I'm a psychologist. The problem with Adolescence, as brilliantly acted as people report it is, is that essentially it gives us a blank slate model of violence. This blank slate view of violence pervades the worst pseudo-research in forensic psychology advocacy as well (although there is good research as well in the field). The blank slate assumption is wrong, just factually wrong, and leads to the conclusion that all boys are potentially dangerous, and can be placid one year, and dangerous the next with the wrong influences. In actual fact, there is likely a large genetic component of sociopathy and callousness in violent youth, as well as cultural components, such as fatherlessness, and is not the case that crimes typically happen in the way shown in program. I don't think non-violent boys, with fathers present, are dangerous powder kegs. Boys should be treated with good expectations, great decency and respect. I think about 3% of men and boys are dangerous due to violent callousness, and will have shown prior signs of that since childhood. Nevertheless, the dangers of the internet are real, with warping influences. That is true. Knife crime in the UK does not tend to emerge primarily from stable homes like the one in the show. Evidence from systematic reviews, public health studies, and official statistics shows it is strongly associated with unstable family environments and gang involvement.