A mothers love vs the justice system (Perfect Match - Jodi Picoult)

Member Name: Secre

Product:	Perfect Match - Jodi Picoult
Date:	19/12/07 (129 review reads)
Rating:

Advantages: A gripping read, Brilliant characters and plot

Disadvantages: None that I saw

I am what is known as a major fan of Jodi Picoult's work...or at least most of it...and this one was no disappointment. Jodi Picoult has a way of writing that makes you feel as if you know all of her characters personally, if you saw them in the street you'd recognise them immediately and this book is no exception. It is touching, heartfelt, deeply sad and yet also very funny on occasions...it is a book that shows the bounds to which a mother will go to protect her child...and how the American Justice system works in ways which maybe many would rather not know about.

Boring Stuff:
Title: Perfect Match
Author: Jodi Picoult
Price: £7.99
Publisher: Hodder Paperback
ISBN: 978-0340897225
Pages: 416

Basic Plot:
Once again Jodi Picoult has picked a controversial issue to write a novel on. On this occasion it's sexual abuse and murder. But that's only the outside of the novel. That's what you see if you are only looking at the barest outlines of the plot. Because this story is far more about a mother who will move mountains for her son and the question: How far should a mother go to protect her child? Beyond the law? And the other main issue is the American Justice system, and how it so often works on the side of the offender rather than the victim...particularly in cases involving child abuse...
Anyhow, Nathaniel Frost - Nina Frost's 5 year old son - suddenly stops talking. As in stops talking point blank. Nothing can convince him to let a word slide through his lips...so Nina - a high flying court attorney - tries to find out what is going on. While in a psychologists room it is noted that Nathaniel is playing with a doll...in a compromising position, that a 5 year old should have no reason to know let alone mimic. It appears sexual abuse is on the cards. While trying to solve the mystery of the abuser by teaching Nathaniel sign language the sign for 'Father' comes up, and Nathaniel repeats it, and repeats it, and repeats it until it is almost certain that he is trying to tell them something. Thinking as any mother would, that the father is to blame Nina takes out an immediate restraining order against Caleb, her husband.
This is the first twist of many in the book, and one the reader cannot quite believe, particularly as it is so early on...and conversations go into whether Nathanielhas ever called his dad 'Father', now if you call your Dad 'Daddy', who else would you call Father? Hint: It involves the Catholic Church. I can't mention much more of the basic plot without unravelling the whole thing as it is all so interlinked. But to add twist after twist Nina murders the accused rapist...but was it the right priest; and this is where the real story starts as such...the questions asked are plentiful: Was Nina right? How far should a mother go to protect her child? Does the leagl system adequately protect a child from harm? How could this be improved? If the legal system cannot protect a child from harm, does the mother then have the right to take the law into her own hands???

When doing my psychology course we went to a conference where a real murderer was speaking to us. He'd been in a similar situation as Nina, he'd split from his wife several years back and she had got custody of the kids but he had found out that her new husband was abusing his 3 children and the mother had watched it. After trying for several years to get custody off his ex-wife he snapped...he bought a gun, went to his ex-wife's house, then shot her, and said if the husband had been there he'd have shot him too. He paid his 20 years in jail, and he said that although he knew they couldn't have put him in for such a short amount of time, that if he'd have been in there for 3 months he'd never have put a foot out of line again, but after 20 years he'd been there, done that and seen the worst possible, if he was at risk of re-offending prison wouldn't stop him. But I think the most sticking line he said was 'If I went back in time, but knowing all that I know now, I'd still do exactly the same. I know it's not what you'd want to here, but I'd do exactly the same'. It does bring some questions up about what is right and wrong, and when you're desperate you'll do things that others will think are evil.

Characters:
Nina Frost: District attorney Frost. Not the most likeable character in the world; but then again, who likes lawyers? However she is faced with a major problem, as an attorney, she knows darn well that the law WILL fail her child. She knows the chances of them getting convicted are low. And she knows that even if they get convicted, they'll be out of prison before the victim is out of therepy...and she wants to protect her son. This leaves the reader with a major question; is Nina right to protect her child even by taking the law into her own hands - or should she have just let the law do the job it supposedly does best.

Caleb Frost: Nina's husband and Nathaniel's father. Other than being the first suspect he actually has very little to do in the book suprisingly...the only interesting bit with him is the love triangle between him, Patrick and Nina...in which he's married to Nina but Patrick has always loved her...a rather nice point in the novel surrounding this:

'And although the guy is something of an albatross, his relationship with Nina has never really bothered Caleb, because when push comes to shove HE was the one sleeping with Nina every night.
But Caleb has not been sleeping with Nina.
He squeezes his eyes shut, as if this might block out the memory of Patrick turning away abruptly when Nina put her arms around Caleb. Tha, in and of itself wasn't disturbing - Caleb could list a hundred times that Nina has smiled at him in the other man's presence that unsettled Patrick in some way...even if Nina never seemed to see. In fact, there had been times Caleb even felt sorry for Patrick, for the blatent jealousy on his face a moment before he masks it.
Today, though, it wasn't envy in Patrick's eyes. It was grief. And that is why Caleb cannot pull away from the incident, cannot stop picking the moment apart like a carrion vulture going for the bone. Envy, after all, comes from wanting something that isn't yours.
But grief comes from losing something you've already had.'

It's an interesting one, and begs the question, do we really know the person that we love at all...

Nathienel Frost: The five year old focus of the story...a boy whose been badly hurt and in typical child fashion thinks he's to blame...on several occasions you see him blaming himself - like when his mother got arrested after being let out on bail because he'd run towards a man she wasn't meant to speak to and she'd gone after him. On each of the occasions when he blames himself he stops speaking - as if to say that it happened because I opened my mouth, and I won't make the same mistake again...a very well written character that shows just how much a 5 year old can hurt...He's very well characterised to give credit where due and some of the comments he makes are very astute...because of his age you hear more about him than from him, but at the end of book sections it's split up by what appears to be his thought processes which is very clever...

Patrick: A police officer who loves Nina more than life itself and would do anything for her 'except lie'. He is one of the few characters in the book that you really feel for the whole way through. He keeps himself near Nina because he cares for her, but cares enough for her that he will let her have Caleb, as that's what makes her happy. He plays a main role in the novel due to his relationship with Nina, and his role as a copper in a court case...which begs another question, as n expert witness, surely he's biased.

Father Szyszynski: The first main suspect for the abuse...can't say much more than that without giving the game away...

There are other characters...but these are the main 5 around whom the novel revolves...

Religion:
The use of a priest for the sexual abuse captures contraversial ideas once again, which is no big suprise considering that most of her books are controversial...the priesthood has been in the news recently over abuse of boys and so the idea was probably got from that...it is however a fairly sympathetic telling of the Catholic faith, making it blatently clear that although there are always a few bad apples in a bunch it's never the whole...the confessional scene when Nina thinks her husband is to blame is very touching with the question being; How can you confess for what he has done? People say that the Catholic faith is about guilt, and in a way I suppose it is - taking responsibility for your actions, admitting you did something wrong and allowing God to forgive you for it. This puts forward an interesting question of - How many times do we blame ourselves for other peoples failings? In this the Catholic faith isn't about laying guilt, but allowing the person to accept that there are things they shouldn't feel guilt for. This confessional does however take a new turning when Father Szyszynski is one of the main suspects...

Forgiveness is also a major issue here...Nina makes a lot of mistakes - well meaning ones, but still mistakes...such as accusing her husband - and although she forgives him...will he forgive her? Does he have a right to be angry? Would you be able to forgive someone who had got a restraining order out on you and refused to let you see your son? Should he forgive her for murder? Even if God can forgive all sins - can the human heart? And should it?

American Justice System:
If there's one thing this book is, it is an excellent critique of the US justice system...one of the first points made is that Nina spends her life prosecuting the sort of crimes that tear families apart, she 'helps clients navigate their way through a nightmare - even though the legal system is not always the faultless compass they want and need it to be.' The justice system is portrayed as trying, but failing, to fully protect the child...
The system works like this: First the child has to go for a competency hearing in which the defense can try to tear the child to shreds to prove that he/she is not competent to stand trial - if they succeed the trial never goes to court and the perp is let free...this alone is stressful to the client...if the competency hearing is passed then the child goes to court where the same thing happens just in front of tons more people and again, the whole thing is set so the prosecution can tear the child to shreads...in basic the case has little chance of getting to court, little chance of getting a conviction and then if it does the perp will be out of jail before the victim is out of therepy...
This is the situation Nina was in...and the question you need to ask is: Was Nina justified in her actions, or was she "simply a reckless woman who thought she knew better than anyone else"? And even if she was justified - Was it moral? And if you do think it was justified should the legal system allow for this, or should the legal system be set aside from such justifications...

Questions
As per usual Jodi Picoult asks and sets up more questions than she actually solves...and perhaps the biggest and most scary is: How far would you go in the same situation? Would you be capable of murder? Do you really know yourself and your friends as well as you think you do? There is also the question of; Do you agree with Nina? What about the end of the book? Is it fair? Or would you have had a different judgement? There are questions set up all the way through, and you have the impression of a mother who would do anything to save her child, do anything, and lose everything if necessary...but even if you can see her side, should the legal system?

Criticism
'With this ripped-from-the-headlines plot, the usually reliable Picoult (Salem Falls, etc.) fails to deliver; major flaws include a cast of one-dimensional characters and an awkward mixture of first and third person that confuses rather than enlightens. In addition, Nina is a truly dislikable heroine (her justifications for the murder are both laughable and frightening), and the meaningless subplots distract from, rather than add to, the main story. '
Library Journal
Personally I don't think this is true...in a sense it is straight out of the head lines, but again it's done in a far more sensitive way than most...the characters to me seemed to be realistic...and I could actually understand Nina's motices - which in the light of this comment seems quite scary...and said sub plots appear to add some light heartedness to what would otherwise be quite a scary story...

One of my friends said it was rather slow and she found the characters could have had mre work done on them...but again I think this is just the way she writes her books...

Recommend
Yes, most definitely - a brilliant read with some rather disturbing issues involved.

On Ciao as Secre

Summary: Disturbing but well worth reading.