Review: Unethical behaviour...
Rating: 3 out of 5
Date: 05 16, 2013
This is an independent review as a result of a `read for review' request.It is difficult to give this well-written book a 3-star rating (actually 3 1/2 but I'm not allowed the half), but there are very good reasons for doing so. First the positives: The story arc starts at the first page and satisfyingly ends at the last and the subplots are many and complex. The characters are well-drawn. I like the writing so much, I will be looking out for Kate Vane's next book.The defects consist of bad decisions the author made due to lack of research or not getting a qualified therapist to critique the book before publication. Because the defects are serious, I cannot award `Recognition' with a 4 or 5-star review.As a reader, I like Nat and I'm with her through many of the twists and turns of the plot. However, she acts like an amateur therapist throughout and that is unforgiveable. As a double professional (trained police officer then a counsellor), Nat would never have taken a therapeutic role with the family a second time; that was utterly unethical. The backstory tells us how, as a new police officer, she became overly involved with this family to the point of trying to seduce the father - and this is both believable and understandable in a newly qualified person (unethical, yes, but plausible). However, the rules about further engagement where there has been any prior emotional involvement are strict.There are very good reasons why further involvement is unethical - the therapist is liable to make bad decisions that not only could impact on her own professional behaviour but may have devastating effects on the clients/patients. No professional would have involved themselves like Nat did given her background. It shouts either arrogance on the part of Nat (thinking she and only she can help, and that doesn't fit with the way the author has drawn the character) or psychopathy (neither does that). However, if she had NOT been emotionally involved in her cop career, or she had observed rather than been involved in the case earlier, the story would have been more believable (here's where good advice early on would have helped immeasurably) - as I said, bad decisions on the part of the author or lack of enough research or not having a qualified therapist look at an early draft of the story.There are a few other unwise inclusions showing this lack of research, for example having both father and daughter in treatment (maybe the most experienced of us therapists could take that on but not Nat.I do hope this doesn't discourage the author but rather to encourage her to belong to a brutally honest critique group or send out early chapters to well-chosen beta readers for feedback.Like all of us should.