Fiona is a very level headed Judge. She has a big heart and cared that she made decisions that are well thought through in the eyes of the law, and always have in mind the interest of the children involved in the cases. The case of the Jehovah Witness and the legality of the blood transfusion is the main case that underlies the better part of the story. Other cases described in the books include the Chareidi children and the conjoint twin, Matthew and Mark. These cases are all controversial in nature, deeply rooted in religion and morality. The fact that there could be a legal stand and a very logical one in such cases, is an eye-opener for me. The law is always on the side of the decision that is made for the interest, and especially the health of the children in these case, but the religious backlash could also be tremendous. In the case of the conjoint twin, venomous letters came to refute Fiona's judgement. In the case of Adam Henry, he renounced his faith immediately upon getting well, only to die for his faith at a later stage. Did Fiona regret after making her judgement? To this end, McEwan did a great job portraying the real human being behind a fierce and intelligent judge. It is no longer about right or wrong, it is about the ability to live with the decision and move on.
It is worth noting the brilliant account of Adam Henry's psychological state after he recovery. He renounced his faith after he found out about the hypocrisy of his parents - how they thought they had manipulated the law to their advantage without having to sin against their faith. He seemed to have gotten back to normal life of a teenager, however, his mind was already pinned on Fiona. He expressed his feelings through his letters and poems, and even acted out his fantasy for Fiona through his actions. All alarm bells should have sounded when he tracked Fiona down in the rain. What Fiona chose to do next was not realistic. With all the experience she had with children, being a protector of them through the Children Act, it is not believable that she would be so weak and so emotionally unstable as to kiss a 18 years old boy, especially one that exhibited psychotic symptoms. However, the final poem written by Adam with vivid description of what transpired was truly brilliant. I totally enjoyed the poem, especially the last sentence when the truth was finally revealed. The poem made much sense from the perspective of the boy. The kiss was the kiss of Satan; Fiona knew it was wrong and there are bound to be repercussions. The fact that McEwan chose not to address it could only be accounted by Fiona's character weakness. Finally the boy decided to get back to his faith and refuse a second blood transfusion. The book claimed suicide; I like to think sweet revenge - revenge for the parent who lied on their true intention in the first instance, and revenge on Fiona for the kiss and the first decision that caused him to deviate from his faith. Is it a good ending? Not at all, but it is an unexpected twist in the book and a very daring one.
What I definitely did not enjoy was the relationship between Fiona and Jack. Jack was portrayed as the husband that any woman would loved to have. He asked permission to have an affair! How realistic is that in real life? Surely there are more husbands who ask for forgiveness than for permission? What was truly enduring was the patience he exhibited to Fiona upon his return and how he truly wanted to make the marriage work. On other hand, Fiona was the principled wife that would not even see any virtue of her husband and kept pushing him away. At age sixty, maybe all that Fiona needed was her job. However, the emotional unstable state that she got into after a difficult case seemed to indicate vulnerability, yet not needing the only one that truly cared for her? It is always good that the ending is a happy one. It gives the reader a sense of completeness; and put the good and evil in the book right back to their rightful place.
The title of the book seemed to infer to the work done by the Family Division in using the Act to protect the interest of the children in family disputes. However, I wasn't really sure if the essence of the Act was brought out deeply in the book, or was it the original intention to do so? The children cases mentioned in the book were controversial, but they were hardly deep enough or detailed enough to warrant the book title. If this is a book about Fiona and her husband, it is rather difficult to follow that line of writing sometimes. The case of the conjoint twin was described while Fiona and Jack were having an argument, inserted somewhere in the middle of a conversation. The case was interesting but it was a distraction from the storyline of Fiona and Jack.
Overall, it is an enjoyable read for 2 hours, easy enough. Interesting ideas were built into the book, but nothing truly spectacular to ponder after.
Book Challenge: a book that you can finish in a day; a book on a difficult topic.
