Precis: The story follows the reaction of a family to finding out their child has been abused.
I found this book quite disturbing, for all the wrong reasons. I mean for reasons probably not intended by the author.
First, the US judicial system and it's disadvantages for children victims of abuse, was detailed. It sounds medieval. Modern technology, used to help these children in Britain is not used at all in America. Children have to give evidence like adults. I found myself repelled by the method in America, and thankful that I am raising my children elsewhere.
Then, the main character, is not at all nice. She is overbearing, rude, short tempered, lacking any patience, lives a double standard (she seems to encourage parents to put their children through the court system by omitting to inform them about the negative effects, when she knows full well she would not put her child through that same system). This unpleasant woman has a fabulous husband who adores her, though he is irritated by her, (which is okay) and a best friend/adorer who thinks she is a goddess, and can do no wrong. Quite simply he is totally unbelievable, and doesn't even seem that necessary to the story.
The main character jumps to conclusions about who has abused her child and kills that person. She does this so fast, that she can have no regard for the sanctity of human life at all, and deserves to be flung into jail for the rest of her life. Her son does not deserve that, but he does not deserve such a minging mother anyway. I do not think the woman is a good mum. She isn't there much, she puts him into school when she supposes he is unwell (without trying to discover if he is or not) after dosing him up. In every description of her spending time with him, she is forcing him to do things that suit her needs, and have nothing to do with his, even when he has been abused, and is traumatised. She has a lot of memories of cute times with him, but they seem unreal. How can this monster of a mother have those recollections? Besides, they are the recollections of a stay at home mum, not a full on working mum.
There was so little evidence that this guy was the one who had hurt her son that the fact that she killed him was truly amazing. If she had but waited, the DNA report would have come back. She didn't, although later in court, the fact that the DNA testing showed a match was held in her favour as proof that she had reasonably thought the abuser was the man she murdered. This woman is changed very little by having committed murder. She can trade witty comments the same, can give a great summing up the same, it made me want the world to be rid of her.
Why kill him in court? She could easily have done it on the night she watched him through his lounge window, why do it in court?
The conclusion, where it is revealed that her husband has murdered the true abuser is simply terrifying. It more or less says, if you live in America, and your child is abused, the only recourse you have to justice that will not harm your child is to kill the abuser. And if you get it wrong, you are not a bad person as you were trying to get it right. You should get away with it.
I dread the future for that boy, living with two murderers (they are a perfect match after all), denied the chance to participate in justice for his abuser. Thank God he is not real.