How do we really know anything about this case? It is heart-wrenching no doubt, and I am sympathetic. But it's a piece of literature (albeit non-fiction), but it's not journalism. Facts are cast in a particular light to make the author's point. Statistics are provided without context; everything is provided without context, except where the author pulls back the curtain and lets us see what he or she wants us to see.

It's an effective piece -- it's able to wring fresh emotion from people who've been hearing similar stories for decades and have become desensitized. But it's not a policy discussion, and it's not even a good starting point for a policy decision.