So what did the Adolescence psychologist’s report state?

[sideeyes]

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

Tbh although it was really well acted by the woman, I'm not sure her script bore much resemblance to an actual interaction between a psychologist and an incarcerated child. The constant needling and pushing, despite his clear discomfort and rising anger presenting a danger to her, as well as to him, just wouldn't happen. I was similarly perplexed and frustrated by her line of questioning when addressing a child well under the age of 18. Even if he is accused of murder.

The psychologist did not respect professional boundaries in any shape or form.

I agree. You keep wanting to hang his actions onto something, to explain them... But like real life it's complicated.

I agree. You keep wanting to hang his actions onto something, to explain them... But like real life it's complicated.

I thought the first episode was really good. Then it got steadily more tedious. The episode with the psychologist was just weird. I didn't understand it at all.

I hadn't even considered the relevance of the security guard and had mentally written him off as a bit part, but you're all absolutely right! Amongst such a sparse cast, no character is incidental.

It’s a made up story, enhanced for dramatic effect, 🤷‍♀️

I think the other point it raised, is that even when parents think they know the internet and social media, they are always a step behind. This was demonstrated by the detective's son decoding the emojis on their Instagram account.

Am I the only one who didn’t find any of it at all believable? I’m a mum of 2 boys. Been through the teen years too in a rough school.

It touched on lots of real genuine issues. Incels, bullying, social media, behaviour in schools. The dad was clearly a bit old school and lots of hints to sexism/bad temper. But he was also at the end of his tether in episode 4 and he very obviously loved his family. The mum and sister were pandering to him, but that happens in thousands of homes. I don’t agree with it but it doesn’t turn a kid into a killer.

None of it was nearly bad enough to make a murdererer.

the actor who played Jamie was a good looking young lad who would be popular with girls.

How often do boys from reasonably nice homes with two loving, working parents go around stabbing girls over a bit of bullying and because your dad works too hard and yells a bit?

Didn’t find the psychologists questioning believable either. Doubt she’d be so shaken as she was.

“I think the psychologists report would class Jamie as a sociopath, unable to empathise with Katie's situation”

Theres no way a 13 year old would be classed as a sociopath or diagnosed with any personality disorder. Those are strictly 18+ and rightly so. Conduct disorder is the youth version of ASPD.

Completely agree. The way the mother couldn't do anything when dad was losing his rag in the car park was horrifying to me. If my DH was upset like that I'd have been trying to calm him down, pulling him away etc (not that he'd ever lose it like that) . Even the way she insisted he have his favourite black pudding when he was upset by the van being sprayed. It like she had no idea how to react to him; her only response was to accept and placate.

I found it very moving at the end when they finally realised they could have been better parents. But the whole idea of him having forced Jamie to go to football, having been ashamed of him being so useless, and the only other option he could think of to try was boxing - that was so so sad. And realising he'd always been good at art but that had never featured on their radar. I hate the whole idea of people wanting a child to fit their mould, instead of valuing the person they really are - but even on MN, that attitude isn't uncommon.

I don't think we were meant to empathise with them (other than the daughter)
The final episode highlighted how damaging that parenting style is, whilst showing that the parents hadn't actually intended the damage and still lacked the ability to take full accountability even after the outcome of it. It was very detailed and thought out in my opinion, even down to the dad touching on why he's the way he is (the violence in childhood) but showing he still wasn't able to fully see his own harmful behaviour whilst in his mind trying to do better. It was a very clear story of generational damage.

Agreed. One of the few things i felt relieved about after watching it was the realisation that my almost teen son has very different role modelling at home. DH and I pretty much split domestics 50/50 and are both more or less equal earners and family decisions are joint. Far from perfect, but my son at least has healthier role modelling at home.

However I thought it was clever not to explain how Jamie got immersed online and what exactly he was viewing, who he was talking to online etc. (even though i wanted to see this!). The whole point is we dont know, and we need to know. I was left feeling sick that i am completely uninformed about this side of the internet, out of touch with what that generation is exposed to and as a result it will shape how i supervise my DS’s screen use going forward.

I don't agree. Jamie would have felt fundamental rejection from the fact he wasn't the type of boy his father wanted him to be. His insistence on having his dad in the police interview was telling - not passive mum, but aggressive dad. I think he thought his father could somehow make it all right, because he was a dominant force in his life.

Of course many boys suffer similar and don't go on to kill, but his misery was exacerbated by lack of real interest in him from his whole family - his parents were letting him as a mere 13 year old do whatever he wanted in his bedroom and wander the steets at night. Plus he was being shunned by the cool boys as well as the girls at school, along with the picking up pernicious misogynistic messages online. Adding the rejection he had from the victim having finally plucked up the courage to ask her out, he could plausibly have lost it. I think it's believable as a possibility.

It didn't really finish......I've a feeling there's going to be another series.

My son hung himself at 14. I have tried to talk to family, friends, our counsellor etc. about how we as a family were ultimately to blame.

Our family dynamic was just like Jamie’s family. The only difference is my son was sporty and ‘typically’ masculine, however he was devastated when his girlfriend dumped him. I’ve always blamed myself for modelling such weak behaviour and still putting up with his dad. I taught him that ‘good’ women (we were very close and he loved and respected me so much) should put up with difficult men. He was upset with how his dad treated me but thought he was destined to turn out the same way.

I would so love his dad to watch Adolescence but the sad fact is that he wouldn’t even see the parallels. Literally the scene with the mum and dad on the bed in Ep4 we could have had word for word, except for the bit about him not being good at football or boxing.

I can’t say any of this in real life as everyone is too polite and doesn’t want to upset me so dismisses what I can see.

I absolutely agree with all of this, but it's clear that a lot of people across the various threads disagree. I wonder how much of it is some people seeing the behaviours as damaging because they experience(d) it and recognise the impact it had on them, vs others thinking it's normal and not damaging because they experience(d) it and presumably consider themselves to be unaffected by it (whether or not they were affected in practice).

@goldringfinger that must be so painful

I'm so sorry goldringfinger. I can't even begin to imagine how you feel, especially if you haven't had the space or support to process and talk about your feelings about it in the way you feel you've needed. I hope you're able to find some peace

There are a lot of people on this thread blaming the parents. Yes, they weren't perfect, yes they could have done things differently, maybe that would have made a difference and maybe it wouldn't. (Of course, it's fiction, so who knows?) But we all have our faults as parents, probably many of us have things we wish we could go back and change. People are imperfect, and that's life.

As for the father's anger, yes he had a temper. If someone had vandalised my van, I'd merely be infuriated. But if someone had vandalised my van at a point when my life had fallen apart, I don't know what I'd do.

Oh, and for all those commenting on a boy roaming the streets at 9.30 aged 13... I was at a friend's house a few years ago, when our children were at the top end of primary. She mentioned that her son was out and she didn't know where - aged maybe 11, at about 9 on a friday night! Another time two children from my daughter's class called round to see if she'd go out with them - again, she was about 11, it was maybe 8pm on a Friday. Where on earth were they going to go?!!

I'm so sorry for your loss. The pain must be unspeakable. Any mistakes that were made in your family, there but for the grace of God go any of us. We do the best we can, and so many other things contribute to the outcomes for our children I don't think as parents we can ever really accept all the praise, or shoulder all the blame. Wishing you peace.

Yes I found it a bit odd that she spent ages staring intently at him behind the 2 way mirror but we did't get to see how he was behaving and no real reference was made to it. Bit strange.

not entirely sure what you mean by "casting horror show" but although he certainly wasn't ugly, I think it could be very likely that he wasn't successful with girls at that age.

Firstly, 13/14 girls are usually more mature, both emotionally and physically, than boys (which is why they often date older boys). Even amongst 13/14 year olds boys there's a huge difference depending on when puberty hits - others in his class would be 6 foot tall and shaving already whereas Jamie is very small and slight and facially young looking. It's believable that a girl his age would look at him as a little boy (both physically and emotionally) rather than as a viable romantic partner.

Furthermore, from my experience of school, looks weren't actually the most important thing at all in whether someone was 'fanciable' - it was a mix of personality (so both boys and girls who had mixed friendship groups were far more likely to then develop romantic relationships simply because they understood how to interact with the opposite sex) and also popularity generally - looking back a lot of the unpopular children were probably more objectively good looking than the popular ones (and even if they weren't at 13/14 developed into such as adults), but it would be social suicide to date someone below you on the popularity scale.

He literally touches on this when he refers to Katie as being 'weak' after humiliated - it's like the school social caste system is basically a replica of the food chain - and then her response was in the same vein - she didn't reject him because she didn't like him or because he was ugly but specifically because, even after her popularity had been negatively affected by the photos she still considered herself to be several rungs on the 'ladder' above him.

As an older teen/adult it's very likely Jamie might have been successful with girls but I think it's very plausible that as an unpopular 13 year old he wasn't, and not having the words or experience to fully vocalise the complexities of a school hierarchy just simplified it as 'ugly.'

If it coming from mum feels like a barrier, you need to find a man to talk to your son urgently. If he thinks the murder was Katie's fault, the Andrew Tate phase hasn't passed, he just isn't saying it out loud in front of you.

If it coming from mum feels like a barrier, you need to find a man to talk to your son urgently. If he thinks the murder was Katie's fault, the Andrew Tate phase hasn't passed, he just isn't saying it out loud in front of you.