Time for some new foster kids?

[alexx]

What puzzles me is that every time the past is mentioned people say 'the show has to move on'. As far as I can see, no one has ever said that 2013 Home and Away should be exactly as it is in 1991 - I know that would be completely dated and never ever work as a prime time TV show on Channel 7 or in Australia at all perhaps.

What most of us seem to want, is the same quality of writing and attention to detail brought into 2013 Home and Away and for it to at least appear to be an extension of the past, so that it is still the same show 'long term' viewers can recognize and enjoy, whilst moving forward.

And of course there were plot holes, inconsistencies and so on back in the day - there will always be in these types of shows - but the feeling and tone of H&A has completely changed (along with how characters are written) and that's why I no longer enjoy it.

Maddie and Spencer, to me feel/felt like a couple who needed a place to stay and some helping out - they got that via Roo and Harvey. And that's pretty much where it's ended. It's great to see the older characters help out younger characters, and that is something H&A have done pretty consistently - but I don't think it's a different spin on the fostering theme really. And that was what this thread was about.

[John]

This is a good discussion alexx. Can I suggest we take it over to the Storyline thread or we'll be straying "off topic".

[Inactive User]

This is a good discussion alexx. Can I suggest we take it over to the Storyline thread or we'll be straying "off topic".

I agree with John. It was a good discussion Alexx had posted And yeah it's a good suggestion to take it over to the storyline thread.

[TelephotoMarigold]

What puzzles me is that every time the past is mentioned people say 'the show has to move on'. As far as I can see, no one has ever said that 2013 Home and Away should be exactly as it is in 1991 - I know that would be completely dated and never ever work as a prime time TV show on Channel 7 or in Australia at all perhaps.

What most of us seem to want, is the same quality of writing and attention to detail brought into 2013 Home and Away and for it to at least appear to be an extension of the past, so that it is still the same show 'long term' viewers can recognize and enjoy, whilst moving forward.

And of course there were plot holes, inconsistencies and so on back in the day - there will always be in these types of shows - but the feeling and tone of H&A has completely changed (along with how characters are written) and that's why I no longer enjoy it.

Maddie and Spencer, to me feel/felt like a couple who needed a place to stay and some helping out - they got that via Roo and Harvey. And that's pretty much where it's ended. It's great to see the older characters help out younger characters, and that is something H&A have done pretty consistently - but I don't think it's a different spin on the fostering theme really. And that was what this thread was about.

I agree with this point.

[c120701]

Plus it would be unlikely that Harvey would be allowed to foster with a criminal conviction, so this is a workaround.

[MACYLIGHTFOOT]

I haven't really warmed to Maddie and Spencer. Regardless of the ins and outs of whether they're foster kids or not it feels to me like the writers just wanted to add a few more teens to the show. It started out interesting enough, when they were sleeping rough and all that but the explanation given for why they ran away seemed a bit of a let down to me.

Jett's story in the other hand I think has been a great example of what the show used to do well. He was initially in need because of his mum's death, John and Gina took him in. I'm not sure if they ever legally fostered him? But they were still providing a family and a support system for him. Then even when they found his dad he still ended up staying with them. I know in a lot of actual fostering cases it's not always that the parents have abandoned their kids. Sometimes they just can't cope, sometimes there's other wider ranging circumstances and things just don't work out.

Like someone pointed out though, the Maddie and Spencer story isn't actually a fostering story line, it's more just a case of two not quite adults needing a bit of a helping hand. It may well lead to Roo and Harvey actually fostering someone down the line but it itself is not, nor I think is it supposed to be, one of the old fashioned H&A foster kid stories.

[cadyctslover]

I work in an Australian legal system so some of the ages and definitions may vary in other places but the show is set in a mythical Australian town. If Maddie and Spencer are over 16 they are entitled to live independently and would even be entitled to some government support payments. The tragedy of that is that sometimes young people of that age do need mentoring from supportive older people and don't get it.

In my opinion this is a good storyline and, although not strictly a foster kid situation, it contains the same ethos of older people mentoring/supporting younger people who for some reason don't have family support.

I don't see it as a plot device but a new approach to the old theme which saw various young people in the past mentored and supported by the older couples in the Bay.

The word homage is yours not mine, ( I am wondering why you threw that in ) I don't see this storyline as any sort of tribute to the past but a development of a theme from the past.

That's interesting to hear John, I didn't know that. It gives fresh insight into what they're probably trying to achieve with these new characters, and I have been quite enjoying this storyline. I think John and Gina's official fostering of Jett is a worthwhile storyline also, but it is nice to see a different tact to the idea of young people being looked after by older members of the community with whom they have no relation.

[Red Ranger 1]

Yes, John and Gina officially fostered Jett, with a child that age they really couldn't have done anything else.

At the risk of restarting an argument, I really don't see any differences between Spencer and Maddy's storyline and several "fostering" storylines in the past.How is it different from, say, Blake and Karen or Belle, who also had a home no more abusive than Spencer and Maddy's, were nearly adults and were never officially fostered?I don't see it as a "new spin" on old fostering storylines, I see it as no different from them and saying "But they didn't get DoCS involved" or "But they're not in need" feels like people looking for excuses to say it doesn't count because it's not exactly what they wanted.Maybe I'm being harsh and I apologise if people thinking I'm dismissing their opinions but when the show's getting back to its roots like this I think it should be supported, not nitpicked because it fails match people's ideal storyline.

[alexx]

Yes, John and Gina officially fostered Jett, with a child that age they really couldn't have done anything else.

At the risk of restarting an argument, I really don't see any differences between Spencer and Maddy's storyline and several "fostering" storylines in the past.How is it different from, say, Blake and Karen or Belle, who also had a home no more abusive than Spencer and Maddy's, were nearly adults and were never officially fostered?I don't see it as a "new spin" on old fostering storylines, I see it as no different from them and saying "But they didn't get DoCS involved" or "But they're not in need" feels like people looking for excuses to say it doesn't count because it's not exactly what they wanted.Maybe I'm being harsh and I apologise if people thinking I'm dismissing their opinions but when the show's getting back to its roots like this I think it should be supported, not nitpicked because it fails match people's ideal storyline.

I didn't really mind if it was a foster storyline or not in this case - I was just saying that from what I saw, I didn't think it was. In regards to Belle - I didn't see that as a fostering storyline either. She was just a guest in Irene's house, like April and Bianca are.

I think Blake and Karen are different. They quite obviously needed guardianship and looking after, coming across as young and in need of parents. Whereas Maddy and Spencer don't need that - they just needed a place to stay.

I agree that it's good to see Roo and Harvey take an interest the way they have, and its definitely running along the same lines as the Drop in Centre for example. I was interested in Maddy and Spencer at the start, but then I found it hard to take seriously when their reasons for running away came out.

I've enjoyed the Gina/John/Jett storyline. I think they're probably my favourite group of characters.

[jodlebirger]

I disagree with you Alexx. Well I haven't seen Maddie and Spencer so I can't talk about them... I haven't seen Karen and Blake either, because Norwegian tv has only showed H&A from 1993 season and onwards.

But I disagree with you about Belle.... Belle really did need some adult guidance when she arrived in the bay. Yes, some 16 year olds have to be independent, but most live with their parents. And there are a lot of teens who have fallen out of home for some reason, or are about to become a criminal... A lot of them are coming from very troubled families... And they need some guidance. So did Belle and the others (Celina, curtis and so on)

I don't think it is the same as with Bianca and April. April is a teen but she has a sister who is about 30 (she really looks that old), and she is an adult, a teacher so April has the support she needs. And Irene giving advice to Bianca is not the same as when she gave Belle or Geoff advice. She is just a house keeper to Bianca (and April), but she was more to Belle, Geoff and Annie.

I haven't seen Jett much, but I have read that he is meant to be 13 just like VJ?.. 3 years younger than Maddie and spencer (read that they were meant to be 16), Belle was 16 too... Only 3 years difference. I think sometimes we forget about that, because Vj (and Jett) are played by very young actors, but the others are played by adults... I do understand that Palmer, Gina and Jett is more a family set, but I think also the other adult/teen guidance thing is also very important.

Irene as a foster parent/adult wasn't used to its potential from 2006 Australian season and onwards... But that is something else... it doesn't mean that she tried to lead Belle to live her life right or Geoff and Annie.

There are a lot of kids like this in the world who need adult guidance, and for some reason have dropped out of home... I love these storylines, They are the reason why I started to watch Home and away. This is like my dream world that young people who are in need for support get the help they need and are saved from being criminals. I am looking forward to Maddie and Spencer when they are coming to my screen some time late this year (we get 2 new eps each weekday now).