Eastenders Baby Death Storyline

[deemented]

Once again, no one can live happily ever after

Ronnie's baby James, dies and she puts his body in Kat and Alfies son's crib, and steals their baby boy, Tommy.

Why oh why oh why do scriptwriters insist on portraying bereaved parents - mothers especially - as mad and deranged??? Maybe it's because they can't begin to imagine how awful the death of a child is, but really, whilst we are mad with grief, it is our own child that we want back, not someone else's stolen child. When are scriptwriters ever going to understand that?

Still, it'll be a riveting watch, no doubt.

Just registering my support to the cause.
EE has blundered in a hugely irresponsible and offensive way.
The supplying of helpline numbers only reinforces that.

BUT in terms of Ronnie's character she's always been a bit on the 'delicately balanced' side. In fact she's positively unhinged.
This, surely, must go some way to helping audiences understand that her actions are way off the 'normal' scale of behaviour in such tragic circumstances?

I won't be watching.

Is 2000 complaints a large amount? I have nonidea about these things, but it would be good to know if that is a large outrage and therefore can't be ignored.

Apparently 9 million watched on NYE so does 2000 complaints really scratch the surface?

Depends on how many complaints they would generally expect. It might be a huge amount, doesn't necessarily have to be in relation to how many viewers I guess, I don't know

Well the x factor complaints only just reached over the 1000 mark and that got news coverage

"The source is a bit iffy (The Scum) but the BBC have apparently had over 2000 complaints about this storyline."

If that's true BBC policy means they will class that as 20,000 complaints.

I've never seen this "unhinged" side of Ronnie. Sure she stuck pins in condoms but I know a couple where every time he says "Wouldn't it be good to have another one?" they have a "condom accident" (she got sterilised with #5 to stop him doing it) and I'm sure there are plenty of people doing similar things. I know when we first decided to try for a baby I was going to finish my prescription before we did but I became lax with taking it and became pregnant. Other than being quite a hard character, I don't see what else points to her being someone who would swap her dead baby. I think some people just don't understand what that means.

sorry should point out that was the last set of complaints about the x factor, in total over the whole 3 months the x factor got about 6000 complaints and that was from an audience of about 17 million

An EastEnders insider told the newspaper: "Bosses are keen to assure viewers that they're not portraying Ronnie's behaviour as typical of bereaved mothers.

"Regular viewers know she's lost two children before this tragedy with James. She acts in a state of grief and shock."

Found this in a Whats on TV article.

Firstly, I am interested to know in what way have viewers been assured of anything surrounding Ronnie's behaviour?

Secondly, Does the second part of the statement mean 'She has had other tragedy in her life so what do you expect?'

All arguments and justifications are rather wafer thin aren't they?

Morgan Gallagher has tackled the subject, brilliant as ever.

Emjxxx that's double the amount of complaints X Factor got then.

"Bosses are keen to assure viewers that they're not portraying Ronnie's behaviour as typical of bereaved mothers."

Perhaps they need to make an announcement to that effect at the beginning/end of the programme then, just so that viewers are aware that they are realistic events not being portrayed in a realistic way.

Yes exactly and that got news coverage so surely this should as well? Or will it just get swept under the carpet as irrational over emotional mothers who can't tell the difference between RL and fiction as VD tried so hard to do this morning on her radio show!

"Or will it just get swept under the carpet as irrational over emotional mothers who can't tell the difference between RL and fiction"

But it´s not just "emotional mothers" who think it is unrealistic, is it?

No, but that's what they'll pass it off as.

diddl - no, good point, and that's not my opinion by the way its just that's how it was coming across this morning on BBC radio 5 live with Victoria Derbyshire

"Regular viewers know she's lost two children before this tragedy with James. She acts in a state of grief and shock."

Oh, well that's okay then. Silly me.

If that's the case Mr BBC, why on earth is ths not the case each time a parent loses a child?

Utter nonsense!

Not a dig at you Foofy

Morgan Gallagher's column says it superbly

No worries Mouse I know what you mean

It beggars belief thats their justification.

This character has been in Eastenders all of about 3 years and in that time we have made her life as miserable and tragic as any human could have and provided her with an abusive past SO whaddya expect?

I have boycotted the episodes, a decision I made back in November when I heard about the storyline. Curiosity has just got the better of me and I have just watched literally 2 minutes of last night's episode.

I saw Alfie trying to persuade Kat that their beautiful little boy was all on his own in the hospital and needed one last cuddle from his mummy before he 'went' and I saw Ronnie sitting looking guilty whilst her husband and sister talked about how devastated Kat and Alfie must be.

I feel sick. How could anyone justify this plot?

Rockbird - they can't justify it. Not to me. And I'm sure not to many more bereaved parents.

Even reading your post has made me cry again. (Sorry, bit hormental at the moment)

It's just so wrong, it really is.

Sorry, I did wonder about writing it :(

i love eastenders but cant watch atm.

Rockbird - no sorries needed. I'm rubbish at the moment, bloody emotional wreck.

Here