More Carters hinted at this week

CharnhamCharnham Posts: 61,312
Forum Member
✭✭
the Dean / Shabnam baby (Roya) would be a Carter, and could show up one day.

Meanwhile more hinted at, Lee asked Stan about his grand father, are they setting up for a new brand of the Carter family tree, Stans cousins, etc We are talking second and third cousins here of course, but this is EE, Billy and Phil are second cousins.

With Stan about to die, we could well see them at his funeral.
«1

Comments

  • FiregazerFiregazer Posts: 5,888
    Forum Member
    What's you've just described my dumpling, is something called REALISM. Just because a family member is mentioned doesn't mean they are instantly going to be on the show in a few weeks.

    I wouldn't classify Roya as a Carter. If she returned, she'd be Roya Masood if anything.

    DTC would be making a huge mistake if he brought in a new set of Carters. It's not like the set we have now are going to be going stale anytime soon.
  • AngelicPrincessAngelicPrincess Posts: 7,434
    Forum Member
    Firegazer wrote: »
    What's you've just described my dumpling, is something called REALISM. Just because a family member is mentioned doesn't mean they are instantly going to be on the show in a few weeks.

    I wouldn't classify Roya as a Carter. If she returned, she'd be Roya Masood if anything.

    DTC would be making a huge mistake if he brought in a new set of Carters. It's not like the set we have now are going to be going stale anytime soon.

    If she returned she would be 18 and have a different first and second name. Realistically Shabs wouldn't get her back all these years later doesn't work that way. So we wont see her for 18 years with a different first and second name.
  • CharnhamCharnham Posts: 61,312
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Firegazer wrote: »
    What's you've just described my dumpling, is something called REALISM. Just because a family member is mentioned doesn't mean they are instantly going to be on the show in a few weeks.
    true its realistic for Stan to have other family, but I would point out that, mentioning some previous unknown family, only for them to show up a couple of months later, is exactly how soaps work.
    Firegazer wrote: »
    DTC would be making a huge mistake if he brought in a new set of Carters. It's not like the set we have now are going to be going stale anytime soon.
    I agree a new set of Carters would be wrong, but not one or two.
  • CharnhamCharnham Posts: 61,312
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    If she returned she would be 18 and have a different first and second name. Realistically Shabs wouldn't get her back all these years later doesn't work that way. So we wont see her for 18 years with a different first and second name.
    name unimportant, the kid is still a Carter, and yes its unrealistic she would get the kid back, but Sonya got Rebecca back.

    Will need to look up how old she would be.
  • dulliredullire Posts: 20,192
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    If she returned she would be 18 and have a different first and second name. Realistically Shabs wouldn't get her back all these years later doesn't work that way. So we wont see her for 18 years with a different first and second name.
    Charnham wrote: »
    name unimportant, the kid is still a Carter, and yes its unrealistic she would get the kid back, but Sonya got Rebecca back.

    Will need to look up how old she would be.

    Dean is a Briggs though. ;-)

    Shirley's grand-kids are expanding at an alarming rate. (Lee, Nancy, Johnny, Roya, Jimmy, Carter foetus)

    Shabnam left in October 2008 so it's likely she gave birth in summer 2009. Roya will be 6 this summer.
  • CharnhamCharnham Posts: 61,312
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    dullagj2 wrote: »
    Dean is a Briggs though. ;-)

    Shabnam left in October 2008 so it's likely she gave birth in summer 2009. Roya will be 6 this summer.
    Dean is as much a Carter as Mick is, they are both the off spring of Shirley and Buster, so if we are going to say Deans off spring are not Carters, then we can also say Mikes off spring are not Carters.
  • dulliredullire Posts: 20,192
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Charnham wrote: »
    Dean is as much a Carter as Mick is, they are both the off spring of Shirley and Buster, so if we are going to say Deans off spring are not Carters, then we can also say Mikes off spring are not Carters.

    Yes but I think people get too tied up about character's surnames on here. This is Dean's first and only child. Carly has one too. I'd rather this than Dean being the father of Linda's baby.

    I think if they were going to bring in another branch of the Carters, it would be Linda's side of the family (Peacocks). A wedding is likely this year and we have already met Elaine. We know her dad is dead but is she an only child?
  • valdvald Posts: 46,057
    Forum Member
    What's in a name, Roya will go by her adoptive parents name. I like the idea that she could turn up in years to come though and that she has links to the Carters and Masoods. I wonder if Shabnam is going to tell her family about her.
  • J-BJ-B Posts: 18,611
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    We have Manuel Carter joining soon. He comes from Barcelona.
  • CharnhamCharnham Posts: 61,312
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    dullagj2 wrote: »
    Yes but I think people get too tied up about character's surnames on here. This is Dean's first and only child. Carly has one too. I'd rather this than Dean being the father of Linda's baby.

    I think if they were going to bring in another branch of the Carters, it would be Linda's side of the family (Peacocks). A wedding is likely this year and we have already met Elaine. We know her dad is dead but is she an only child?
    I think she is an only child, but no reason she cant have a cousin from her mother.

    Fully agreed, I am hoping Lindas baby is Micks.
  • ofthenightofthenight Posts: 1,382
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I think that Shabnam probably tried to get Roya from her adopted parents at some point and they paid her not to see Roya again. This would explain Shabnam's money and lead to her somehow regaining custody.
  • CharnhamCharnham Posts: 61,312
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    ofthenight wrote: »
    I think that Shabnam probably tried to get Roya from her adopted parents at some point and they paid her not to see Roya again. This would explain Shabnam's money and lead to her somehow regaining custody.
    I like it
  • duckyluckyduckylucky Posts: 13,840
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    18 ??? What age are Dean and Shabnam meant to be ??
  • sunny daysunny day Posts: 849
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Charnham wrote: »
    I like it

    except the money was an inheritance......Shabnam abandoned the child, she is more likely to get arrested than paid off...
  • CharnhamCharnham Posts: 61,312
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    sunny day wrote: »
    except the money was an inheritance......Shabnam abandoned the child, she is more likely to get arrested than paid off...
    so she tells people.
  • lou_123lou_123 Posts: 12,706
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    The last thing we need is more Carter's... They're too big as it is!
  • AngelicPrincessAngelicPrincess Posts: 7,434
    Forum Member
    sunny day wrote: »
    except the money was an inheritance......Shabnam abandoned the child, she is more likely to get arrested than paid off...

    Exactly there was a case in my county where a couple left a baby with food, clothes, toy and nappies on a priests doorstep. They were arrested for child endangerment. They plead guilty and avoided jail as they had even more mitigating circumstances than Shabs did. They came forward straightaway, years later means she would have lost any rights.

    Realistically the only way she could see the child is if she confessed to her crime. Put her DNA on a database and if they child themselves wanted to know at 18 they could. had she tracked the child down under that age that she not only would have no legal rights she would be in the wrong.

    Its even more unrealistic for her to see her child then it was Martin and Sonia. This is actually less chance and I will be very disappointed if DTC disrespects this by showing otherwise. I have adopted cousin and I hate how soaps just get it wrong. Only realistic portrayal was Sharon as she tracked them down post 18 (we saw her go to the agency and talked to a counsellor first etc), the choice is with the child not the parent. DTC should show some decency on this because when it involves children he should show its not rainbows and fairytales with birth parents. Who can walk in and out of a child whom is under 18 life.
  • eejmeejm Posts: 1,485
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    More than a chance to bring more Carters in, I wonder if this is a chance to bring more of Masood's extended family in. What if Inzamam and Fatima actually did give Shabnam's baby to a cousin or something with whom the Masoods are currently not in contact? Shabnam may have assumed Roya went to strangers when she was actually given to a more distant relative? That family comes to Walford after getting back into contact through Masood (he is in Birmingham right now visiting, could be the perfect opportunity), bring their little girl, and Shabnam realizes it's Roya.

    I'd welcome more of Masood's family.
  • llgxllgx Posts: 1,590
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    lou_123 wrote: »
    The last thing we need is more Carter's... They're too big as it is!

    Agreed!
  • NoughtiesMusicNoughtiesMusic Posts: 15,914
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Biologically Roya is as much a Carter as she is as a Masood. She would be an addition to both families.

    Unless she has been adopted, she may have been placed into foster care. Inzamam and Fatima might have not known what to do so they would have arranged for her to go into a foster home instead. Alternatively she may have been sent to live with some other Masood family members, in which case Shabnam could track her down more easily.

    The trouble is how she'd tell this to Uncle Inzamam. He is a terrifying man who'd no doubt tell her immediate about it. The Masoods are going to struggle to get their around this and no doubt there will be rows with Shabnam.

    For the Carters, they wouldn't want to know purely because she is Dean's daughter. Dean himself will be seriously messed up by the revelation. Maybe in time they'd embrace her once Dean is gone and they want to be friends with the Masoods.

    Funnily enough I think Shirley and Denise may be the ones to help Shabnam track her down. They're both standing by Dean, neither have the same cultural stigma attached to this which Zainab might have and Denise gets on with Shabs.
  • spungerspunger Posts: 2,656
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Give them them their own show and give me back EastEnders instead of this freaking Carter show.
  • judy08judy08 Posts: 483
    Forum Member
    spunger wrote: »
    Give them them their own show and give me back EastEnders instead of this freaking Carter show.

    Totally agree. They are SO over used!
  • writer_composerwriter_composer Posts: 1,543
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I think Zsa Zsa should return.
  • D. MorganD. Morgan Posts: 4,166
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    It's ridiculous.

    "The Masoods need a big story!"

    "Okay fine, they can have ONE this year. But just make sure The Carters are involved somehow"
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 11
    Forum Member
    Baby isnt a Carter...its a Wickes/Masood. Dean himself isn't a Carter, he is a Wickes.
Sign In or Register to comment.