Discuss The Archers  permalink

Some reality at last.

This discussion has been closed.

Messages: 51 - 100 of 243
  • Message 51

    , in reply to message 50.

    Posted by carrick-bend (U2288869) on Thursday, 4th October 2012

    There is perhaps a parallel with Helen (although I fully recognise that in most aspects their situations are very different).

    When either of them talk about the inevitable challenges of raising either a child with Downs syndrome as an older mother with a still older father, or of raising a child as a single parent (I am not for a second suggesting that it is wrong or foolish to have a child in either situation), there will be inevitable (albeit suppressed) thoughts of "It was your choice" within their listeners.

    It'll be interesting if the SWs ever make the characters anything other than strikingly happy, positive and full of energy, even for a short space of time, for this reason.

    Report message1

  • Message 52

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Mieteka (U14938651) on Thursday, 4th October 2012

    Me too, Rural.
    I thought it was so moving - brilliantly acted and written.
    Poor VIcki - she has been trying to be so positive and I thought it was so realistic that it is something quite unnconnected that brought home the realit she has been trying to suppress. To me, Vicki has known only too well the negative side of the life that her baby might face, but has been trying to concentrate on the positive. But we heard that she does know and understand.

    I was so pleased that it was Lynda who was there. I don't think there is anyone else in Ambridge who could sympathise with her in the same way, except perhaps Christine.

    Anyway, it was said upthread that the SWs having been doing a 'slow burn' with this storyline - and I think it is working really well. It is entirely in character with Vicki taht she would put the most positive interpretation on things (and I think understandable too - what mother does not wish the best possible outcome for her child?) but now we know she is not deluded about what might be the reality of the situation, which she's been trying to push to the back of her mind until seeing those photos created a lightning flash moment when she could see the future her daughter was NOT going to have. I found it genuinely moving.

    Well done to all involved.

    Report message2

  • Message 53

    , in reply to message 32.

    Posted by Lakey_Hill (U14391672) on Thursday, 4th October 2012

    Sid was the age that Mike is now when he dropped dead of a heart attack.

    Report message3

  • Message 54

    , in reply to message 53.

    Posted by splitnotes (U2320878) on Thursday, 4th October 2012

    And John was alot younger when the grim reaper came for him.

    Report message4

  • Message 55

    , in reply to message 54.

    Posted by splitnotes (U2320878) on Thursday, 4th October 2012

    Don't know why I wrote that- perhaps emphasising that there's no predicting things and you have to do the best you can.
    I thought this scene was great and very realistic. Vickki has so far been obliged to protect her child's very continuance of existence and therefore felt obliged to be up beat all the time. Now she is grieving for the future that won't be before coming to terms with the one that will be.
    Rather as those of us with 'normal' children continue to talk of their potential exam results and futures whilst dealing behind the scenes with a child 'going off the rails' and possibly losing any potential of fulfilling the previous dreams we had for them or they had for themselves.

    Report message5

  • Message 56

    , in reply to message 55.

    Posted by Auntie Molly (U14110968) on Thursday, 4th October 2012

    It occurred to me also that Vicky must have felt a bit out of it with all the mum talk in the office over the years, and thought when she got pregnant that she’d never feel that way again, and be able to join in, but now she’s realising that she still won’t be just like other mothers.

    Report message6

  • Message 57

    , in reply to message 52.

    Posted by rolekins3 (U2294341) on Thursday, 4th October 2012

    I so agree, Mieteka (message 52). I found this episode very moving. I have a little granddaughter with an extremely rare genetic syndrome, which is affecting her speech and general development, and although she is a delightful,happy little girl, adored by the whole family, in darker moments her mother and I fear for her future as an adult. Yet her life has enriched all our lives and has helped her siblings to be more caring people, who would to anything to care for and protect their little sister.

    Report message7

  • Message 58

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by BlackSheepBoy (U11150138) on Thursday, 4th October 2012

    Yes I sympathised with her.

    She is now accepting that there are going to be sad things to encounter. It will not be possible just to ignore them, and simply accentuate the positives all the time.

    But I did not hear her say that she now thinks she made the wrong choice. It was regret for the prospects of her child, but not regret for her position, or for taking an ill-informed or unwise step.

    Surely for any parent of a Downs child, who is content and fulfilled in being so, there still must be days like that. It must occur to you that by comparison with other children, your childs life has less scope.

    I thought Vicky's position yesterday was altogether believable.

    Report message8

  • Message 59

    , in reply to message 51.

    Posted by Lady Trudie Tilney Glorfindel Maldini (U2222312) on Thursday, 4th October 2012

    When either of them talk about the inevitable challenges of raising either a child with Downs syndrome as an older mother with a still older father, or of raising a child as a single parent (I am not for a second suggesting that it is wrong or foolish to have a child in either situation), there will be inevitable (albeit suppressed) thoughts of "It was your choice" within their listeners. 


    I don't think they'll be in the least bit suppressd in ML, c-b!


    So do we only feel sympathy for things that happen to people randomly, that they've had no part in?

    Report message9

  • Message 60

    , in reply to message 56.

    Posted by Mieteka (U14938651) on Thursday, 4th October 2012

    I so agree and I can totally empathise there - I've been in that situation many, many times. And while you rejoice for your friends, you also grieve for the fact that you do not have a baby. I can totally get where Vicki is coming from and my heart went out to her.

    Report message10

  • Message 61

    , in reply to message 57.

    Posted by anna kist (U2314477) on Thursday, 4th October 2012

    I have a grand daughter with disabilities too. She isn't a ray of sunshine she is difficult and can be violent although she is now learning to struggle against the latter. We love her as we love all our grandchildren not more nor less and her parents love her as well as their other daughter but she hasn't as yet brought a lot of joy into our lives although we do rejoice when she manages to achieve something. But we do worry about what will happen to her as an adult. Having a disabled child in the family brings more worry than joy I fear.

    Good Luck Vicky and Mike. I don't envy you at your ages.

    Report message11

  • Message 62

    , in reply to message 61.

    Posted by Bette (U2222559) on Thursday, 4th October 2012

    Well said, Anna. I know many families who have severely disabled children. I also have a relative who will always need to be in sheltered housing. All these children (and adults) are loved, and are cared for as much as is possible. There is /huge/ worry though (esp for those at higher end of disability) for the provision when they are adults, and the parents will be that much older.

    Report message12

  • Message 63

    , in reply to message 59.

    Posted by carrick-bend (U2288869) on Thursday, 4th October 2012

    So do we only feel sympathy for things that happen to people randomly, that they've had no part in? 
    Well, Erms, the literal meaning, and basic definition, of "sympathy" is "sharing the feelings of another", so I would think, personally, that if a persons situation was in some or all part, caused by their own choice, the amount of sympathy we might feel might be in some part tempered by to what extent we sympathised with the choices they had made, which brought them to that situation.

    Report message13

  • Message 64

    , in reply to message 61.

    Posted by JustJanie - Fairweather Strider (U10822512) on Thursday, 4th October 2012

    It's odd, because these are both fictional people, but I find myself hoping for the best for Vicky and longing for Helen to start having a really tough time with Henry and get little sympathy from her parents.

    Generally speaking, I don't hold with an 'I told you so' and 'you knew what you were getting into' attitude but I know I'd make an exception for Helen. I suppose it's because Helen claimed to know EXACTLY what she was getting into, said she had 'thought it through' and 'done the research' whereas Vicky has been landed with this and finding out so late never really felt she had a choice.

    Report message14

  • Message 65

    , in reply to message 64.

    Posted by Bette (U2222559) on Thursday, 4th October 2012

    I have little sympathy with either Helen or Vicki. Both of them are ploughing on with 'my baby because /I/ want it and I don't care about anyone else' attitude.

    Report message15

  • Message 66

    , in reply to message 65.

    Posted by JustJanie - Fairweather Strider (U10822512) on Thursday, 4th October 2012

    Fair enough, Bette. I admit Vicky is the ploughing ahead kind, but I don't see her as being as awful as Helen. And she's human enough to have some doubts whereas Helen just went on in her glassy-eyed, mad way.

    (OMG, nearly added a paragraph to this post about the webcam cats (thread in The Bull) - something about her biting her own tail!)

    Report message16

  • Message 67

    , in reply to message 66.

    Posted by Bette (U2222559) on Thursday, 4th October 2012

    On the scale of things, I agree that Helen has the edge on Vicki when it comes down to self-interest.

    Report message17

  • Message 68

    , in reply to message 67.

    Posted by Lady Trudie Tilney Glorfindel Maldini (U2222312) on Thursday, 4th October 2012

    There's a huge difference between them, isn't there? Helen decided she wanted a baby and went out of her way to get one, as it were. Vicky is having one accidentally and just decided not to kill it - I'm not sure there's a comparable level of self-interest there.

    Report message18

  • Message 69

    , in reply to message 68.

    Posted by Bette (U2222559) on Thursday, 4th October 2012

    The comparison between the two stems from the apparent great wish to have a baby, which overrides other considerations, IMO.

    Report message19

  • Message 70

    , in reply to message 69.

    Posted by MsMumbo-Jumbo (U3613133) on Thursday, 4th October 2012

    And not just have a baby but have a baby that will Need them and Love them.
    Creepy.
    MJ

    Report message20

  • Message 71

    , in reply to message 69.

    Posted by Lady Trudie Tilney Glorfindel Maldini (U2222312) on Thursday, 4th October 2012

    I dunno, Bette - I don't interpret Vicky's reasons like that. She hasn't gone on and on about wanting a baby, although she's expressed regret she never had one - and if she was that desperate I think she'd have found a way to do it before now (& not Helen's method, either). But she's been 'presented' with one and found that she was unable to contemplate getting rid of it - which is completely understandable and not the same as 'I want it so I'm having it'. (to me at least!)

    Report message21

  • Message 72

    , in reply to message 71.

    Posted by Bette (U2222559) on Thursday, 4th October 2012

    Yes, I agree that Helen specifically 'engineered' a baby, and Vicki was 'landed' with the pregnancy - but their single-minded determination after that is rather similar. I still think that the Downs SL - which is good - would have been better if it had been with a younger couple, and unexpected. My problem with this (Vicki and Mike) is that so many emotions and issues are being mixed up. Still, it is done and we have to go along with it as best we can.

    Report message22

  • Message 73

    , in reply to message 72.

    Posted by Lakey_Hill (U14391672) on Thursday, 4th October 2012

    Vicky said something about her baby needing and wanting her forever, which made me think immediately about Helen, and what she said about her reasons for wanting a child. Helen, I suppose, is at least young enough to have a fair chance of looking after the child into adulthood in reasonable health. Poor old Mike isn't, and Vicky may not either. Yes, Helen made a deliberate choice, and Vicky doesn't seem to have, but they have both been utterly selfish in going down the path from then on. Vicky doesn't care one jot about what Mike wants or can cope with, and the baby is still relatively easy to take care of at the moment.

    Report message23

  • Message 74

    , in reply to message 73.

    Posted by Bette (U2222559) on Thursday, 4th October 2012

    The thing is - most parents /want/ and hope and expect their children to grow up and become independent. This 'having a baby that will need and love one forever' does come across as not quite a healthy attitude.

    Report message24

  • Message 75

    , in reply to message 74.

    Posted by JustJanie - Fairweather Strider (U10822512) on Thursday, 4th October 2012

    << This 'having a baby that will need and love one forever' does come across as not quite a healthy attitude. >>

    I can't remember Vicky's exact words but I don't think she meant it in the same way Helen did. Helen's baby was supposed make up for a series of failed relationships. Vicky was crying yesterday because her daughter may NOT be able to fly the nest and be totally independent.

    Report message25

  • Message 76

    , in reply to message 73.

    Posted by Lady Trudie Tilney Glorfindel Maldini (U2222312) on Thursday, 4th October 2012

    the baby is still relatively easy to take care of at the moment. 

    Indeed!


    I know it's a bit of a radical view, but I honestly think it isn't just selfish to *not* end the life of a being that actually exists.


    Report message26

  • Message 77

    , in reply to message 75.

    Posted by Bette (U2222559) on Thursday, 4th October 2012

    The way Vicki has been depicted up until now, she has been fluffy and not-economically-level-headed, and highly emotional and impetuous - oh, and stubborn, and likes to have her own way.

    I liked the episode last night, and I thought it added some depth to this SL. However, if Vicki had done any research on DS, she would know that the child /will/ have problems. Presumably this has only just dawned upon her. I wondered, actually, if she was crying for the child, or for herself.

    Report message27

  • Message 78

    , in reply to message 75.

    Posted by Lakey_Hill (U14391672) on Thursday, 4th October 2012

    I think that the words that I was referring to were before the tears yesterday, but I'm not 100% sure.

    Report message28

  • Message 79

    , in reply to message 77.

    Posted by JoinedPeetsBoard_Smeesues_too (U14519481) on Thursday, 4th October 2012

    She *DID* realise the child would have problems - but those photos brought it all home to her
    JPBS

    Report message29

  • Message 80

    , in reply to message 9.

    Posted by Rhedeg (U9299887) on Thursday, 4th October 2012

    She is weeping for her child's sake .. I don't see any "I told you so's" are relevant ..
    JPBS 


    Well observed,.. Anyone close to a child with a profound disability understands the process of grief that you go through, for the person they may have become, but that has been denied them.

    It does not mean that the child is diminished in anyway, just that once the reality if the situation hits you, you have to let go of those hopes and dreams that the family of a fully disabled child might expect. Once that process is over, you embrace that child for who they are and damned well get on for doing the best for them, and love every miniute that they grace you with their presence.

    Chops 
    Good post.

    A bereavement model is helpful in this context, moving between acceptance, denial, anger etc is part of the long process of having a disabled child, I have worked with many Vickys and they do oscillate between hope and depression and project these feelings on to everybody. Linda did well to listen.

    Report message30

  • Message 81

    , in reply to message 73.

    Posted by pollyanna (U7304225) on Thursday, 4th October 2012

    [Vicky said something about her baby needing and wanting her forever, ]

    Yes she has said this Lakey, a week or so back. She implied that her unborn child having DS was in some way a bonus because the very fact of her having that condition would tie her to Vicky for ever, she would always be dependent on Vicky, always need her.

    Now however Vicky is apparently beginning to understand that this is not all about her, there is another human being involved here, and she was, presumably, weeping for what life might hold, or not hold, in store for that human being, her unborn child. Which if the case is some move towards facing reality, even if it took gap year photos to do it, rather than walking up Borchester high street after work and seeing the gaggles of pupils from Borchester Green having a laugh with their mates, talking on their mobiles, arranging to meet later.

    I'd have thought what she would want more than anything for her child would be a life like that, a life most ordinary, and how she has got to this stage without relating that sort of life of a teenager with what might be the expectation for her child, but was so brought down by a photo of random girl on a gap year, is what had me not believing in last night's epi.

    I don't believe in moments of epiphany, not really. The truth about things generally creeps up on us. But Vicky has gone from barmy happy to depths of depression because of moment of clarity brought on by one photo. Either they are telling us she has never really been as positive as she has been making out, or this is just a very clumsy dramatic device. If its the former, I hope that gets explored now, but I doubt it will.

    Report message31

  • Message 82

    , in reply to message 30.

    Posted by billytrout24 (U2448301) on Thursday, 4th October 2012

    You know what? I'm now bored with this storyline and I think I'm coming over all non-PC about it. Too much misery. Too much sobbing - and - please bear in mind that these are fictional characters - I think the script writers have dealt with the Downs issue, and I think the MB has dealt with this issue - and now, to be honest, I'd quite like her to have a quick miscarriage so we can get on with some less depressing storylines.

    There we are. My two-penn'orth for what it's worth.

    Report message32

  • Message 83

    , in reply to message 78.

    Posted by JustJanie - Fairweather Strider (U10822512) on Thursday, 4th October 2012

    << I think that the words that I was referring to were before the tears yesterday, but I'm not 100% sure. >>

    Yes, indeed. Like you I was referring to something Vicky said a while back about the child always needing her. It's just that though the words were similar to Helen's I didn't see it in the same way for reasons explained above.

    Report message33

  • Message 84

    , in reply to message 80.

    Posted by Lady Trudie Tilney Glorfindel Maldini (U2222312) on Thursday, 4th October 2012

    I have worked with many Vickys and they do oscillate between hope and depression and project these feelings on to everybody.  


    Agreed - I'm always baffled by the way a few lines of speech are deemed to determine a character's whole personality and state of mind. People do say (and mean) different things from one week to the next, varying with mood or circumstance or, as you describe, the 'process' of coming to terms with something like this. Vicky was always a 'labile' character - I remember when she first appeared I couldn't quite make her out, as she veered from obnoxious to sensitive and back again. I've always thought she is more complex than the cartoon baddie she's often portrayed as in ML.

    Agree about Lynda. too.

    Report message34

  • Message 85

    , in reply to message 72.

    Posted by Mieteka (U14938651) on Thursday, 4th October 2012

    I think you'e hit the nailon the head as far as I am concerned, Bette.
    Vicki and Mike were facing enough challenges being older parents faced with an unplanned pregnancy. And it just seems a little bit unfair that Vicki, who has probably cherished hopes of having a baby for years finally gets her wish, only to find out her baby has DS, whereas Helen decides to have a baby to make up for the fact she can't keep a relationship going and not only jumps to the front of the queue but then gets pregnant at the first attempt.

    now, wouldn't it have been interesting if it had been Helen who had been carrying a baby with DS. How would she have reacted? But of course everything turned out for the best , in the best of all possible worlds. And so far Henry has been a model baby, which makes many of us suspect he is not real. But I'm forgetting about Helen's 'dogged independence'. Snork. Anyone more needy and less independent it would be hard to find.

    Report message35

  • Message 86

    , in reply to message 54.

    Posted by Auntie Molly (U14110968) on Friday, 5th October 2012

    John died in an accident. Whereas as you get older you're more likely to die of an illness. Although this being Ambridge Mike is much more likely to be killed in a tree felling accident than of old age in his bed after having suffered an increasingly poor quality of life.

    Report message36

  • Message 87

    , in reply to message 82.

    Posted by Earldunda (U14196337) on Friday, 5th October 2012

    You know what? I'm now bored with this storyline and I think I'm coming over all non-PC about it. Too much misery. Too much sobbing - and - please bear in mind that these are fictional characters - I think the script writers have dealt with the Downs issue, and I think the MB has dealt with this issue - and now, to be honest, I'd quite like her to have a quick miscarriage so we can get on with some less depressing storylines.

    There we are. My two-penn'orth for what it's worth. 
    Agreed, and perhaps she could die too- I've had enough of her!

    Report message37

  • Message 88

    , in reply to message 87.

    Posted by Rose Sal Volatile Parade (U4705648) on Friday, 5th October 2012

    What do you mean, non-PC? Makes no sense. There's no PC aspect to a woman having a late baby and insisting on keeping it even though it has Down's Sydrome.

    Report message38

  • Message 89

    , in reply to message 82.

    Posted by carrick-bend (U2288869) on Friday, 5th October 2012

    I think the script writers have dealt with the Downs issue... 
    I hope that they don't share your opnion - having a baby/child/adult with Downs Syndrome isn't a short, dramatic interlude with no consequences that can't be got over within a few months.
    It's a subject that deserves proper treatment, I think, not a little bit of feel-good, social issues R us window dressing.

    If it isn't going to be dealt with properly, over a realistic time-scale, it shouldn't have been introduced to TA, I think.

    Report message39

  • Message 90

    , in reply to message 89.

    Posted by Mysterious (U14144861) on Saturday, 6th October 2012

    I wonder if Vicki might have some kind of Bi-polar condition that has been lying dormant for a while. She does seem to be very erratic on occasions. Still don't like her though and I am normally a sympathetic and understanding sort of person but she has tried my patience beyond endurance.

    Report message40

  • Message 91

    , in reply to message 90.

    Posted by anna kist (U2314477) on Saturday, 6th October 2012

    No she is just horrible. Some people just are.

    Report message41

  • Message 92

    , in reply to message 91.

    Posted by MsMumbo-Jumbo (U3613133) on Saturday, 6th October 2012

    I'll second that, Anna.
    And so many of them are congregated in a small area of Boresetshire.
    MJ

    Report message42

  • Message 93

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Chris Ghoti (U10794176) on Saturday, 6th October 2012

    I have been trying it over in my mind to try to work out whether I feel sympathy for Vicky, and realised over the past three days that I don't. I feel pity for her, which is a somewhat different emotion.

    I am sorry for anyone who, having tried to pretend that somethng was not important and was going to make little or no difference. comes up hard against a reality which shows that it is important and will make a difference.

    That sort of lesson must be terrible to learn in your mid-forties instead of in your mid-teens.

    Report message43

  • Message 94

    , in reply to message 93.

    Posted by JoinedPeetsBoard_Smeesues_too (U14519481) on Saturday, 6th October 2012

    But what she's learned - or rather realised because she knew it already - does not affect anything at all ..

    Do you think that realising this a few weeks ago would have made her have an abortion? I certainly do not think so ..

    So what she has learned is something she could not do anything about - at any time
    JPBS

    Report message44

  • Message 95

    , in reply to message 94.

    Posted by Chris Ghoti (U10794176) on Saturday, 6th October 2012

    You have missed the point so thoroughly that I am aghast.

    Vicky has learned (or is learning) the hard way that she can't have what she wants and that sometimes you can want things to be some way or other until you are blue in the face, it ain't gonna happen that way.

    Poor woman. She ought to have had to learn this before she was seventeen, when she was younger and more resiliant and had more options open to her, not just before she is forty-seven.

    I pity her.

    I am not suggesting that she ought to do this or that or have done the other, I am simply saying,. poor silly woman. I pity her a great deal. Whatever comes now will not be ideal for her. Her child has Down's. She has just realised that this is not ideal.

    Report message45

  • Message 96

    , in reply to message 95.

    Posted by pollyanna (U7304225) on Saturday, 6th October 2012

    Chris I understood what you meant in your original post and agreed with your thoughtful insight.. I meant to post then to say so, and am doing so now.

    Report message46

  • Message 97

    , in reply to message 95.

    Posted by Lady Trudie Tilney Glorfindel Maldini (U2222312) on Saturday, 6th October 2012

    I think you're a bit harsh on her - she hasn't had what she wanted (a child of her own) for 46 years and seems to have borne that ongoing disappointment perfectly well.

    She then, unexpectedly, found that it was to be after all - only not the perfect happy-ever-after scenario she'd dreamed of. Is she really to be blamed for a bit of denial, at first, before the reality hit home? And as said upthread, she will probably still swing from positive to negative thoughts, throughout the pregnancy and beyond.

    Report message47

  • Message 98

    , in reply to message 95.

    Posted by JoinedPeetsBoard_Smeesues_too (U14519481) on Saturday, 6th October 2012

    So I don't see YOUR point.

    She "got what she wanted" when she unexpectedly became pregnant if you care to look at it that way - which I don't.

    The child was a surprise - a lovely gift as she saw it ..

    So the lovely gift was not as she hoped ... but she realised all that when she cried at the result of the test .. this is one aspect of that ..
    JPBS

    Report message48

  • Message 99

    , in reply to message 98.

    Posted by Chris Ghoti (U10794176) on Saturday, 6th October 2012

    I had already gathered that you don't get my point, JPBS; that is because the point is that I pity the woman. Just that, none of the complication anyone wants to add.

    I am not advocating any action by anybody, in the past or in the present, nor am I deploring any action by anybody past or present; I am saying that her position is pitiable.

    Report message49

  • Message 100

    , in reply to message 93.

    Posted by carrick-bend (U2288869) on Saturday, 6th October 2012

    I agree, CF.

    Report message50

Back to top

About this Board

Welcome to the Archers Messageboard.

or register to take part in a discussion.


The message board is currently closed for posting.

This messageboard is now closed.

This messageboard is reactively moderated.

Find out more about this board's House Rules

Search this Board

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.