Jake seemed OK too, and that might bring Chrissie back.

Apparently The Sun and Daily Mail are running stories that Sam Womack has quit. The rumors about her wanting out have been going on for over a year, even when Santer was producer, but sure enough the hype is that she is quitting because of the baby swap story, that she gave a note asking them not to do this, they offered her more money and lighter stories if she stayed, but she won't, because she's a mother first and an actress second, and so on.

Some of the media over there are really sinking their teeth into this, I think due to their general hostility towards the BBC - running a lot of stories about anger from a celebrity who lost her child to cot death in 1991 (Anne Diamond), stories about backpedaling from the charity which helped Eastenders with details about the cot death part of the story (not the swap), etc.

It will be a shame if this makes the BBC force Kirkwood out because by and large I think he has done a good job and the viewing figures have stayed healthy.

I like Ronnie but I roll my eyes when I hear "she's the star of the show!" No she's not. Eastenders does not have a star, and frankly, they pretty much finished Ronnie as a character a year and a half ago.

Oh, and Y&RWT, you should write the BBC and tell them it's time to bring Sharon back.

Is this really that much different then AMC's Babe/Bianca baby swap? I guess I'm not understanding why there's so much hoopla. If people took everything they saw on a soap to heart, life would much more entertaining conflicted and troublesome. Soap watchers are not mindless droves, that act based on what they see.

That said, I left England in July, and was only able to catch up a few days of EastEnders when I was back last month, but saw nothing about Ronnie or her baby. Is this a biological child she had? If so, is Jack the father? And if not, how long ago did she adopt the child?

Edited January 6, 201114 yr by Kylie

I like Ronnie but I roll my eyes when I hear "she's the star of the show!" No she's not. Eastenders does not have a star, and frankly, they pretty much finished Ronnie as a character a year and a half ago.

It's funny how annoying Ronnie/Rack fans are. They overestimate her importance to the show.

The show recently lost Barbara Windsor and Lacey Turner, if anything, they're bigger losses and more identifiable with the show than losing Samantha Womack will ever be.

Some have also said it should have been Kat swapping babies. Yeah, because Kat's been a baby obsessed lunatic for years right? Ronnie will also never be half as iconic as Kat is as a character.

Ronnie as character has always been all hype and no substance. There is nothing to this character other than tragic plot points. She's never had a fully developed personality.

Oh, and Y&RWT, you should write the BBC and tell them it's time to bring Sharon back.

I wish.

At least Sharon existed beyond that tragic plot points in her life and had much more going for her as character than Ronnie will ever have.

I want another fabulously camp return though.

"Hello Peggy! I bet you never thought you'd see me again."

What scares me is I think they'll probably throw Sharon in a triangle with Phil and Shirley if she comes back.

Is this really that much different then AMC's Babe/Bianca baby swap? I guess I'm not understanding why there's so much hoopla. If people took everything they saw on a soap to heart, life would much more entertaining conflicted and troublesome. Soap watchers are not mindless droves, that act based on what they see.

That said, I left England in July, and was only able to catch up a few days of EastEnders when I was back last month, but saw nothing about Ronnie or her baby. Is this a biological child she had? If so, is Jack the father? And if not, how long ago did she adopt the child?

I think this is seen as different because they have a cot death, which is a sensitive subject. Add in that a lot of the press hates the BBC/Eastenders, a lot of online fans don't like Bryan Kirkwood, and a lot of Ronnie fans are upset...

They sped up Ronnie's pregnancy in order to get the time right for the story. She had sex with Jack, in the hospital, in April. In September she refused to go into the Vic fire to save Phil, and when Roxy asked why, Ronnie said she was pregnant.

What scares me is I think they'll probably throw Sharon in a triangle with Phil and Shirley if she comes back.

How awful that would be. I would hope that she or someone would stop that from happening. Phil is past any romances and the stuff with Shirley is a non-starter.

I do wonder if they might bring her back since Ronnie is leaving. There is going to be a huge hole in the canvas because of so many characters going. I think the show can move on, but they might need a distraction.

I'd say, hey, bring Sue Osman back, but then that is probably never going to happen.

Someone at DS said that Simon Ashdown said they'd been talking about the baby swap with Kat/Ronnie before Kirkwood ever showed up. Yet he will likely get the blame.

Someone at DS said that Simon Ashdown said they'd been talking about the baby swap with Kat/Ronnie before Kirkwood ever showed up. Yet he will likely get the blame.

Simon mentioned in this interview that it was being talked about and planned as much as a year ago, before Kirkwood even joined.

<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nw7hahsIYW4?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param'>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nw7hahsIYW4?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nw7hahsIYW4?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>

How awful that would be. I would hope that she or someone would stop that from happening. Phil is past any romances and the stuff with Shirley is a non-starter.

Despite everything though and the way he treated them both, I do think Sharon and Kathy were the only women Phil ever genuinely loved.

A lot of people still want Sharon and Grant to reunite. The only way that would work is if Grant matured in his years off the show and they forgot his brief crap comebacks.

If it were me I would have Dennis come back from the dead.

If not that then I would put her with someone like Max. Or a new character.

Do you prefer Eastenders when the show is very smooth and functions well or when it's out of control? I was thinking about some comments people were making about the show seeming out of control. I wonder if that's why I'm enjoying it more lately. I kind of liked some of 2003-2005 for that same reason (although 2005 seems to be a popular year in general with EE fans, at least now)...

Is Cot Death (SIDS here) more common in the UK? I ask, because I don't really think something like this would cause that kind of emotional upheaval. American shows kill kids/babies all different kinds of ways, and it's horrible, but I don't know the last time one really shook up the critics/audience.

If it were me I would have Dennis come back from the dead.

Nigel Harman actually requested that they kill Dennis off because he didn't want to be tempted to ever come back in the future.

If not that then I would put her with someone like Max. Or a new character.

It would be interesting seeing her with someone like Max. I would how Tanya would react.

Do you prefer Eastenders when the show is very smooth and functions well or when it's out of control? I was thinking about some comments people were making about the show seeming out of control. I wonder if that's why I'm enjoying it more lately. I kind of liked some of 2003-2005 for that same reason (although 2005 seems to be a popular year in general with EE fans, at least now)...

I don't know, I like the 98-02 era a lot, but the show seemed really lacking of a soul during the mid 00's, and that probably set a bigger template for the show would become in later years.

Back to Sharon, I think the show is lacking a female character like her, if this means she'll return, I think I'll take her any way they deliver her.

An EastEnders spokesman apparently confirmed Samantha Womack's departure:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5hjngyAxk_F-Jor0A7x2h3cMwMjmQ?docId=N0000741294283726703A

An EastEnders spokesman said: "The current storyline allows an exit for Ronnie Branning. Samantha Womack has been a major part of the show's success in recent years and she will continue to work with us until her departure later this year."

One less Mitchell is always a step in the right direction.

Ronnie as character has always been all hype and no substance. There is nothing to this character other than tragic plot points. She's never had a fully developed personality.

This is true from what I've seen on YouTube.

However if the show wasn't so keen on treating Ronnie/Rack fans with kid gloves, they'd write Ronnie true to what she should be, and that is a mentally unstable conniving little beyotch who is more her father's daughter than anything else. Instead they seemingly insist on portraying her as some heroine of the show. That is what I mostly hope that this baby switch succeeds at doing, finally showing viewers and those of Walford, Ronnie's true colors, but I'm not sure it will.