I read the spoilers for next week's Coronation Street this morning, knowing full well that it would feature details of Tyrone and Kirsty's much publicised wedding. I've watched the Street long enough to know that no wedding goes to plan in Weatherfield, but in this case the sting in the tail is just too much for me.I have been thoroughly impressed by both Alan Halsall and Natalie Gumede as this gruelling, harrowing and gripping story has progressed. As Tyrone and Kirsty, they have been utterly believable in their performances. The story has engaged viewers and turned the spotlight on to an important issue. And I think Coronation Street have done the right thing in running with this storyline. However, there are a couple of things that have worried me. And the latest twist has only added to this.
I understand the story has been developed over a long period of time as would happen in real life. However, if Coronation Street was being true to real life I reckon Tyrone would have chosen another option to gain his freedom from Kirsty's abuse. Why go through with the pain and stress of a sham wedding when a simple DNA test would secure his name on the birth certificate? If Tyrone was too muddled to think of this surely Tina or Tommy would have suggested? It just doesn't make sense.Also, given how thin the walls must be in that terrace, why has nobody heard exactly what has been going on between the two of them? We've had a suggestion in the past that Eileen and Sean have heard raised voices, but I cannot believe they haven't heard enough to know Kirsty is to blame for this.
My third criticism is the involvement of Fiz. I love Tyrone and Fiz together and given their history it makes sense she would try to help Tyrone out of his current situation. However why did the writers have to put them together in an affair? It is stupid beyond belief and tarnishes Tyrone's image as he deals with his dreadful situation. By adding an affair into the mix it also takes the attention away the main focus of this story. I would have much preferred it if Tyrone and Fiz had agreed to wait and be together once they were free of Kirsty. Or am I just being old fashioned?
Finally I just don't think this story has touched enough on the counselling that Kirsty could be receiving. I know Tyrone tried to make Kirsty seek help, but this did not last long. Had the writers not considered that maybe Tyrone could seek help from a counsellor too? I think it would have been a positive step if that side of this issue had been featured more prominently.
I can't help but think that if this storyline had been featured ten or twenty years ago the wedding would have culminated with the truth coming out about Kirsty's abuse, rather than Tyrone ending up in jail, being accused of being the abuser himself. I may be in the minority here, but for me, the outcome of this wedding, whether it goes ahead or not, is just one step too far.
I know Kirsty will eventually be unmasked as the true villain of the piece, however I hope when this happens it is dealt with sensitively. I'd rather see her leave in order to get help than crash her car into the viaduct. And I do hope at the end of all this Tyrone and Fiz can be together and bring up their children as a family. Knowing Coronation Street though, it won't be as easy as that. Sadly!Follow the Coronation Street Blog on Twitter and Facebook
All original work on the Coronation Street Blog is covered by a Creative Commons License
22 comments:
I'm sure DNA testing was discussed but Tyrone was told Kirsty would have to agree to it and he reckoned there was no way she would.
AJ Brisbane Australia
It's been said on this blog and elsewhere many, many times that Tyrone could have gone to court to force Kirsty to agree to a DNA. It's true she might have done a runner but it would have been good to hear the pros and cons of such action debated between Tyrone and Fiz. Walls are thin but people mind their own business even on Coronation St. Eileen or Deirdre would otherwise have acted on their suspicions that Tyrone was the abuser. I think the neighbours doing nothing has been one of the most realistic parts of the story. What ruins the story for me is the Tyrone/Fiz affair. Definitely, she could have helped him as a mate and then let it grow into something else, or not. We don't have to have everyone paired up. I wish we had heard more in the dialogue about why things didn't happen rather than fill in the gaps ourselves. Maybe Tyrone is not the counselling type and wouldn't have gone but Tina might have suggested this to him; the same issue again with the DNA. Why has no-one questioned where Kirsty's old friends are - she certainly had some on the night she met Tyrone. I'd like to see Michelle not being entirely sure that Kirsty is as innocent as she makes out. Her expression during the police interview at the factory suggested she was puzzled. Overall, it's been a good storyline and the issue now is how does Kirsty exit.
We are from Canada and we could not believe that a simple DNA test would not be the answer. So several weeks ago, my husband went on the internet and apparently in England, that is not a slam dunk to getting rights. It may indeed prove you are the father, but without benefit of your name on that document, and marriage, he still may not have had the rights he seeks and she probably could have taken off. I think Fiz did some digging at the beginning of all this and this is why this elaborate wedding plan was hatched.
I posted on the previous article abiut this but the really disappointing thing is that Corrie are going down the wrongful imprisonment story AGAIN, it's been done and done to death in this soap. It will really cheapen the whole thing.
It's lazy, sensationalising and very, very boring.
Does marrying Kirsty and getting parental rights for Ruby actually get his name on Ruby's birth certificate it doesn't sound like it so what's the point of the wedding?
If his name isn't on the birth certificate as a result of the marriage how can he then divorce Kirsty and expect to keep custody of Ruby as the only person listed on the birth certificate would be Kirsty and the father would still be shown as unknown.
It seems that the only way he could get custody of Ruby is if had gone to court and had a court ordered DNA test done to establish him as Ruby's biological father otherwise getting parental rights doesn't sound to me as if it would guarantee that he could get custody of Ruby.
It seems to be the same as Leanne and Simon she acts as if she has custody of Simon even though Peter is Simon's biological father and Leanne was only married to Peter.
At no point was it ever stated that she adopted Simon while she was married to Peter and even if marrying Peter gave her parental rights in regard to Simon I would have thought that as soon as she and Peter were divorced those parental rights would no longer apply as there was no other claim she could have made for custody of Simon.
The Tyrone/Fiz affair was ridiculous as both of them knew how quickly Kirsty can fly into a rage and start beating Tyrone so why risk his life with the affair, as many people have pointed out wait until everything else is sorted before starting a serious relationship.
This is just another example of Collinson's ego getting in the way of reality just so he can have his "sensational" storyline regardless of the harm it does to to the agencies that deal in parental rights and domestic abuse issues for the men involved in situations like this.
Men will watch this or read about this and then think well there is actually nothing that I can do to remedy my situation so I will just suffer through it.
Collinson claims that they have consulted with such agencies as ManKind but then they ignore many of the options that are available to these men just to get ratings and to heck with reality.
Kevin didn't have Molly's permission for the DNA test done on Jack. He just stole his dummy, and next thing we saw was the results envelope being delivered to his place of work! I know there was no custody fight, but it would have stood him in good stead to win, once the abuse is proved. Tyrone has had ample opportunity to get this done.
Once again, you have pinpointed the problem. It is easy to forget how well this story started. The vague feeling that something about Kirsty was not quite right.....
Now it's just a farce. Tyrone is risking life and limb to marry Kirsty, but that's not sufficient. He has to have an unlikely affair with Fiz, all so it can go pear shaped on the wedding day. Then, he is accused of violence and what was one of the best stories just decends into fantasy soap nonsense.
A big problem for male victims of domestic abuse is fear of not being believed and here is good old Coronation Street re-inforcing that. Well done ITV!
This is also a rehash of the story line which saw a pregnant Tracey fall down the stairs, then blame Steve who was totally innocent. C'mon, writers!
One hundred percent agree with everything you say Graeme. In don't think I'll be watching next week.
Why are Corrie blokes so 'desperate' for a baby?
ie., (Tyrone/David/Marcus).
Is that the mindset of the typical British male?
For me the only shocker about this wedding is that purple dress. HIDEOUS.
I said it at the very begining when this abuse first started and she beat him, and after the baby came, why didn't he go to the street Doctor. He would have seen something and why is no one suggesting couselling for Tyrone. As for DNA, Kirsty still has to give the right to have him be Ruby's father since she didn't name him. She has to agree to signing the papers as the mother. You'll find out Ruby isn't Tyrone's,(sad, again) and there's a reason she has no friends from her past. He, Tina or Fizz never mentioned this, ( hint writers).
If I recall correctly it was said some time ago that Tyrone could go to court and have a DNA test ordered by a judge and that Kirsty couldn't refuse to allow it.
But if that also means that Tyrone would then automatically be able to have himself named as Ruby's father on her birth certificate I don't know.
If the DNA test proves that he is indeed Ruby's biological father wouldn't that give him some rights regardless of whether or not he was listed as the father on her birth certificate.
I suppose the way it would work though is that he would be acknowledged as Ruby's father but the only rights he would have would be child support and not custodial rights.
I agree with some of the concerns raised in this, particularly the idea that somebody as terrified as Tyrone is supposed to be would risk having an affair right now. And whilst having a DNA test or going to court to assert Tyrone's rights in relations to Ruby could force Kirsty to run away, there's nothing to say she won't eventually run away with Ruby when Tyrone dumps her anyway. The risk that she'll scarper exists either way.
This is the issue I have with "issues" stories generally. We start off thinking "hmm, this is interesting I haven't really thought about that before" but sooner or later, drama takes priority over realism. And that is potentially damaging. Having read spoilers about the next phase of this story, I'm a little worried about the messages it gives out.
Oh and regarding a comment above about birth certificates. Nowadays, it's not quite as straight-forward as whose name is on the birth certificate. It's all about parental responsibility, and you don't need to be on the birth certificate to get it. By marrying Kirsty, Tyrone would automatically get parental responsibility and once he has it, only a court can remove it. However, none of that would necessarily prevent Kirsty running away with the child.
Similarly, with Leanne, she gained parental responsibility when she adopted Simon and cannot lose it just because her marriage to Peter is over. Birth certificates have very little to do with it now.
There are three main ways Tyrone could obtain Parental Responsibility for Ruby -
1. Being named as the father on the birth certificate (scuppered by Kirsty)
2. Marrying Kirsty - he would keep Parental Responsibility even if they were to divorce in future
3. Applying to Court for a Parental Responsibility Order. Alternatively, he could apply for a Residence Order (if he is worried about Kirsty disappearing with Ruby, gaining Parental Responsibility on its own won't prevent this, and Residence Order would have the effect of giving him Parental Responsibility too). If Kirsty tried to defend the application on the basis that he is not Ruby's biological father, the Court could order a DNA test. If Kirsty refused to comply, the Court could attach a Penal Notice to the requirement which, if breached, could result in Kirsty being sent to prison for contempt of Court.
Boring law lecture over, but it is very frustrating that yet again there doesn't appear to have been any research about this. The same error was made when Roy thought he had to marry Tracy to be recognised as Amy's father. Although this was addressed later with Maya saying she'd made a mistake, I worry that the damage had already been done and the misconceptions about this already very misundertood area of law had been added to. Not very responsible of the writers imho.
Fiz and Ty are both a pair of idiots so I suppose the writers thought they should get together and breed.
What might have started out a good storyline..morphed into great and now, once again it's turned into a ridiculous circus. I can't understand the affair between Fiz and Tyrone but I suppose Kirsty had to have a reason for a melt down on her wedding day and so she finds out about the affair. I really don't understand HOW Kirsty found out..what with Fiz and Ty being so secretive and all. Way to go Corrie writers!! Another plot down the loo!!
Really well-written post & enjoyable post, Graeme. I agree with every word you say.
IF Tyrone actually did the same thing what Kevin did, then you all will MOAN about recycling the storyline. Beside, Molly was dead so Tyrone will have no strength. But Kirsty is alive. And this is drama, come on. Not a reality show. If you hate this so much, GO AND WATCH SURVIVOR. There's plenty drama on that show. I am over negative posts. Recycling what other people said over and over. Move over and say something new please.
Despite differences in legal requirements between different countries and complexities in England, I think everyone can agree that this story has over emphasized the impossibility for a man to claim rights to his child merely by being left off the birth certificate by the mother. I find it impossible to believe that Tyrone couldn't have contested the registration of the birth, deliberately excluding his name from the birth certification without his knowledge, despite his constant presence in the child/mother's life and her act being motivated purely by control and spite. There must be some type of mechanism to prevent this from continuing uncontested. If the father of a child has no rights without the mother's permission, England certainly needs to rethink its bigoted position on this issue.
He shold have reported her to the police, including the threat her violence posed against Ruby. Then he could have petitioned for sole custody, supported by a Court ordered DNA test. Sure, Kirsty's father might have stepped up to petition for custody on behalf of his daughter but it would have taken little to no effort for Tyrone to demonstrate that Kirsty's father is the source of the violence in the first place! Then, Tyrone could put forward his past efforts in raising a child that turned out to not be biologically his and the support of Fiz in his life, who is also a single parent, in addition to his operation of his own business to provide stable financial support. Problem solved, Kirsty gone.
Thanks as always for your comments! It's great when someone agrees with my musings!
Post a Comment