What should happen now - Eastenders baby swap story

[PotPourri]

MNHQ have done us proud and taken a stand on our behalf. So what do we want Justine to tell the producer should happen now?

My own view: The only way I would accept is to reverse: make it a dream. It could be a from the point where Ronnie finds her dead baby. Maybe a sleeping sedated Ronnie is trying desperately to 'fix' the situation in her dream, but realising that there is no way to fix it. Then it could flash back to what really happened - the sensitively handled real life traumatic event - an unearthly roar, dialling 999, collapsing with grief, being sedated (hence the crazy dream)

And a public apology from the bbc to viewers and licence payers. And an apology to FSID for abuse of their name.

Reversing and admitting they messed up big style is the only outcome that will show integrity

I do think Jessie Wallace has acted well... but it won't last.

Because somewhere along the line, someone will come along and say those words that i've been longing to hear for over six years..

'I'm sorry, theres been a mistake, your son isn't really dead'

Fair enough Eviltwins. I happen to disagree that knowing the facts of the story from reliable secondary sources mean's I'm not entitled to comment, but you're entitled to your opinion .

deemented - this is one of those times I wish this wasnt the internet and I could give you a big hug.

I haven't watched much EE recently, because of this storyline, which I found revolting - but I wondered whether anybody could answer how Kat, Alfie and Jack didn't realise the babies had switched.

Surely the babies looked different? It's taking the "all babies look like Winston Churchill" to the extreme, isn't it?

I dont watch EE - i dont watch any soaps in fact.

However i am shocked and appalled by this storyline as i havent been able to escape the reporting of it.

All i will say is that the whole idea of the babyswap and another mother grieving over her child who is not in fact dead sickens me to the core. I dont care if it isnt real - it actually panics me to think of the sheer horror of it all.

And i dont even watch it. My heart goes out to all of you on this thread and MN who have suffered the loss of a child.

More rumours about Samantha Womack's views. And the News of the World's musings on how to end it quickly .

Spoilers originally said they were going to have Ronnie diagnosed with, or at least thought to have, PND, on the basis of the difficulties her relatives perceive she has bonding with "her" baby. Obviously the viewer would know the difficulties would be due to grief and the fact the baby is a neighbours baby - this sounds outlandish even when Im typing it.

Thats presumably why there was a helpline number given for people struggling with PND at the end of one of the episodes.

Again, BBC missed an opportunity to do good here. They could have had one set of parents dealing with losing her baby through cotdeath, and had a genuine protrayal of bereavement. They could have the other new mother dealing with PND.

Instead they messed up hugely, purely for ratings sake, and added to the old bad stereotypes that still exist in some peoples mind about bereaved parents and
now possibly about PND too - because if they give Ronnie PND in these circumstances they will make a mockery of that too.

Even if people think the BBC have no responsiblity to help overturn outdated and hurtful stereotypes, they should at least think about the basic idea of "first do no harm"

If the BBC didnt feel they had any responsibility to tackle these issues sensitively and accurately, they should never have gone near them in the first place.

I have to say, i'm a little concerned about the 'Warm and Tender' conclusion apparently going to be brought to this storyline.

What scares me most is that they would have to do an exhumation of baby James to prove identity, wouldn't they? I suppose they could do a paternity test on Kat and Baby Tommy, but that would only prove that Kat's his mother - it wouldn't prove that James had died, iyswim? I really hope EE wouldn't be as insensitive as to show something as harrowing as that.

But then, after it all comes out, and Ronnie is imprisoned/sectioned/kills herself, what about Jack, would he want his baby buried in someone elses grave, or would it just be as simplistic as changing the name on the headstone?

I honestly can't see how this could possibly have a warm and tender outcome.

Just wondering whether anyone might be interested in this

I just thought it would be good to see something positive and constructive come out of all this!

I would doubt that they even think as realistically as that dee - theres been no evidence of it so far!

They might go for a DNA test as drama as they have a few times in the past.

I would bet they will hedge over the details - if they are trying to do damage limitation at this stage, any realistic details like those you're thinking of would probably not be shown.

They presumably mean the baby is returned, Kat and Alfie are delighted, and are grateful to have the baby back and somehow theres no prosecution, or Kat gets Ronnie off- that would be an EE idea of a happy ending.

Well, quite. It would also be v out of character for Kat to forgive and forget quietly rather that "ripping er flaming ed off" or something .

Is the meeting on Wed? If it is that's interesting timing given that the funeral episode is on Tues. I'm putting my money on that being one of the most horrid yet simply because of the swap. One mother stands by as her dead baby is buried by another family at a funeral she can't even attend. What a betrayal of her child. Another couple bury a dead baby that isn't theirs in a tiny white coffin with all the pain and grief that would entail, whilst one person could (but doesn't) end their anguish. It's not entertainment, it's vile. The person that thought this up and then actually took it as far as filming and screening is one sick puppy.

nappyaddict wrote "beachholiday So with a baby snatching storyline you think they should pick somebody without mental health issues but not be in keeping with a realistic scenario. It's not a stereotype that baby snatchers are usually mentally ill - it's reality."

You are missing the point - I responded to your previous suggestion that "If they are going to do a story on baby snatching then I think they should pick a character who has mental health issues because it would be even more unlikely for a NT person to do it"...by pointing out that that would stigmatise people with mental health difficulties further.

(NT people do obviously experience with mental health issues, Im not sure what distinction you were making there).

They should not have anyone kidnapping a child as far as Im concerned, but if they do want to do such a storyline, they should be very careful not to link it directly to grief or bereavement or a specific mental health issue.

There are people who still believe stereotypes and if they see someone who has been diagnosed with a specific mental health issue then go on to kidnap a child, they associate that kind of behaviour with the mental health issue.

There are unfortunately people who still do not want to think these things enough - due to fear or reluctance to change their old mindset or some other reason- and are more comfortable with stereotypes. That has been shown on these threads when some people have actually argued that its realistic to show a bereaved mother immediately kidnap a child. The BBC are reinforcing those stereotypes. Shame on them.

(shame on them because they knew they would and went for ratings anyway btw)

They have filmed scenes of Kat and Alfie with a baby's coffin. They have also fimed scenes of Ronnie visting the greve alone later.

I dont get how they went ahead and did that either - you would think it would hit them somewhere along the way how wrong is was to do this. I suspect it hit the cast more than the producers or the people who wrote it though.

Cot death soap style: why Eastenders has got it wrong.

Like many, I found the cot death episode in Eastenders very difficult to watch. The death of day old baby James - his body cold and still throughout each scene - was harrowing and drawn out enough. As the episode drew to a close and his mother held him tight, pacing the freezing night in her grief, the plaintive cries of baby Tommy through an open window formed a poignant end point to this injustice. However, the story suddenly shifted to one of abduction, and the episode ended as baby Tommy?s ?death? was discovered instead. With my mind in a quagmire of emotion I craved some kind of resolution and I remarked to my partner that the scene unfolding was unbearable. His reply - ?it?s only a story? just wasn?t cutting it, and I didn?t know why until my feelings evolved into anger. With my three month old son sleeping peacefully, and mysteriously, as I write this, here are five reasons why I feel Eastenders has got it totally wrong:

1 We have barely adjusted to a scene of intense grief when the narrative shifts entirely and rapidly to a criminal act of child swapping. The protagonist admittedly has mental health issues but colliding two plots gratuitously loses both.

2 Although holding our attention, the drama thus fails to focus on, and educate about cot death. References to cigarette smoke and second hand mattresses were useful but marginalised in this circus of sensationalism.

3 The emotional impact of the episode ? which is a responsibility to handle - is unnecessarily complicated through the mothers bearing hidden grief and misplaced grief.

4 Despite such a heart-searing storyline, viewers and victims alike remain robbed of the experiences of empathy and closure over the cot death.

5 Neither mother comes off well. Ronnie compounds her loss through the worst act imaginable. Kat is too grief stricken to be taken seriously when she does not recognise Ronnie?s dead baby. Against this backdrop, the refrain ?all new mothers are nutters?, by several characters helps oil the wheels of this runaway plot.

Ultimately this television series has ridden roughshod over feelings and facts. The quiet fear of cot death is a reality for all parents and a tragedy that is yet to be understood. Despite our apparently child centric society, this popular television series needs to wake up ? not least for the sake of the babies who don?t.

Just heard that Enders baby plot is to last 'till Spring!
Don't think I can take Kats grief however well acted by Jessie Wallace, for that long.
Have decided to boycott the show altogether until this plot has been resolved.
Maybe if viewing figures drop the BBC will get the right message. That this is a step too far

IMO it was always going to last til Spring anyway - i don't think it's been cut short at all, given that Samantha Womack was leaving in the spring when her contract ran out...

Excellent post ,Fragilerock....who are you?...

I don't buy the "samantha womack is so stressed/on verge of breakdown/wants to walk out" stories in the press. I think she is just doing it for damage limitation ie she's leaving the soap and has to forge herself a new career from there - and wants to be seen as a credible actress with perhaps some morals, rather than as someone who was clearly quite happy to be a part of a storyline where a woman abandons her own dead baby and abducts someone else's to fill his place. The reality is that soap actors are often type-cast and so find it very difficult to move on after they leave their soap role. They rarely go on to serious long-term acting roles, we tend to see them in bit parts in other shows/adverts/documentaries etc but rarely in serious long-term programmes.

Clearly the media are trying to make the gullable viewers think that Sam Womack is distressed about the storyline currently being played out, almost as if she is currently acting out this role and is stressed about it every day. But these episodes were filmed in early November. If she was that stressed about the role, why wasn't she that stressed then?

comment from Charlie Brooker:

if broadcasting the storyline was fairly crazy, complaining to Ofcom about the lack of realism in EastEnders doesn't seem much saner ? almost on a par with threatening to sue the manufacturers of Monster Munch because their crisps don't taste of monsters.

www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jan/10/charlie-brooker-eastenders-row

Distressed cast film baby's funeral .

Yeah, cos it's just a laugh a minute, a babys funeral

Yeah .

Guess they understood it's not real. That, and obviously Samantha Womack took all the emotion home, so was OK on set?

Sorr, just realised the ironic tone may not have come across . I'm agreeing with you Dee .