This. Also her relationship with Roxy was complicated and endearing. The reasons for Ronnie’s controlling behaviour with Roxy have been clearly stated so many times. She vowed to protect her sister from abuse and took on the mother’s role with Roxy and eventually let go. Why is that so hard to understand?

Sharon and Ronnie are two different characters so I don’t necessary see the comparison.

I don’t know why some posters state their opinions as it is a fact. People have different tastes and like characters for different reasons and get drawn to some more than the others. For some Sharon is this “be all” for some she is just a bore just like some were drawn to Ronnie and some hated her.

I miss Ronnie. Sharon does absolutely nothing for me. I couldn’t connect to her character in 2001 and can not connect to her now.
I don’t see what Jack’s attraction is with her either. She is not exactly a great catch and frankly after all the trauma Jack went through last year the last thing he would want to do is get involved with someone who clearly has lots of issues.

BIB What is bizzare is that a doctor should prescribe pain killers for depression. They are specifically for severe physical pain, usually following surgery or an accident. She said she went to him because she was in emotional pain following Dennis' death, that she could hardly function . In that case strong pain killers would not have been prescribed particularily as they can cause tiredness and depression. She would have been prescribed an anti-depressant.
A doctor would not have made such a basic mistake.

BIB - Me too - six years of addiction in my case, only recently conquered. And you're so right - it is a slow burner. I started on one strong one a day (I'd torn a tendon in my shoulder which needed an op to repair, but all the MRIs, consultations, waiting lists etc meant I waited a year to have it done). That first one was a real "wow" moment - I had no idea what taking codeine felt like until then. I thought I was in control, but then life got stressful too, and suddenly the painkillers (which, actually, were pretty useless for the pain!) were serving a different purpose - they made me feel calm, when the 'high' hit it was just enough to take the stress away.

Then, of course, you need one more to get that high... and then one more... and then one more.

But I couldn't stay on prescribed strong ones forever, so when I'd had my op and my shoulder was fixed I swapped to Nurofen Plus over the counter (same ingredients, only a third of the strength of prescribed ones, so you need to take three times as many - and it had to be ibuprofen and codeine; paracetamol and codeine made me feel sick, so that immediately counted out many of the cheap, own-brand formulations including codeine, as well as some brand names like Solpadeine.).

It was expensive, but I gave up buying myself any other treats (no clothes, no going out with friends - not that I did that much anyway with a family). My addiction was my 'treat'. During all that time no one guessed, not even my husband - I looked normal (even 'better than ever' according to most people), I didn't look ill, I functioned, worked, looked after the family, nothing changed... except the need to find a different chemist every day (which, when you live on an island 9x5 miles big was a challenge in itself) and the money to fund it. The stress I was under was my excuse (I also have clinical depression, but that's not related to this).

I tried to give up many time - the withdrawal is awful. But, eventually, I had to decide what was more important - the addiction or the will to be a better person who could beat it. I didn't tell anyone (my dr doesn't know, although I did tell the psychiatrist I saw for two years when I was prescribed antidepressants for the depression) and so I was on my own in my giving up, but that worked for me. Other people will need the support of groups or a friend who they can rely on - every addict is different in that respect. I did it literally one tablet at a time (I was taking 32 a day at my worst), letting my body adjust to each drop before I reduced the dose again.

It took ages, but I realised that what I had to do was replace the 'high' of the pills with a different 'high', that of conquering it. As it was, the 'high' from the pills was only temporary anyway - only lasted an hour, two at the most, each morning. Even if I took more later in the day (yes, I tried) the high didn't come back; it was strictly a 'mornings only' addiction to start the day, which I believe is very common in over-the-counter painkillers (it's only the stronger opiates like Fentonyl which can affect you each time you take one). I had to change my whole mind-set and attitude to what I was doing and why - and that was the hardest thing of all. But I did it in the end.

Am I tempted sometimes when it's bad? Yes, of course I am. But do I keep a supply in 'just in case' like Sharon? No. You should never do that. If they're there you WILL take them until they're gone - at least, that's my experience and that of others I've since communicated with. It's impossible to keep them 'just in case' - if you're truly an addict the pull is just too strong. It literally has to be "if they're not there I can't take them". It got to the point where I hated the thought of walking into another chemist and asking for another packet (but no one ever stopped, me even though I must have been an familiar face in all of them) and in the end that helped too - I didn't want to HAVE to ask for them any more.

I'm not sure how accurate Sharon's portrayal is because we haven't had enough of the backstory about how she ended up being prescribed them in the first place. But please don't confuse depression with addiction to painkillers - painkiller addicts rarely think about using them to kill themselves with. We know too much about them to do that - it's a horrible way to die. It's not the overdose that kills you, that only happens weeks later as a result of liver or kidney failure. And yes, I have been suicidal because of my depressive illness, but not once have I ever considered the painkillers part of that or thought about using them in that way - they simply weren't part of that.

It's a complex set of variables, but a few people on various threads are making judgements based on their own pre-conceived ideas rather than actually knowing any of the facts. It's not often that EE does a s/l that I can relate to, or have detailed knowledge of through my own experience, but this is something I do know about


What is your definition of bizarre in this instance? I'm confused too - do you mean it's bizarre because its out of character or just a plot device, or do you think the idea of addiction to painkillers is bizarre? Personally I don't care if it's a plot device if it highlights one of the most common addictions around these days - perfectly legal, socially acceptable, nothing bizarre about that surely? I don't invest in any of the characters enough to get my knickers in a twist about whether they are acting in character or not - I leave that to others - but because of my personal experience I am interested in a s/l which is touching on my life.

BIB - Why not? I was prescribed painkillers (see my other comments) because I needed them. The only bit that was unrealistic was Sharon carrying them around for so long without taking them - no addict would do that. If you're still addicted you take everything you have. If you've given up you don't have any more around. There is no 'keeping them in case'.

So would you rather I'd have stayed in agony for year waiting for the op I needed? As I have also said, most painkiller addicts know that they are a pretty ineffective means of killing yourself. You might be surprised to know how thoroughly depressed people with suicidal tendencies can and will research means of suicide and how effective/quick/painless etc each one might be. Suicide is rarely a spur of the moment thing for someone with long-term depression, even if they hadn't given any signs away that they'd been thinking of it. Sudden 'reactionary' suicides are a different matter altogether and can have nothing at all do with depressive illness. Anyway, the people who take overdoses are rarely those who've used painkillers as an addiction - for a start we have built up a tolerance to them over months or years so an overdose is unlikely to be effective in any definite way. There are lots of misconceptions about overdoses - often people who don't know how it works are going by misconceptions that it's an 'easy' way to do it. It isn't - at least, the swallowing of the pills is easy, but rarely do they kill in matter of hours, it usually takes weeks, and your family will be in bits watching it happen as it's death in slow motion from internal organ failure. That isn't most people's idea of suicide, is it?

As for Sharon, well I'll watch with interest to see how and where they take this.

ETA - have just seen your comment about the emotional pain Sharon described, which if it was just that of course painkillers were not the answer from the GP, but perhaps there was something else going on which necessitated short-term painkillers which Sharon then used as an excuse to get more - she might not have said anything to the dr about her emotional pain at all, just made something up (i.e. backache which can't be proved easily). In other words, a means to an end.

I don't know if that's what the writers meant, or whether it's just sloppy research, but you're right that antidepressants should have been prescribed (as they were to me for my clinical depression, but the pain in my shoulder meant I also needed painkillers). However, I take full responsibility for not being totally honest with my dr about what I was taking, why and what for - and maybe that's the angle their taking with Sharon too. Addicts will always justify/explain things in several different ways depending on who they're talking to and depending on what they need the response to be. It's not a black and white issue.

Just watched it. Syed couldn't been less interested in having a relationship with his fiancée or daughter, yet alone marriage - Christian and Zainab are closer these days for pete's sake... Stupid fool.

Danny is a slimy [obvious] sod too.

MEOW at that Sharon and Tanya scene. Though Sharon does still seem like a loose part wandering from Jack's bed to Phil's sofa, the later was right to chuck her sympathy-seeking self out.

And keeping the pills in hand trick.

Ohh, Angry Alice, me like.

A good parent does protect their kids from the truth till they're of an age [and maturity] that they can handle it, yes, Sharon.

New Del won't last long.

Social Woman wasn't a total bitch this time... Lola.

Wait. They married off-screen?! So much for the big first Gay wedding in EastEnders of months ago. And Syed is already gagging for Danny...

I know its very far fetched but the lola storyline is still very good and the girl playing her is doing brilliantly

What a good post.
I only found her explaination bizzare...that she was prescribed them for emotional pain by a doctor. Of course she could have been lying, but even so why no mention of physical pain, it's nothing she'd need to keep secret. A difficult birth, an injury, severe back pain..any of these would have explained why she was prescribed them in the first place. Instead we get, as you say, a wishy washy explaination.
I didn't mean to offend or belittle the problem. I spent my entire career working with people who struggle with addiction. I felt very strongly last night that they had not given it the gravitas that it deserves. For that reason alone I was angry at the time.
Again I'm sorry if I offended anyone.

You clearly know little about the American system. They prescribe drugs like they are sweeties especially ones that are more controlled here such as hydrocodone or xanax both of which you rarely get more than a few weeks here, over there you can easily get months worth. My husband got 6 month supply of xanax after 1 appointment (in the UK you rarely get more than a few weeks unless under special circumstances) and both my sister in law and I have been prescribed opioid pain killers in big number from the doctor. I live in the UK now but although I prefer their medical system the prescribing over there in my view is a mess.

Her wishy washy explanation was accurate too, notice she still can not even admit she is an addict. Most addicts when explaining their situation will go into vast details in such places and gloss over something else. And you said you ran a pub most of your life, now you work with addicts I am confused? Unless you are talking about alcohol addiction and prescription pain killing addiction is completely different. As this is actually something I happen to know about from my work. It was like when people said the scenes when Peggy shut Phil in were unrealistic I disagreed as I thought it was very realistic. And Sharon so far has been accurate she is a highly functioning adult which is not uncommon with such an addiction. The action of holding the drugs in the other hand "Just in case" is classic addict behaviour. The explaination is the only thing in my view that was debateable which can be explained away. But I doubt this is the end of it but we are not going to get scenes of her rolling around in the gutter shooting up it does not work that way. Like I said it is sometimes referred to as the "Hidden Addiction" because it affects a great many middle class people who can still live out there lives in a functioning manner. Now sure it can get worse and often affects personal relationships but the subtle approach is better.

And although Letitia said Sharon was in the UK for 4 years. She told Phil it was 2 weeks. Who is to say she did not get them while out there on a trip. None of us know how long she has carried them around for.

I was not aware that they were so sloppy in America. Even so I would assume that doctors would only prescribe pain killers for pain.

BIB. I ran a pub after I retired from a long career as a mental health professional.

Ah I get you now.
I am not saying she got it for something other than pain but she could have easily got them at the same time some anti anxiety stuff such as xanax can be used for pain especially when its accompaniedd by spasms which often muscle injuries do. The prescribing over there is terrible. I had my first child out there with my American husband and they would only prescribe painkillers for pain that is correct. But you can easily get your hands on them and other things which can be used for anxiety or spasms such as xanax. My husband got loads for an injury where he was in spasm, he had no anxiety so it was purely for a physical injury. In the UK drugs in that group very rarely get prescribed for more than a few weeks your old professional training you would know that already (I am also from this field).
I got hydrocodone for a old injury which flares up time to time. Again a supply which I considered rather large.

When I came to the UK and it flared up again. I was prescribed codeine for a week and then was told to manage it with a mixture of ibuprofen and paracetamol (paracetamol is acetaminophen over there). Where I come from orginally in Italy I found it was there I got the best care overall but thats my personal experince. I think the explanation was not the best but I found she was blurting it out then giving the particulars so it did not bother me the rest of it in my view was fine. But I can see why some people might think it was anti depressants and not pain killers as it did not explain it well but like I said she was hardly going into the particulars. Of course the 2 are not the same but I do not think it will cause any harm for viewers on that tiny matter unlike say the social worker storyline currently going on. My sister in law in my view shocked me when her paroxetine was upped from 20mg to 40mg and in the same appointment was given a huge supply of hydrocodone that was from a doctor in Dallas, Texas. Depending on how their insurance works some prefer to get bigger amounts as it saves them money from each time on the co-pay. So some doctors will prescrible large quantities on each prescription in general, I obviously can not speak for them al but I found this with a few doctors I saw. Their prescribing laws are all over the place, which is why I know its currently being looked at. The money issue there changes things drastically to here. Of course she could easily go the more dangerous route and take a higher amount over the counter (wont be the same but to try and get a similar affect) to help her but that would be dangerous.

Er, the wedding is on Tuesday.

Syed is too busy feeling guilty about stealing from his parents etc to be thinking with a clear head right now, of course he doesn't want his family around him when he's done what he's done and then along comes good looking Danny to help him off-load his self-imposed troubles.

From the wedding pics, it's obvious Syed really loves Christian and I hope Pete Lawson and Co can turn things around in the space of a week.

Could please someone kill Derek ? PLEASE !

Tanya and trustworthy.

I don't think that Syed and Christian will get married next week... It looks not good.

Loves him so much he is lying to him and flirting with another bloke. I love Marc Elliot as Syed but I think Christian should get rid. So what if Danny is "good looking" I have good looking mates does not mean I flirt with them while lying to my spouse. The fact Syed has stolen from his family before and is even blaming it on his little brother shows what a tool he is.

A pretty poor episode last night I thought, very filler like in nature and a small extension to Tuesday's ep, going over the same old ground in most of it.......Derek and Tanya's ambiguity/secret, Jack and Sharon, etc etc. - with all once again culminating in the subject of Lola's temporary loss of baby - not really "duff duff" worthy once again after last Friday and Tuesday I didn't think!

Meanwhile (without my being a spoilers observer) I sense the beginnings of Syed and Christian being doomed for failure next week, even with a scaled down "intimate" wedding.....which has maybe been forced upon them re the rest of the Masood's blood relatives!

Call him a wimp if you must but he's no Derek Branning, Max Branning - who slept with his son's girlfriend and has been forgiven by most viewers for that - or Phil Mitchell.

Point 1. It's not a wedding

Point 2. Syed does not feel guilty

Point 3. Syed no longer loves Christian

Point 3. Poor Christian

But everyone calls Max a serial cheat. Characters like Phil and Derek are potrayed as villians. So he is not worse then them so what? I was not comparing him to them. I love Jake Wood he is probably the shows best actor but I actually think he should not be with Tanya and I hated him allowing Stacey to have Bradley's name tarnished. So please do not assume I stand by what I posted. I love Marc Elliot too by the way. I am not JP fan I think he is shocking but the character Christian should get rid.

I was saying if he loves Christian so much why is lying to him again and flirting with another man? Sneaking around spending time with this other man. Yet again Syed can not communicate with his partner. I think its a shame the ceremony goes ahead but there was no way they were not going to give Chyred a sad ending or one which had them apart. Either they will leave together happy or one will die after a few weeks of bliss Zzzz
How he is a thief who has stolen from his family not for the first time either and is prepared to blame his little brother. That is shameful and he should be ashamed of himself. And Christian should ditch him.

He is not Derek,Max or Phil,doesn't mean that he is a good person. He is not. I used to like him. But i can see his chemistry with Danny though. I wish he don't lie to anyone any more.

It does make me laugh it would be saying I do not like Chris Brown and my reasons why, only for someone to turn round and tell me he is not Hitler. You can dislike someone by various degrees.

Other than point 1, this.

And, well, I thought they'd gotten married off-screen cos they were all dressed-up. Then later on we snapped back to them and pictures had been taken etc.

Should've assumed it was just a rehearsal, but you never know...

I really hope Christian leaves without Syed - he deserves better [as does Syed's family once they find out all his lies]. ... Especially since Syed won't tell Christian about Danny [and whatever they end up getting up to] himself [when Christian told him straight away about that one guy who kissed him].

Won't miss the character of Syed the slightest, but I will his actor

It's still not a wedding.

Does it really matter?

Yes it does. EE are ignoring the fact that there is a big campaign to acutally have gay weddings.