Lila
Sitter-In-Training
Posts: 293
|
Post by Lila on Feb 11, 2009 2:08:47 GMT -5
I noticed something when i was reading Friends Forever Kristy's Big News.
Patrick never acknowledges David Michael as his son. He never gives a ticket to him But the whole situation is lightly touched on. At least, Elizabeth doesn't care and says "Oh he is too young to go" and that is that. But it made me wonder, Patrick left when he was barely a year to my recollection.
What if, Elizabeth cheated on Patrick and David Michael isn't his child but the result of a love affair?
Patrick also says in the FF book that "Your mother never made it easy to keep in touch with you kids."
Patrick also sneaks into town to see Kristy too. why would he sneak around to see her?
It made me wonder if Elizabeth was playing the victim and keeping the kids away from their father. Destroying mail from him, or not letting them speak to their father.
My boyfriend's mother did that to him when he was a child. but he didn't know that until much later in life when he was older. She didn't let his father come around and his father tried multiple times to get in contact with his son. She moved away so he couldn't mail anymore to the house and the whole time told him "your father doesn't want you or me" and played the victim for pity party and attention.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2009 2:14:38 GMT -5
|
|
Lila
Sitter-In-Training
Posts: 293
|
Post by Lila on Feb 11, 2009 4:11:13 GMT -5
LOL that page is funny. i'm glad you showed and shared with me. XD its awesomely funny
|
|
|
Post by otempora541 on Feb 12, 2009 16:39:29 GMT -5
Honestly, the way it's written, DM could be legitimate (but Patrick could've felt he needed to impress Kristy, Sam, and Charlie-who remembered him leaving vs a baby) or illigitimate (there is something odd about the entire aspect of it).
I honestly don't know, and I like it. It leaves us in an air of mysterty. What do you want to bet that Elizabeth herself doesn't know?
|
|
|
Post by booboobrewer on Feb 12, 2009 17:11:02 GMT -5
I've never subscribed to this theory. Lots of couples have children with fairly big age differences. I guess the question is raised because of that FF book, but I've always thought that after DM was born, Patrick was just sort of like, "okay, I've had enough," and didn't want anything at all to do with DM because he never "knew" him, and might even have guilty feelings about the whole thing.
|
|
|
Post by sparklymouse on Feb 12, 2009 20:10:01 GMT -5
I agree about the age difference. Charlie and DM were 10 years apart, but there were also two kids in between them. Kristy and DM were 6 years apart, which isn't the hugest age gap. Having a baby while your other kid is in it's Terrible Twos can't be the easiest thing, and Elizabeth did that twice in a row. Maybe she wanted a breather, or maybe DM was the result of failed birth control. It's hard to picture a mother of a 9, 7, and 5 year old having the time to sneak around and have an affair.
|
|
Penny Lane
Sitting For The Arnolds
The Girl With Colitis Goes By
Posts: 2,888
|
Post by Penny Lane on Feb 16, 2009 17:11:58 GMT -5
Or maybe, Patrick accused Elizabeth of cheating when the BC didn't work. And when he left, he convinced himself that he was right and Elizabeth was wrong. He doesn't want to see David Michael because he doesn't want to have to think about it. Maybe he also feels guilty?
Or maybe he was cheating and that's why he accused her of cheating. maybe they were both cheating.
|
|
wanderingfrog
Sitting For The Arnolds
Official BSC Archivist
Posts: 2,552
|
Post by wanderingfrog on Feb 16, 2009 17:45:42 GMT -5
^ That's a very interesting theory. Maybe DM is Patrick's, but Patrick is convinced that he's someone else's kid.
|
|
|
Post by wenonah4th on Feb 17, 2009 6:36:37 GMT -5
Irrational, but possible.
|
|
|
Post by greer on Feb 17, 2009 9:14:08 GMT -5
I kind of feel like Elizabeth was too busy taking care of three little kids to fool around. Maybe DM was a baby used to try to "trap" Patrick into staying or something, and that's why he has no attachment to DM.
|
|
tiff85
Junior Sitter
Posts: 583
|
Post by tiff85 on Mar 7, 2009 16:54:51 GMT -5
I don't think Elizabeth would have the heart to do that. She did seem to be busy trying to start her career for all that. Patrick just didn't want to take responsibilitiy for the kids he helped bring into this world.
|
|
|
Post by firecausesburns on Mar 7, 2009 18:55:12 GMT -5
I don't really like that idea. I always figured that Elizabeth oopsed Patrick, or that having David Michael was the final failed attempt to bring the marriage back together.
|
|
|
Post by sparklymouse on Mar 8, 2009 15:42:10 GMT -5
Patrick wasn't exactly a prize worth trapping.
|
|
|
Post by greer on Mar 9, 2009 0:22:41 GMT -5
I'm sure that he had his good points. He seemed like he could be charismatic in Kristy's Big News. Also, Elizabeth had Charlie really young, and people don't always make the best decisions about dating when they're younger. I have definitely dated guys who are not the family type. It doesn't make someone a bad person. Not everyone is cut out to be a parent. And I would definitely not be happy living in suburban Connecticut saddled with a mortgage and four kids. Even though abandoning your children is a terrible thing to do, the Thomas kids were probably better off in the end because Watson is a way more suitable father.
|
|
Amalia
Sitting For The Braddocks
Her Original Point of View
Posts: 3,664
|
Post by Amalia on Mar 22, 2009 22:07:46 GMT -5
^ Or maybe Elizabeth told Patrick to leave, and Patrick was willing to be looked at as the bad guy (abandoning his children and all) in order to not have to pay child support, to be freed from being tied down to all of those kids, etc.. Wait . . . did he pay child support or alimony? I was under the impression that Elizabeth was a single parent making it on her own.
|
|