The journal/review begins with outlining the horrific circumstances that Walls was put through. How her "familial drawbacks" could have led to having an unbalanced view that would not have depicted the vast, upsetting setbacks that being born into a broken family has had on her. Instead it says how the story "manages to ring true" even though circumstances could have led to a completely different account. It also outlines the confusion that the child would have felt, which makes the honesty and the balance of the book even more remarkable.
It too discusses that the horrific burns that young girl suffered came out of hunger, desperation and lack of attention from her parents. We also feel a greater level of empathy due to the girls innocence being discussed, which was said about in the article. The article is keen to argue that it's almost symbolic for how important parents must there to protect or else.
The article also says how the author does fully immerse herself with the feelings of pain both physically and mentally of living in poverty. Perhaps because of this the article is, to a degree, reserved in proclaiming this book to be an interesting, worthwhile read into the depiction of poverty, as we not given the full account of the pain and suffering that Walls went through.