Archers addicts 3!

I got a book from a charity shop yesterday and its the first 25 years of the archers written by Phil archer!

I wonder if Helen is aware that Ursula is stayingin BHC?

She's refusing to see Pat and Tony so she won't know that Bruce and Ursula stormed round to Bridge Farm shouting the odds.

If she's worried about Henry being safe she really ought to start co-operating with Anna Tregorran.

Rowantree was worried that Helen might have to give birth in shackles.

The following incident happened only twenty years ago. I remember how horrified I was when it was revealed by the Press that a woman had recently delivered her baby whilst in shackles.
I do hope this barbaric practice has been discontinued.

In 1996, Ann Widdecombe, as prisons minister, defended the Government's policy to shackle pregnant prisoners with handcuffs and chains when in hospital receiving ante-natal care.
Ann Widdecombe told the Commons, " The restrictions were needed to prevent prisoners from escaping. "Some MPs may like to think that a pregnant woman would not or could not escape. Unfortunately this is not true. The fact is that hospitals are not secure places in which to keep prisoners, and since 1990, 20 women have escaped from hospitals". Jack Straw, Labour's Home Affairs spokesman at the time, said it was "degrading and unnecessary" for a woman to be shackled at any stage.[53][54]

"... that we forget TA is a radio soap ..."

I expect we will each get out of it what suits each of us merlotgran and that will differ from person to person.

This is the piece *Lazigirl* mentioned on that was on Radio 4 this morning.

ambridgeobserver.blogspot.co.uk/2016/04/helen-says-nothing-jazzer-says-too-much.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed:+TheAmbridgeObserver+%28The+Ambridge+Observer%29

While not ignoring the serious issues contained in the current DA storyline, I do hope this thread doesn't become so serious that we forget TA is a radio soap and therefore intended to entertain as well as inform.

Gracesgran, thanks for remaining stoical and grounded. You've helped me get my proper Archers / life head back on by summarising the issues, especially around Pat. We listened to the omnibus (on the way back from countryside dog walking) this morning and I found myself letting go of my irritation at Pat and reflecting on the nature of her relationship with Helen. "Strong" women (so called) seem often to have an at times rather difficult relationship with their adult daughters. Helen has certainly given her parents some anxieties over the years and both parents have often wondered if they're responsible for H's emotional difficulties. I don't think they are, for what that's worth.
Men like Rob are ace manipulators and seducers, in the widest sense. Helen isn't the first young woman to be bowled over by a man and thought Pat had her suspicions about him, she was persuaded that Rob was a nurturing caring partner to H, not least because that's what H said.

As for Henry, I'm with posters who ask how anyone can be so negative and critical about a 5 year old (yes yes, I know he's a character, rather than a Real Boy) He's had a dreadful time over recent times. I still wonder how Rob taught him the meaning of 'obedience'. He's been effectively kept away from his mum and subjected to emotional abuse by his father figure. I do understand legally why he's not allowed to see his mummy but that shouldn't stop him being reassured about her well being and the fact she loves him and misses him. He needs a simple, honest, age appropriate explanation - mummy and daddy fell out, daddy was hurt and the police are talking to everybody (including you Henry) to try and work out what happened and help all of us.

Helen as Tess! I did A level as a mature (23 year old) and read the book for the first time. I remember weeping on the number 8 bus into Manchester as the book came to its end. Poor Tess, though my daughter who also did Tess at A level, age 17 was infuriated by Tess, get a grip and grow a pair she said…..

Oooh err. There's a thought Lazigirl That would make Rob Alec d’Urbervilles but I wonder who is Angel? Perhaps it is Ian and he is going to forgive Helen. Actually Ian could do a lot for Helen who probably doesn't understand this much more than we do. At least Helen won't hang!

I think we will learn a lot about how prisons deal with women and how - if it has - society has changed and understands the behaviour of men like Rob. I think we often think we know but unless we have ever had anything to do with the law etc., there is probably a lot to take on board. As you say Lazigirl - will we live to see the end?

Sean OConnor ex Archers editor was on Radio 4 this morning, and said inspiration for Rob/Helen story was partly from Hardy's "Tess" and that the story had years to run before there may be a satisfactory resolution. Oh dear! I may have shuffled off mortal coil by then so perhaps will give up listening now.

I am also gripped by the story Gracegran . The thing is the Archers is different from a one off series as we do all know the characters, and have for so many years.A strange situation. We know what happened but everyone is catching up. Pat has to take Helen's side, as as she is starting to. They must make Henry the priority. It will be hard for him to go back to school as the other children will have heard the story. I assume he won't have counselling yet.

The piece about children was on Friday's woman's hour.

1) They don't shackle prisoners these days
2) Am I not right in thinking if a woman does go into labour in prison, she is moved to a hospital PDQ so that the baby doesn't have e.g. HMP Holloway Prison on its birth certificate.

I'm horrified that Helen can't see Henry; it's not in Henry's best interests. The law is an ass and a cruel one at that.

And Helen will have to give birth in shackles, alone. How horrendous that will be.

Woman's Hour

What is WH LullyDully please?

From my point of view the character's are playing this out in exactly the way they would in my Ambridge and with my knowledge of them but just as we would all see real life people differently we will with these characters too. Our view of others depends as much on who we are as who they are.

The family are extremely confused at the moment as they would be. Pat is getting older and I know how much more dealing with my children's (around the 40 mark) challenges is becoming more difficult than it was when they were younger.

We have already talked about Helen not being easy to know - that does not make her guilty but it does mean Pat and Tony have a lot to sort out. As far as members of the family finding it hard to believe - that is what people like Rob do. Peggy is being kind but she is also fact finding by talking to Ursula - she is not daft by any means.

I think Henry, as a minor character currently but one it will be interesting to watch as the years go by, is being played well. I can imagine him returning to babyish behaviour - in fact I think Pat and Tony have got away quite easily so far. It is common for a child in normal surroundings, between the ages or four to eight, to worry about their parents dying (it goes, but it certainly happens to quite a few) so what is poor Henry going to think with his very young little brain?

We all have our own Ambridge and the characters are seen as differently by us - because of our own view of the world - as real people are. I feel this needs to play itself out slowly and am very happy with what I am hearing. I doesn't stop me liking and disliking the "people" involved in exactly the same way I did before this story line but I am very happy with the story-line.

I do find people very mean about Henry . He is only 5 and has been growing up in a controlling, abusive environment. He has been encouraged to criticise his mother and obey unreasonable demands for a boy his age. (Not to mention losing his bunny and Easter egg.)

Very interesting feature on WH this week. It said how damaged such children can be and how little boy's can be frightened of growing up in case they become like the father/ father figure.

Surely even if he is a witness he should be allowed supervised visits. It just adds to the cruelty.

I know nothing about Parental Responsibility so I googled it.
As well as providing the child with a home etc., etc.,

you are also responsible for:

disciplining the child
choosing and providing for the child’s education
agreeing to the child’s medical treatment
naming the child and agreeing to any change of name
looking after the child’s property

Yikes! Poor Henry. Those boxes will be well and truly ticked.

merlotgran couldn't have put it better myself

Pat is being a lot more blinkered than she should be. And obsessing about getting to see Helen when she' seen so little of her lately. Guilt perhaps? Perhaps after she does get to visit she may start to think straight. I always saw her as an empathic character, so I too would have thought that she would have started to see things from Helen's angle by now.

We shall see :-)

I disagree, gracesgran. I think most mothers, knowing how desperate their daughter's situation is, would start looking at their son-in-law from a different angle just to see if it made any sense. Pat did not set out to raise a Stepford Wife so although she thought Helen was happy with her paragon of a husband she must surely realise that there's no time to lose in finding some support for Helen because as things stand there is nobody in her corner. Even Kirsty will be called to give evidence for the prosecution although that could be interesting.

If Pat is incapable of removing her blinkers then it's up to Tom to talk to Ian and Adam and anyone else he can think of but his support hasn't actually got off to the best of starts.

As far as Peggy is concerned, all I can say is that my 96 yr old mother would have rather perjured herself than carry on a friendship the victim's mother. Peggy has only known Ursula for a short time but despite her faults, Helen is her granddaughter There's more to family support than flashing the cash.

I don't think there is any way she would be seeing these things as we, who know so much from all sides, see them - although it's a great list Merlotgran. I am sure they will piece this together bit by bit and once they do start to see it I imagine it will come together more quickly.

As a mother she was trying to accept that this was what Helen wanted and Rob was really very good at covering his tracks. I think most mums would do that. I am sure most would be saying "all I wanted was for her to be happy" at this point. Of course, if the truth does finally come out, those who are judging Helen (Susan and the press) now will judge others - Rob, Pat, the rest of the family, later. It's the English disease - being judgemental

I also think it's a little harsh not to suppose that those who have no idea of the truth would not be sorry for Ursula too. So sorry HLL and Merlot - I don't agree; I think it has been very well written and we will no doubt have to let it unravel in something like real time - that's what they did with the lead up to the stabbing so no reason they would just unravel it now.

merlot - spot on criticism. Pat was a feminist with a bit of a brain. We know she's had a rough time with the death of her son and the bull/Tony incident BUT come on Pat. I suspect most of us, even feminists like me, mellow with age and experience. That doesn't mean we lose our moral compass and I suspect our Rattometer gets stronger.

it is truly out of character for Pat to be behaving like such a non caring mother and as for Tony and his comments about pregnant women and hormones arrrgh

Oh Merlotgran I agree with everything you've said. I'm also fed up with Peggy and her"dear Ursula" line.

Just soooo frustrating!!

So, Pat....You cannot think of anything that might suggest coercive control??

What about Helen being persuaded she is no longer capable of driving.....by Rob?

Her wages being paid into their joint account.....by Rob?

Her role in the shop being totally taken over.....by Rob?

Poor Helen's hormones again....ad nauseam.....by Rob?

Undermining Helen's business partner who happens to be her brother?

Moving his mother in and virtually placing Helen under house arrest.

Suggesting Henry might be better off at a private school?

Those are the ones that Pat at least knows about and if Helen were my daughter I'd be on a mission to uncover the truth. No stone unturned.

Pat a feminist? Don't make me laugh

I have only just caught up with the dramatic events as have been away and thought your link Gracesgran is interesting. I must admit that the media articles and pictures have spoiled the Archers somewhat for me as I don't like to see what the actors look like, but prefer to keep a picture of them in my imagination. Helen in particular looks nothing like I imagined. The producers have taken advice from agencies involved with domestic abuse I know but was surprised that Helen appeared in handcuffs in magistrates court which seemed unduly harsh and in my experience would not have happened.