Archers thread #180: Burgeoning backstories! Continuity, what’s that? Discuss The Archers here.

[Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g]

Thank you, @PseudoBadger, for kicking off this long, long series of Archers threads.

All views on The Archers welcome here! New blood welcomed, and of course we are always delighted to welcome back former or occasional listeners/posters. We don't all agree on all points, although we do mostly try to be civil about it. Most of us are posting tongue in cheek a lot of the time, so don't worry about revealing that you think it's a great idea for Helen and the boys to lodge with Tom, Natasha, Seren and Dippity*, or other unusual views.

Spoilers: not on this thread, please! We don't wait for the omnibus to discuss the weeknight episodes, but we do try our best to avoid cross-contamination from www.mumsnet.com/talk/radio_addicts/5244480-the-archers-spoilers-thread-10-cant-wait-for-702pm-join-us-here, where spoilers are positively welcomed!

For newer listeners, lurkers or those who just have no idea what we're talking about, @DadDadDad has created this useful thread: www.mumsnet.com/Talk/radio_addicts/3557323-For-Archers-fans-a-guide-to-acronyms-on-the-long-running-discussion-threads-and-any-other-meta-thread-questions-you-may-have - BOOP point for him! (See thread for explanation.)

*Can't remember who coined this, but it's genius.

I was strongly tempted to use one or both of the posts suggested for the title of this thread on the last thread, but went for something a bit briefer. However, they're brilliant and will kickstart this thread very nicely, so here they are:

@Sidebeforeself: Beavers, bridge, bunny boilers and busybodies - it's all a load of bollocks!

(I couldn't agree more!)

@DeanElderberry: I don't usually speculate much on the appearance of characters, but do wonder what it is about Miranda that is bringing out the chest-thumping silverback in Brian and Justin? One little bridge game and the course of Ambridge rewilding is set. The face that launched a thousand beavers.

Over to you!

Maybe Rochelle distanced herself from her kids because she was scared of repeating her mothers mistakes

Lots of practice!

Thanks for those stories, @stilldumdedumming. It makes sense to me that Neil's birth family may have been waiting for him to make contact. If I understand the laws around adoption properly (not a given, and of course this isn't adoption, but anyway) only the adoptee can start the process of tracing birth family through social services, not the birth parent(s), and that seems to me to be how it should be. (Of course, Ancestry etc have driven a coach and horses through that.)

I'm pretty certain that there's been no DNA sample, just a message left on an unspecified website.

Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g
I'm pretty certain that there's been no DNA sample, just a message left on an unspecified website.

I feel sure you are right. Neil decided to go for it, and so Susan went and asked Adam for the details of the website he used, and then put a message on that website on Friday after work. There was a reply to her message on Sunday, so there simply has not been time for any DNA sampling to have been done.

But Rex lives on a rusting narrowboat and works at a rewilding enterprise that seems dependent on the whims of Justin, with taxi-driving on the side to bring in some actual cash.

Yes fair point but then again, Joy was about to propose to a man who, up until recently, lived in a broken down old van.

I agree about the Rex-Rochelle pairing making absolutely no sense. Probably just a device for Joy to do her thing and cause Rochelle to do a runner. Guess there isn't many single men the right sort of age to choose from. Poor Rex!

Rochelle's life is a disaster area if Rex really is the first man she has fancied for years, as she claimed to Joy. I mean honestly, Rex?

then again, Joy was about to propose to a man who, up until recently, lived in a broken down old van

Very true! 😂

So what sort of message would Susan have posted on the family reunited/genealogy website:
"Did you happen to have a bun in the oven May '57 and leave him on a baker's doorstep?"!

I'm not convinced that a foster parent would even know this sort of detail after a child had been though a series of children's homes. Perhaps the person getting in touch is the foster parent's child admitting that they simply made up the story to make it sound less cruel.

I feel as if we have wandered into the plot of Alice in Wonderland:
“Alice laughed. 'There's no use trying,' she said. 'One can't believe impossible things.'

I daresay you haven't had much practice,' said the Queen. 'When I was your age, I always did it for half-an-hour a day. Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast."

o what sort of message would Susan have posted on the family reunited/genealogy website:
"Have you recently discovered that you had a baby 70 years ago?"

So what sort of message would Susan have posted on the family reunited/genealogy website:

Have you recently become a figment of a scriptwriter's imagination?
Do you find yourself somehow drawn towards pigs?
Are you able to re-invent yourself at the drop of a hat?
Are you available to appear in the life of a farming village for a few weeks until the scriptwriters get bored and move on to another whacky idea?

I believe - although I might be wrong - that if you are a mother who has given her child up for adoption, or a child who has been adopted, you can ask for a message to be put in your adoption papers to say you would like to be contacted by your child/ mother. So if someone obtains their adoption papers with a view to making contact, they will receive this information and, perhaps, a current name and address.

But Neil wasn't adopted so I don't know if this would apply.

I think he could obtain his birth certificate with his original name from social services and this would then give him his mother's name. He could then begin his search for her.

I have Googled and I can't see any websites where you would just post vague details and hope to get a reply.

Of course, there are companies who will search for you for a fee or you can go down the DNA route. But Neil doesn't seem to have done either of these and, in any case, he wouldn't get an answer in two days.

I'm so cross about this ridiculous SL.

According to Neil (at least in the December version of this ridiculous story) he was abandoned by one or more of his parents, found by a baker on his doorstep (not sure whether this was a house/shop/bakery).

It's a bit odd that that a healthy white child wasn't adopted as a toddler/baby, but nothing about this story makes sense.

FoundlingFamilyFinder.com, I assume.

Godesstobe
I think he could obtain his birth certificate with his original name from social services and this would then give him his mother's name.

He was abandoned on a doorstep and nobody knew who his mother was, so his birth certificate cannot give her name.

Of course !!! ( I'll excuse my stupidity by saying I have the mother of all colds and my brain feels like cotton wool.)

Adam wasn’t a foundling so he couldn’t have used that website.
and anyway Neil said a couple of days ago that he was going to try social services, did speaking to Adam make him change his mind?

As an adoptee who has traced birth family, I am pretty offended by this story and esp the latest “Oo we’ve got an answer in two minutes!”.

And why on earth does Neil appear to think his parent(s) very likely to still be alive? Unlikely.

Oh, that's rotten. I hope it bogs off and leaves you in peace within three days. (Sooner than that is alas deeply improbable.)

The only one I’m aware of didn’t end well as one sibling didn’t want any contact with the one looking. Sad story all round really

I'm assuming this sl is going to be positive though

Oh I listened again: they decided social services would take too long and he might not have much time.
Which is logical, but the Neil and the Susan we used to think we knew would both have been aware of needing safeguards for him and for any hitherto desperate young girl who might well not have told subsequent family anything about their first baby. Which is where social services support and anonymity could come in useful….

I was actually pleased to hear pip because at least it wasn’t Joy. Would rather not hear any more about beavers though. Preferred the sibling squabbling about being evolved. Josh clearly going to have his heart broken

At least we had Brian make an appearance. His and Stella’s scenes are better than his and Miranda’s. Glad the am poisoning was raised! Although slightly insensitively perhaps. Pip and Stella don’t talk to each other a if they are in a relationship.

wonder why they picked Southport

so Vince is all about cost cutting but suddenly wants to arrange this trip to the panto. The insurance on coaches can be extortionate. And all to impress Lizzie? Clearly some pathetic SL about the panto

vince never struck me as the cricketing type tbh - I was thinking more rugby. Is this all to move him to the village?

but I’ve had my 2025 quota of pip so don’t need to hear her again thank you!!

Stella is interesting we need more of her.

Oh Jack archer is a fun idea, regrettably last night I was musing on Joe Grundy 😅

Well, I didn't know about Vince's cricket backstory, and neither, it appears, did anyone else.

Are you trolling us!!

Another knot very much NOT wanted in George’s family tree

Doesn't Kirsty come from Southport? Or am I mixing actress and character?