assamed of him, and he has attempted to address this by immersing himself in hyper-masculine spaces online.

Jamie has few friends and projects this internal vulnerablity outwards often provoking cruelty from his peers, confirming to him his low self worth. When the cruelty of his peers comes from other boys, Jamie is able to dismiss it as banter. However, when this cruelty is experienced from girls, especially girls whom Jamie finds attractive, this is experienced as a further assault on his identity and masculinity. Jamie's manages this by engaging in projective identification, where the cruel internal narrative, usually inwardly focused (you are scared/weak/pathetic/ugly) is attributed to those girls who he feels are attacking him. In these moments this internal narrative becomes an external narrative leveled against them (they are scared/weak/pathetic/ugly). However because of his compromised sense of masculinity, Jamie can engage in sadistic attacks against the other, in order to further distance himself from the feeling that these attributes belong to himself. This is backed up by "pathological splitting" in which, for any exchange or interaction, one party is all-good and the other party is all-bad. Jamie's age and the recent end of adrenarche will increase the likelihood of this taking a sexual direction.

Were you interested in the family dynamic? You should have been … it was very telling.

I thought I was the only one

What was your thoughts there @Sarastake?

That she's easily disturbed. All that panic and deep breathing because a kid ranted a bit.

I have no idea why he stabbed her. Blah blah incel blah emojis blah flat chested blah blah didn't like him...so he viciously stabbed her? Doesn't make sense.

I would have liked to have seen the sentencing (there wouldn’t have been a trial as he changed his plea), but actually I think it’s quite clever that it ended where it did. The gut reaction was to think ‘what was the point of that?’ And then you realise the point was the impact that the son’s crimes had on the family, who were complete innocents, and how their lives were ruined forever. And to paint a picture of them just being a normal family who have done their best, and ended up with one (female) child who had turned out lovely, which highlights that they were not the cause of the boy’s behaviour.

normal family who have done their best, and ended up with one (female) child who had turned out lovely, which highlights that they were not the cause of the boy’s behaviour.

I think this is the most important bit of it all. They are a normal family, obviously not to blame... And yet...

Dad is the decision maker, the head of the house.
Dad was physically abused by his dad
Dad's temper is barely held in check
Mum and daughter manage dad's emotions, help him to regulate
Dad is ashamed of son not being masculine
Dad can't find a way to connect with son so allows him to spend hours alone
Son allowed to wander streets at 13 until around 10pm

Mum seems entirely absent in parenting son. She's home in the evening, but imposed no reasonable curfew or encouraged him to get out of his room. She allowed dad to take son to football and boxing when those activities wouldn't suit him. Son's opinion of mum is that she makes a good roast dinner.

Very traditional gender roles in the family. Subtle "harmless" misogyny eg dad calling mum and daughter "girls". Mum asking daughter "is your boyfriend looking after you?"

Jamie doesn't fit this family's image of a son. Jamie is small, slight, weak in appearance. His interests are typically "feminine". He feels inadequate. By his family's expectations of gender roles, he is inadequate. At the same time he's given the implicit message from the family that men should be pandered to, listened to, appeased. Then he's allowed free rein on the internet. He is the perfect target to be radicalised by incel narratives. Entitled, inadequately 'masculine' , not meeting his own expectations and very vulnerable.

And then he meets a girl who doesn't treat him like his mum and his sister treat his dad.

I think the last episode was a warning that it could happen in even a happy "normal" family.

I also agree they should have done more about the actual psychology - the anger he clearly held and his barely concealed disdain for authority. I also thought more should have been made of his mate who actually gave him the knife, as he wasn't as "bright" as the main character which was possibly why he was ignored as this was more about shocking us into understanding that no man is exempt.

She said she was there to check his understanding, so I expect she will confirm he was intelligent and had good understanding into what he was doing and that it was wrong. albeit that it was not going to be of the same level of maturity as an adult. I think that kind of interview/report for a parole board before release may also be interesting.

why was she crying at the end? Fear, sadness?

I thought it was because she could see he did still care deeply, but allowed his anger to take over because he was shoving down his emotions. The realisation that boys are being told anger and rage is better than feeling human and growing healthy coping mechanisms.

It felt like he was similar to many teenagers these days, left to spend hours and hours on their devices with no supervision of what they are accessing.

Teens watch a wide range of disturbing material, violence, porn, misogyny, abuse, influencers, bullying, are exposed to a range of extremes and no wonder mental health issues and general anxiety has increased massively. Most of this is unsupervised.

I’d also like to know what the psychologist saw on the security camera.

Well if he is pleading guilty there won't be a trial.

He would be sentenced to be detained at 'his majesty's pleasure'.

I thought that scene was there to demonstrate the misogyny that exists everywhere in the world. That it wasn't exclusive to Jamie and his immediate family/friends/internet history.

To me it was all about the male guard feeling entitled to be in the phycologist's personal space, and offering his layman opinion of body language to an actual expert. This in the context of the previous male psychologist being more efficient (didn't need 5 sessions to do his assessment) and asking 'better' questions of Jamie

If the phycologist we saw in episode 3 was a man, would you expect the security camera scene to have played out the way it did?

I don't think what she saw on the CCTV matters at all. It wasn't the point of the scene

That was my interpretation too @SleepingCatBlanket

The security guard made me feel really uncomfortable and it annoyed me when he started offering his opinion!