LOL, and I rated it in June last year.
I totally understand what you mean about her writing being at a different level, and not necessarily a good one in this book.
I don't think I could have read Nineteen Minutes earlier this year...it hit too close to home. And it brought back some memories and thoughts that I'd rather not have, but it was a good story.
I could have done without the Patrick/Alex love angle, but I saw it coming. I surmised correctly early on who had written the handwritten intros to the chapters. I guessed a good portion of the ending long before I read it. The fact that much of the book was predictable didn't make it unlikeable, but it didn't set me on the floor like
My Sister's Keeper did. I think that's what your epinion was getting at.
That being said, I felt bad for Peter and his mother. If Peter and Josie had not been separated when they were children, would the story have played out the same way? There are so many factors that built Peter into who he became, so many layers of bullying and abuse inflicted over the years...would having one person for him have made a difference?
In a way, it reminded me of
The Butterfly Effect, which remains one of my favorite movies...go back to a defining moment and change the outcome. What effect does that have on the rest of a person's life?