I think that one way in which the narratives are constructed to show different points of view is to show that different narratives have different foundations for righteous action. It is difficult to assess which narrative is more compelling. The collision of equally valid narratives helps to bring out the different points of view of characters. For example, the father's commitment to journalistic integrity helps to bring out the point of view in his narrative: “The truth is the truth. How can I write what’s untrue?” This commitment to the truth is matched by the commitment to survive that Sade and Femi show. Their point of view becomes equally compelling because of their struggle to escape and survive.
Such a construction of different points of view resides in the need to bring out the basis of righteousness in each narrative. The ability to make each narrative of a main character ethically and morally compelling helps to establish different points of view constructed in a manner in which the reader is forced to reflection. It is in this reflection where one is able to see different points of view illuminated.