I agree with the article, and the comments, as far as the effect of the utter hopelessness in these books can have on kids. I think this is a legitimate concern, and people who think that the free speech argument is a sufficient rebuttal of this are deluding themselves. Free speech doesn't imply a lack of concern for the effects of what is said.

But I also think banning or restricting these books is a bad move. Not because it violates free speech but because it doesn't really solve the problem. The depiction of issues like drug abuse, self-injury, rape, etc. is common in books, movies, music and the internet, and I don't think there's any fool proof way to completely restrict access to such media.

Which leaves parents and teachers with two options. They can go for half-measures that will just drive such media underground. The result will be the same. Kids will come across these things, and many a times will be ill equipped to tackle these issues, drawing entirely the wrong conclusions.

Or, instead of insisting that children shouldn't have to learn about such things, society can wake up and realize that the era of a sheltered adolescence in gone, and come up with strategies to deal with it. I think the healthiest approach would be to encourage open discussion of such issues in schools, which lets children know that not only are such issues around in the world, but that they are not things to be suppressed. In the right setting, I think teenagers can get the right message from these books, even if they are completely depressing and hopeless.

I know this is asking for an ideal solution, but if we don't aim for something like this, and continue to try and impose an obsolete worldview on a modern society, we'll only have ourselves, and not these books, to blame for the negative consequences we can all too easily imagine.