Keir Starmer has welcomed Netflix’s decision to make Adolescence available to screen for free in secondary schools. The Prime Minister, who watched the show with his teenage children, said he found it ‘harrowing’ and ‘really hard to watch’. I wonder how his kids found the experience because watching upsetting television during formative years can have a lasting effect, as many of us can testify. Is screening Adolescence in schools really a good idea?
If the PM found the series ‘harrowing’, why is he so blasé about showing it to others?
Life is rough, so perhaps gritty fiction like Adolescence is a good way of preparing young people for the horrors of reality. But at what price? The issues raised in Adolescence are important and you could argue that no one needs to learn about them more than secondary schoolchildren. But the decision to show it in schools feels less like a considered plan and more like a knee-jerk reaction to a media bandwagon.

Get Britain's best politics newsletters
Register to get The Spectator's insight and opinion straight to your inbox. You can then read two free articles each week.
Already a subscriber? Log in
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in