Amy gives Matthew a poem for Christmas and he doesn't understand it. To clarify, Amy tells him the poem is symbolic. She says, "I'm poor in many ways, except monetarily."
Really? I feel like (again) this is the author's lack of insight coming through. Not to mention it makes Amy entirely inconsistent: at twelve, she says she's lucky, and at seventeen she insinuates that her CP makes her "poor?" (I also wonder if this new revelation is the result of Matthew pointing out Amy's never had true friends, and her "wake up call" regarding that?)
Matthew doesn't know what Amy's plans are after high school, but he assumes she will be taking correspondence courses online. He has not even thought to ask her, though I feel like he would ask a typical peer, or at least, assume they would go to college, if their parents were as well off as Amy's.
Amy starts developing feelings for Matthew. It's all very unfamiliar to her, which makes sense, given that this might be her first crush. But then she thinks, "kissing was probably too much, of course."
I just can't understand that a book like this would encourage this kind of ableist nonsense. Kissing a boy as a disabled girl, or being kissed by a boy as a disabled girl, is in no way "too much" to ask. And by framing it that way and making Amy the one to think such things, just creates a deeper divide between her and typical peers.
Amy shares that one of her occupational therapists has talked to her about sex and Matthew is terribly uncomfortable. He says for her to stop saying the word "sex" and she apologizes.
On New Year's Eve, Matthew texts Amy that if he was there he would "kiss the back of your hand and thank you for being my friend this year."
My gut says that had Amy been able bodied he wouldn't be texting her about kissing the back of her hand and being "friends."