'Just stick the video on': Why the government’s plan for Adolescence in schools misses the point

3 April 2025, 10:15 | Updated: 3 April 2025, 10:20

One of the strongest messages in Netflix’s Adolescence is that adults are often unaware or disconnected at some of the most crucial moments in young people’s lives.

The series shows how boys, in particular, are left unsupervised online, consuming radicalising content and forming harmful beliefs with no guidance or challenge.

It also portrays the failure of schools and professionals to offer meaningful intervention, with teachers frequently shown as disinterested, ‘mentally checked-out’, and content to “just stick a video on.”

Of course in real life, this approach is often used out of necessity, due to chronic underfunding, limited resources, and the impossible demands placed on teachers.

But this only strengthens the argument that we should not respond to such serious issues with more of the same.

It is therefore contradictory and frankly ironic, that the UK government now proposes doing exactly that.

The plan to roll Adolescence out across all secondary schools is a blanket approach with no clear structure, no trauma-informed support, and no meaningful educational framework.

Teachers will be expected to do what the series itself critiques: press play, sit back, and hope for the best.

If showing a video on the Industrial Revolution doesn’t lead to deep engagement in a history class, why would Adolescence, with its themes of misogyny, trauma, and murder, be any different?

There is no evidence that distressing content changes behaviour, and plenty of evidence that it can actually cause harm.

The widespread use of traumatic child sexual exploitation (CSE) films in schools during the 2010s was shown to re-traumatise pupils, cause confusion, and produce no measurable improvement in safeguarding outcomes.

These films were eventually withdrawn by leading organisations including the UN, Barnardo’s, and NSPCC.

Repeating this approach is not innovation, it’s a failure to learn from past mistakes.

Most teenagers are socially aware and tech-savvy. They will see through this contradiction quickly.

Some may laugh, disengage, or simply switch off.

Worse still, victims of abuse may feel exposed and alienated, and those at risk of radicalisation may become more curious, not less.

I am not opposed to using media in education.

But if one of the central warnings of Adolescence is that young people are left to process serious content without appropriate support, why would repeating that dynamic in the classroom be a solution?

A drama that critiques disconnection should not be used in a disconnected way.

The government’s urgency to respond to misogyny and online harm is welcome.

However this is a knee-jerk reaction based on fear.

If we want to engage young people meaningfully, we must invest in structured, evidence-based education, not recycle the very failures Adolescence tries to expose.

Jaimi Shrive is a doctoral researcher and Director of VictimFocus.

LBC Opinion provides a platform for diverse opinions on current affairs and matters of public interest.

The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official LBC position.

To contact us email views@lbc.co.uk