Archers addicts 3!

OMG I wrote my post before tonight's episode

Wake up! Pat and Tony if you don't want to lose Henry to a couple of monsters.

I can't imagine the police or H's barrister, or children's services would have supported a visit to Rob in hospital. Indirect contact in the form of cards, letters or drawings would reassure Henry that daddy is ok and recovering. He isn't allowed to see mummy and any contact between Henry and Rob ought to be very carefully arranged and monitored - assuming its thought to be in Henry's best interests which I'm not convinced it is at this moment.

Surely even if the professionals aren't getting involved, Pat n Tony ought to realise they shouldn't let Ursula take H on future visits.

How could Pat just stand there and take all that viciousness from Ursula?

If Pat believes Kirsty then she knows that Helen has been abused by Rob and was trying to leave him.

If she couldn't see the link between Rob, Ursula and Helen's predicament then she's more daft than I thought.

Tony is beyond pathetic

Hands up everybody shouting at their radio tonight!!!

I can understand why Par takes the attack from Ursula at the moment. They are very confused and out their depth and don't know what to believe. It is always hard to believe someone would behave in a way we wouldn't. I can also understand why they took Henry to see "Daddy" but I thought the children's services would have had a say in the visit. Perhaps Tony and Pat didn't consult. Let's hope they mention it to Ms Tregorran and she gets something sorted out.

I can't imagine that either the police team or children's services would have encouraged a visit to daddy in hospital at this point. However, there is no statutory involvement and currently Pat n Tony are caring for Henry with the consent of his mother. What happens when Rob asks for Henry to return to live with him, in anticipation of the baby joining them at Blossom Hill Cottage. Parental Responsibility is with Helen and Rob. If Pat n Tony are to oppose Rob's request to care for Henry they'll need some legal order I think.

Pat n Tony would benefit from talking to a family lawyer because I suspect its going to get very nasty indeed. Poor Henry. Interesting that he's been happier at school than he was when living with his loving daddy…..

If Helen gets wind of the fact that Henry has visited or that he and Ursula might want to have Henry there, then hopefully this will loosen her tongue and she will say what has been going on (e.g. throwing away rabbit etc.) and that her actions on the fateful night were in defence of Henry who was under threat.

Helen seems very traumatised (not surprisingly) but it sounded as if protecting the children seemed to clarify her thinking a little so you may be right Luckygirl

Where does Rob stand as far as Bridge Farm is concerned. He has already shoved Helen aside so he probably regards himself as Tom's partner?

Where's his money going to come from if he doesn't sweet talk Peggy into signing another cheque?

Will the Bridge Farm idiots please close ranks??

They will merlotgran they just don't know what we know. I don't think Rob will be after the farm, etc., at the moment - thankfully, although I suppose he could suggest he needs something to live on The Bridge Farm Archers will not believe Rob can behave so badly. As I said we find it hard to believe someone would behave in a way that would be impossible for us to behave. It's why we can be so shocked by some people in our own lives. Once they have broken that barrier they will accept more.

I was also thinking the same as Iam64 about contact. That Henry should not have been allowed to go anywhere near Rob either, because Henry is a witness and Rob could "coach" him.

There seems to have been a bit of a cockup about this with the professionals and the police.

It is so complex though Nelliemoser. Henry is a witness to Helen stabbing Rob but no one is aware yet that they may be saying that Rob threatened Henry. Even so I wonder about the visit.

Does anyone remember what the date was when Helen is back in court? Won't she have to offer a plea then?

Pat and Tony seem to be in a daze. Very odd they didn't ask the solicitor or police about taking Henry to see poor daddy.
I was horrified that Rob might be out so soon, don't think the colostomy bag will stop him wreaking havoc.

Helen's court date is 5 May I think and yes, she'll have to plea. Anna has her work cut out doesn't she.
Gracesgran (such a voice of calm reason here) is right to point out that the Bridge Farm lot know very little about what's been going on with Helen. Pat n Tony have always loved and supported Helen but she hasn't been the 'easiest' of daughters in that she has at times reacted, rather than responded in a reflective way to their attempts to help her. Pat no doubt feels Helen was avoiding her, rather than suspecting that Rob was isolating Helen. Most people are pleasantly unaware of the way that superficially charming, agreeable people like Rob function. They learn a lot, the hard way, when one of these manipulators or gas lighters lands in their midst.

I think Pat is a very odd grandmother. Where is her protective instinct where Henry is concerned? She believes Rob to be an abuser yet she was only too happy to trot along to the hospital with Henry in tow without playing for time or contacting Ana to see if it was the right thing to do.

Ursula was vile but that didn't stop Pat from agreeing to allow her direct access to Helen's son. Ursula has no rights to Henry at all.

I would have marched out of the ward declaring that all future contact with Henry would have to be agreed with the solicitor.

And I suspect the majority of grans on here would do exactly the same.

The scriptwriters certainly know how to wind us up.

You're completely right there, merlotgran. I was gobsmacked that Pat didn't show more spunk and awareness of her right to tell Ursula that her attitude and demands weren't acceptable or appropriate. Surely when Anna gets to hear of it, she'll strongly advise against further contact with Rob? It's breathtaking.

Back to not listening and just catching up on the thread, It must be Rob;s voice that does it. I still cannot believe that Pat and Tony would take him to see the man that their daughter and Kirstie have said was abusing her. Did Tom know what they were going to do?
The SW need to get some professional input here I am sure it would not have been allowed. Is it what is known as artistic licence??

Thank you for the kind words Iam and the date. I wondered because that will mean the story has to move forward over the next two weeks and hopefully have the family asking lots of questions and looking back and remembering.

Merlotgran I haven't heard anything that tells me Helen believes Rob to be an abuser. She is certainly beginning to question what has been going on but we have had two years to understand what this sort what this sort of abuse does to people and she has had a couple of weeks.

Ursula was indeed awful but Pat is still feeling very guilty about Helen stabbing Rob. Helen did stab Rob - the family know that is a fact and they are good people who do not usually expect to get involved with such things so they are doing their best to come to terms with that and they feel awful (with undercurrents of questioning why) for Rob. Rob appears in so many ways to have been a good husband and father. We can imagine that there will be some people who never accept he did anything wrong. Helen's family will be able to understand over time but I do think your expectations of someone in Helen and Tony's position behaving as if they have all the knowledge we have are a bit harsh.

too many "what this sort" - sorry.

A village is made up of many different personalities, gracesgran. There are 'voices of reason' and people who would happily send the likes of Ursula off with a flea in her ear!

It takes all sorts.

I'm sure Kirsty told Pat that Rob had hit Helen.

That would be enough knowledge for me.

You are right merlotgran. Kirsty did indeed say Helen had told her Rob had hit her and I seem to remember Tom said he had seen a bruise but Helen had an explanation for it. As I keep saying "good" people find it very hard to accept that people behave so very badly. That is why con-men (or women) do so well. Very well educated and aware people who are normally people savvy people believe in really awful cons and Rob has conned a lot of people.

Having said that I may not have behaved as Pat did - no one else might have behaved in exactly the same way but I am happy that Helen, as her character has been drawn in this long running drama, might well have done. I am not saying you would not have behaved as you describe but, just like characters in a book, we are watching how other people behave. I will be interested in how the all the characters unravel and adjust to the whole story as they learn about it and how they feel as themselves as they do.

I feel I need to keep saying this, as nobody else seems to agree!
I'm sure Rob will take the line " She's not well, it was a dreadful accident/ hormones/ misunderstanding", and refuse to testify.
He then earns gratitude from everyone, and further deference from Helen, thereby allowing the control to continue.

I think you could be right about Rob's take on it, Daddima but isn't the genie out of the bottle as far as Helen is concerned?

From the conversation with her barrister, when she kept repeating that she was a bad mother, it seems as though Helen still believes the lies!

They do say women go back - is it something like ten times before they actually leave Daddima so you could be right but I think that maybe the stabbing may make a difference. Rob knows now that Helen is alerted to what is happening though and may not think it worth the effort. It will be interesting to see where they take it.