|
||||||||
Why would phil be granted custody?? |
![]() |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,133
|
Why would phil be granted custody??
With the criminal record that phil has, and all the previous drug and alcohol issues he has, why would social services think he is a safer bet to look after lexi than her mum??
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,456
|
Because you can't let real life get in the way of this ridiculous storyline?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 428
|
There is no social worker in the world that would give Phil Mitchell custody. Also if a child is removed they wouldn't place it back in the same tiny area where the mother is. I've stopped watching EE until they come up with some better storylines
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 253
|
Because he has run out of stories. FFs just bring louise back rather that this stupid story.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1,448
|
Wouldnt they need a paternity test or something as well?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,028
|
Quote:
Wouldnt they need a paternity test or something as well?
I do not know about UK law details, as I am not from the UK, but where I live, Ben could be put on that birth certificate without any problems, as long as he agrees with it. When a man and a woman (or a boy and a girl, in this case) agree that they are the parents, the law lets them be the parents. It only gets difficult if one of them denies the paternity, in that case, a paternity test could be ordered by the court. This could be done by Lola, if she feels Ben should live up to his new responsibilities, or by Ben, who wants visiting rights and such. It is even possible to agree on being parents to a child if the couple never had sex, or never even met (why anyone would do such a thing is beyond me, but it is not forbidden). For example, if Roxy ends up pregnant, she could choose to claim Christian is the father, if Christian agrees, well, then he is the father. The only problem is when one or both parents are married, but not to each other. The law forbids (over here at least) that a woman who got pregnant by a married man forces him to acknowledge paternity, or that a man who may have gotten a married woman up the duff challenges the paternity of her husband. The husband is always the father, unless he or the mother deny this AND can prove that it is not the case. So if Kat and Alfie were married nine months before Tommy was born (can't recall if they were), Alfie could not have just put Michael on the birth certificate. Even if it was impossible for him to have kids, and he was in prison at the time, so he had little opportunity to have a kid, there would have to be a paternity test, unless both Kat and Michael agreed that Michael was indeed the father. Kat would have to agree first, before Michael could even do anything. Then there would be a paternity test to establish Alfie really wasn't the father. Lola's case is easy, especially if Ben does not question the paternity. I assume UK law can't be worlds apart from this system. |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 9,152
|
Because the producer and scriptwriters do not care one bit about insulting the intelligence of viewers because, no matter what they do, there will always be several million viewers who think it is brilliant, realistic, well written, well acted etc etc so they just churn out insulting rubbish and receive large amounts of money for doing so, punctuated with the occasional award for best storyline or whatever else they can dream up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 8
|
Simple, he wouldn't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,679
|
This storyline goes from bad to worse, it completely insults the intelligence of viewers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 8
|
The storyline didn't start off bad. The removal of Lexi would of never happened the way it did.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 8
|
In a way this storyline is showing how SWs can be. Most are - Power hungry. They think they're above the law
|
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,456
|
Quote:
In a way this storyline is showing how SWs can be. Most are - Power hungry. They think they're above the law
Apart from anything else, social services just don't have the means to provide a home for all the babies they would be taking away if this story were true. |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,374
|
I know, there is no way Phil would get custody even if he is Lexi's supposed grandad. He is a known criminal, alcoholic and has a son who is banged up for murder so he would be a perfect fit .
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sat at computer with heatin on
Posts: 45,573
|
I always thought Phil was in on it with the social worker, and Phil was telling her to move Lexi from her mum and Billy ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Edinburgh
Posts: 2,608
|
I don't watch EastEnders much, but I think its due to Phil being a devoted father, with good discipline, he is like an army general.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: N.Ireland!
Posts: 42,119
|
Quote:
I don't watch EastEnders much, but I think its due to Phil being a devoted father, with good discipline, he is like an army general.
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Edinburgh
Posts: 2,608
|
Quote:
so devoted that ben ended up in prison for murder...
|
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: N.Ireland!
Posts: 42,119
|
Quote:
But it toughened him up and slapped down Jordan.
exactly lol
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,133
|
Quote:
But it toughened him up and slapped down Jordan.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 5,338
|
Someone like Phil wouldn't get custody of a baby but he is King Philth so gets everthing
|
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 31,001
|
Because he and Sharon tell a pack of lies and get away with it.
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: N.Ireland!
Posts: 42,119
|
Quote:
Because he and Sharon tell a pack of lies and get away with it.
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 19
|
You're an idiot
Quote:
In a way this storyline is showing how SWs can be. Most are - Power hungry. They think they're above the law
The only time a social worker would actually remove a child/young person from the home of a parent is if the YP was in genuine risk of mental/physical/sexual harm or if the young person (such as myself) has specifically requested to go into care. I've lived in children's homes and foster homes for most of my adolescent life - and it's NOTHING like how its portrayed in the media... Why don't you try picking up a piece of non-fiction once in a while? Might help your ignorance a little... |
|
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: London Town
Posts: 8,791
|
Considering it was completely implausible for Lexi to be taken off Lola in the first place I don't see why the writers wouldn't give Phil custody, despite the fact that a pot plant could do a better job of raising a child than ex con, bully, alcoholic, ex drug addict, wife beater and all round thug Phil Mitchell.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 31,158
|
Storylines are as irritating as ever in EE, I see.
Gave up watching during the baby snatch storyline. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 13:18.




exactly lol