S12.E16: When It Hurts So Bad

[Nobodysfan]

 

Kind of like where the Amelia/Owen thing went . . . don't know if this means the end of them or what -- maybe opening the door for her & Riggs?

 

I like this idea,honestly,I like it.  The way she acted with Nathan was very charming in Odd man out.

What a bitch Catherine is. That's pretty god damn messed up and I don't even like April. Seriously. WTF was that?  

She is a real harpy.

Over the mid-season break, either (1) Caterina Scorsone won a long-standing argument about how she wanted to portray Amelia, or (2) Shonda herself suggested she tone it down on all levels -- volume and speed of speech, antic gestures and over-exposed inflections -- or (3) Shonda/a producer told her she could stop playing someone headed for the bottle of a bottle, and should now play the humbled upside of Amelia's latest arc.

 

Who knows. But from late 2015 to early 2016, the change and its effect are remarkable. As if she took the aspirin and our headache went away.

I DO wonder what happened to both Amelia and Scorsone herself. I am beginning to actually like her character. I hope Amelia sticks to the break-up with Owen and it will be permanent.

Edited April 2, 2016 by NathanRiggsfan

[Chewy101]

So, Meredith continues to be the last person watching, or tending to, her kids. You'd think she would have included them in her breakdown since they are Derek's kids, too.

 

and Amelia of all people should be willing to forgive Owen for a mistake; she has made so very many herself.

 

 

I thought she was very gentle and forgiving of him. But someone freshly sober for the unpteenth time is not supposed to be in a relationship. She can barely manage her own drama, let alone someone else's. Of course, now that she is moving in to to Meredith's circus house, good luck with that.

 

No way is Katherine going to win a thing here. I assume she wants full custody to carry on the Avery Empire with Jackson one day, but that is so loony and over the top. Shonda forgot she isn't working on Scandal again.

 

I'm loving Arizona this season. Why can't SHE have someone, since Callie's choice has no one happy these days.

Edited April 2, 2016 by Chewy101

[TheresaW1934]

April did not sign an affirmation stating she was not pregnant, she signed the divorce agreement presented by Jackson. Standard divorce decrees do not have the person affirm pregnancy or lack thereof. Neither Jackson nor Catherine have cause for fraud simply because April is pregnant. Nothing has been asked of Jackson at this point, and there are no laws regarding a person becoming pregnant in the midst of a divorce, especially one filed by another party. If April denies paternity or visitation after the child is born, Jackson could sue for his rights as a father; but April cannot be accused of fraud by becoming pregnant.

Could there be something in a pre-marital agreement? 

[Shellie]

There was a small part of me that when Bailey asked Callie who she saw in the future, cheering on Sophia, that Callie would think of Arizona. I know that ship has sailed many times ago but I still remember when they were my one of my favorite couples on this show. 

 

Me too, although I also have the sense of how far that ship has sailed, so figured it couldn't happen.  I felt like I was seeing Callie realizing Penny wasn't part of her future, certainly not in the way she once thought Arizona was her true love.  Then it went in the opposite direction.  

 

The first time Callie and Arizona said "I love you" was one of the sweetest moments in this entire series.  Contrast that with how this "I love you moment" went.  What a definitive difference.  

[Pallas]

The state of Washington's divorce code was revised in 2006, as kushka noted in her earlier post. Prior to that, Washington had been one of several states not to allow divorce while a wife was pregnant (presumably, not to have to reopen the suit and settle issues of custody and child support, upon the birth of a child). That changed with the new code, enacted after a pregnant wife was denied divorce from an abusive husband. But Washington's newer standard divorce petition does contain this clause:

 

Washington State Petition for Dissolution of Marriage

Paragraph 1.13. Pregnancy. If neither spouse in your marriage is pregnant, check the first box.
If a spouse is pregnant, check the second box.

 

So it seems both April and Jackson did have to take a position on whether she was pregnant, in their divorce petition.

Edited April 3, 2016 by Pallas

[Madding crowd]

It was Jackson's petition though, not Aprils. Still don't see how she could be fraudulent in a divorce she didn't initiate. You could be fraudulent in disclosing assets, but your own body cannot be regulated in a divorce. Since Jackson wanted the divorce, what could he sue her for? Money? There is no way in hell he could sue to demand testing or an abortion, so what?

Edited April 2, 2016 by Madding crowd

[windsprints]

Contrast that with how this "I love you moment" went.

 

"I love you", "thank you" made me immediately think of Friends when Ross says it to Emily.  Maybe Penny will go away like Emily, lol. 

[pennben]

I feel like Grey's is doing something really interesting vis-a-vis April/Jackson and the new pregnancy, I'm just sorry that they brought in Mamma Sledgehammer to be in the middle of it.  There's lots of really interesting issues being shown here.  I am both curious at how they will present them all, while at the same time terribly frightened at how they could blow this.  It's sort of like how I was worried when the bomb guy (hi! Kyle Chandler) was carrying out the bomb way back when...this could  work out or be a big mess.

 

Regardless, I applaud the effort thus far.

[kushka]

April did not sign an affirmation stating she was not pregnant, she signed the divorce agreement presented by Jackson. Standard divorce decrees do not have the person affirm pregnancy or lack thereof. Neither Jackson nor Catherine have cause for fraud simply because April is pregnant. Nothing has been asked of Jackson at this point, and there are no laws regarding a person becoming pregnant in the midst of a divorce, especially one filed by another party. If April denies paternity or visitation after the child is born, Jackson could sue for his rights as a father; but April cannot be accused of fraud by becoming pregnant.

 

In some states, including Washington,  standard divorce degrees DO include an affirmation of pregnancy.  I just copied the following paragraph from the Washington State "Petition for Dissolution of Marriage" form I downloaded from the the Washington state forms page:

https://www.courts.wa.gov/forms/?fa=forms.contribute&formID=13

 

1.13 Pregnancy

[ ] No party is pregnant.

[ ] (Name) ______________________ is pregnant.  Note:  Under RCW 26.26.116, the other party is the presumed parent.  If either party believes the other party is not the parent, this presumption may be challenged up to four years after the birth of the child or as otherwise provided in RCW 26.26.500 through 26.26.625.

[ ] Other:

 

 

So it seems that in signing a divorce agreement in Washington state - she did knowingly commit fraud, if that paragraph was checked "no party is pregnant"

[lamadeleine]

 

I DO wonder what happened to both Amelia and Scorsone herself. I am beginning to actually like her character. I hope Amelia sticks to the break-up with Owen and it will be permanent.

 

I agree. We're actually getting to see a side of Amelia that is gracious, humble, and striving for emotional intelligence...it's a good side to see. I also hope that the Owen/Amelia ship has passed for good. At the end of the day, you cannot force chemistry and these two actors just don't have it with each other, bless their hearts. My wish is that this failed relationship is a positive jumping-off point for both characters- for Amelia, an opportunity to really stand on her own and navigate sobriety without the distraction of a relationship. For Owen- I hope this helps him realize that he needs to start dealing with and owning his issues and get into some kind of therapy- do not pass go, do not collect $200.

 

In regards to the Meredith/Will situation- I gotta say that part of me was really put off that they used the tease of "Did Will actually assault Mer in some way" to tell the story of Mer not being ready to move forward. Maybe I'm being too sensitive here, but it just felt it was over the top and it didn't sit well with me.

[rachel1496]

Isn't the petition signed at the beginning of the process though? If that's the case it's not fraud since neither of them knew she was pregnant at that point.

[pennben]

The thing is, she knew when she put pen to paper, I believe in that scene one of the lawyers talked about how easy the divorce was since no children were involved. 

 

I like that the show has shown that April wasn't looking to get any money here, she just stepped away when Jackson wanted out.  But, likely, she stepped on things that should have been settled (custody issues) when she signed the papers.  But Jackson also doesn't get to tell her what to do with the fetus, married or not.  Lots of issues here and I'd like them to continue to balance them all as they tell the story.

[Madding crowd]

I don't have the interest or time to research divorce laws in WA, but I fail to see what Jackson could gain by suing April for fraud. Overturn the divorce? He wanted the divorce. Financial settlement? He filed for divorce and would have to prove some kind of financial loss by April waiting to tell him about the pregnancy. The only thing left is to sue her to try to force an abortion or force her to get testing and no court would touch a case like that. The TV show doesn't need to be accurate of course, but I can't imagine they would ruin Jackson's character by having him try to force an abortion. Just my opinion of course.

[pennben]

Child custody.  He could want to reopen the divorce to get his interests protected by law.  Sure, April is saying now that he will have rights once the child is born, but that's not pen to paper to enforce those rights, and  may not end up being what they would be if he'd known before the divorce. That's why I love this storyline, he has rights she trampled on at the divorce, but I understand why she did.  She has rights with the fetus now that he may want to trample on now for testing and other reasons, but I understand why he wants to.  It's a mess, but it's real.  I don't like Catherine stepping all over this, but I am curious to see where they go.

Edited April 3, 2016 by pennben

[kingshearte]

I'm finding myself surprisingly affected by watching Meredith's journey. It actually is kind of new ground for the show, too. Despite all the relationship drama and deaths, I don't think there's actually been anyone whose long-term, stable, happy partner has died. There was Denny, but that wasn't exactly long-term or particularly stable, frankly. There was Mark and Lexie, but they weren't actually in a relationship when she died, and he, sadly, had no opportunity to move on anyway. And there was Adele, but again, she and Richard weren't really in a stable happy place at the time. So Meredith's loss of Derek is kind of a new thing for the show, and although I think Alex's advice and insights last week were quite valid, I think he (and Meredith) realized this week that, despite some similarities, there is a difference between moving on from an LTR that ended and moving on from the death of a long-term partner. Meredith's freak out this episode was maybe a touch over the top, but when she found Derek's blanket and actually explained what she was feeling, I may have found that there was some sort of irritant in my eye... I just like that it's not being presented as an easy cut-and-dry, OK-now-I'm-ready situation.

 

Catherine... oh man. I will kinda judge Richard if this goes down the way it seems likely to and he stays with her. That was just not OK.

 

Also echoing the general disappointment that Bailey's speech to Callie got Callie to decide Penny was The One. I think I would actually rank their chemistry below George & Izzie's. At least those two had a decent friendship vibe before they screwed it up with the attempt to make them a couple. With Callie and Penny, there's just nothing, and the whole thing is just weird and inexplicable.

 

And I also think patient chick was kind of a dick in the end. I get being gun-shy and not being interested in pursuing anything further with this guy, but the way she just dismissed him as though she only even slept with him in the first place as a personal challenge to herself or something, and, having checked that box off, she had no further use for him? I found it shockingly callous for someone who had, up to that point, seemed so personable.

[WhosThatGirl]

I mean, the show is forcing the Penny and Callie thing; because they were forcing it for the drama aspect of Penny being the doctor when Derek died. And that worked..for a little. Should Callie stay with this woman and it's testing her friendship, but now it seems that's not so much a factor in Penny's character on the show. Which probably is part of the problem. Penny was given only a few simple character traits: She was the woman who was the doctor who treated Derek when he died, she was Callie's new girlfriend who Callie said was great and wonderful, she was coming to the  hospital and would be a new foil/reminder for Meredith. Once we got past 2 of those three character traits (for now anyway, with this show Meredith could always lose her mind on Penny because she still isn't able to deal and be professional), there is nothing about Penny. I don't think I've learned a trait about her. Except she loves Callie. And she's pretty boring. It's funny, a lot of these characters I don't really like but I can say more about them then I can for Penny. And since we seem to be spending so much time on her, I feel like some of her traits shouldn't be relying on other characters for them. 

[KaveDweller]

Child custody.  He could want to reopen the divorce to get his interests protected by law.  Sure, April is saying now that he will have rights once the child is born, but that's not pen to paper to enforce those rights, and  may not end up being what they would be if he'd known before the divorce. 

 

Jackson definitely has a right to custody, and to go to court to get those rights protected. But I don't think his rights are any different than they would have been if April had told him before signing the papers.

 

April had already admitted to Jackson that she knew when she signed the papers, so I don't know what Catherine really accomplished. I thought the idea of her being sympathetic to April, and that getting April ready to talk to Jackson was much more interesting.

[DearEvette]

I feel like Grey's is doing something really interesting vis-a-vis April/Jackson and the new pregnancy, I'm just sorry that they brought in Mamma Sledgehammer to be in the middle of it.  There's lots of really interesting issues being shown here.  I am both curious at how they will present them all, while at the same time terribly frightened at how they could blow this.  It's sort of like how I was worried when the bomb guy (hi! Kyle Chandler) was carrying out the bomb way back when...this could  work out or be a big mess.

 

Regardless, I applaud the effort thus far.

 

I also think the issues set up for them have been very interesting, far beyond Grey's standard soapy fare.  There are are really good moral, ethical, legal and emotional stuff all roiling round in their story. 

 

I am gonna go the unpopular route and say that Catherine's inclusion is also a very good thing for the story.  It is myopic to think that she wouldn't be involved.  She loves her son, but she is also a  sharp businesswoman who has for years been protecting her family's financial and professional interests.  People like that don't sit back and just let things happen.  And frankly, imo,  left to their own devices April and Jackson by themselves do not make the story sing. I find their fighting tedious tbh.  But with Catherine in the mix the story can go a lot of different ways.  Jackson, rather naively, doesn't think about the Harper-Avery stuff, he is too busy just trying to be a regular guy.  But unless there are a bunch of siblings or cousins running around, this kid is the next big heir.  So it makes sense Catherine would be invested in the child. 

Edited April 3, 2016 by DearEvette

[RedheadZombie]

I thought the same as many of you about Catherine - this is her attempt to get Jackson and April to reconcile. If she tried in a more motherly, nurturing and positive way, they both would think she had something up her sleeve.

Who knows, but I doubt that's what's going on. It saddens me. Catherine is a lot to take, but like Annalise Keating, she was a unique strong Black female. Not a stereotype, not the magical negro trope. A woman who has thrived in a man's world, but maintains her femininity and sexuality. She also was kind (in her own way) to April. I got so tired of everyone treating April like a bizarre freak of nature. She was the punchline of every joke. Look at the weirdo Christian, they'd sneer, while pointing and giggling at the freakish virgin. It got old. Catherine always gentled her personality around April and her scenes at Samuel's impending death were tender hearted. I think this betrayal will hit April harder than anything else to this point. I think it's what will make Jackson and April join forces and get on the same page. Maybe that's the point of this SL.

And while many constantly call April judgmental, I don't recall her slut-shaming any of the other doctors. Most of society falls between abstinence before marriage, and sexual partners in the three figures, yet I only recall Derek - you know the one committing adultery - attempting to slut shame. And most people fall between devout religion and hardcore atheism. And there are many, many more Midwestern farm people than sophisticated and jaded Seattle-ites.

I never thought I'd say this in a million years, but I liked the Maggie/Amelia/Meredith/Alex stuff. I was never crazy about it before it felt forced. But this felt natural. And Alex feels like their bro. I enjoyed them sitting around, waiting for pizza feeling comfortable enough with each other to speak unvarnished truth. Maggie wasn't neurotic (even though I kinda like her neurotic personality). She just sounded like a woman who was disappointed. Amelia wasn't annoying and seemed content in her choice.

I really really liked it. It seemed like they finally meshed, as actors and characters, and everything felt genuine. The three were just so kind and understanding to Mer that it makes me a little teary eyed. It wasn't up to early seasons of MAGIC, but it was the closest to it that I've felt in years. I usually watch while I'm on my phone, but I was sitting up straight and intent on this episode. No phone involved.

I guess the Nanny question is answered - there isn't one. Meredith goes crazy screaming with her kids in the house (and bedrooms on the same floor) followed by Maggie screaming and slapping a strange guy and she doesn't even check on them. Maggie took the two oldest to school. Amelia brings them home and Meredith never budged from in front of the fire with Alex. Its great that she's so concerned about her kids.

Guess so. Hopefully Amelia remembered her and fed her. Alex ordered pizza so at least the kids will eat. Meredith did learn where the cleaning supplies were so there's that.

I'm torn on the children issue. It's an extremely rare child actor who can add anything positive to TV shows. You either get little oddballs like Lily from MF, or just distractingly poor acting. But how hard is it to simply have the characters mention their children and where they are? When both Callie and Arizona were out getting their groove on, how about one of them mentioning Sofia's at a sleepover?

And while I would have been horrified for Mer's children to have popped up in the midst of her screaming meltdown, could either Amelia or Maggie have said - I'm going to make sure the kids didn't hear that, and go to check on them (off camera)? It's not that hard. Are the writers parents? I'm not, but I seem to remember the kids more than the writers. And I'm not really interested in seeing them, excepting the precious original Zola. But frequent mentions by their mother would be nice. And just write in a damn nanny! Hire a great character actor that can become Mer's mother figure, or keep the nanny off screen and mention her frequently. Or maybe Meredith could have peeked in on her kids after her 24 hour shift, and before her car date.

And while I'm on that subject, I just don't care for the push to have Meredith date. She was never really the dating type. I think she tried it with Finn because she was practicing abstinence. It has always been more Meredith's style to pick up a man and have a ONS, or hookup in her brief moments of down time. This isn't judgment, and I appreciate the show's sex-positive stance. But I would prefer Meredith in that mode, or even growing attracted to a man she's hanging out with. It's just odd to see her primping for a first date.

And she could have an offscreen housekeeper, too. While it's realistic that a single mother of three surgeon doesn't know where her cleaning products are, it's less than realistic that the neurosurgeon and cardio-thoracic surgeons know where everything is. And I'm assuming someone packed and unpacked for Meredith, since she didn't realize Derek's blanket was in the linen closet. But in a house over-filled with humans and children, who prioritizes the ugly old scratchy blanket, and gives it precious closet space?

ETA: Just realizing that I implied that children aren't human, but I'm leaving it because it amuses me.

Edited April 3, 2016 by RedheadZombie

[aprilbabe]

Jackson definitely has a right to custody, and to go to court to get those rights protected. But I don't think his rights are any different than they would have been if April had told him before signing the papers.

 

April had already admitted to Jackson that she knew when she signed the papers, so I don't know what Catherine really accomplished. I thought the idea of her being sympathetic to April, and that getting April ready to talk to Jackson was much more interesting.

Yes once he goes to court and establishes his rights they would be the same, however  the only way the father automatically has  equal legal rights as the mother is if  they are married. If April had told him  before signing the divorce papers it would have been noted that the child was conceived during their marriage and therefore his legal rights would have been established.(as well as a custody agreement) Now he has to wait until the child is born get a paternity test to prove he is the biological father and go to court and file for legal rights, in the mean time April could move to the other side of the world if she wanted to and there is nothing he could do about it.

 

Im hoping Catherine isn't trying to take custody from April, because April has done nothing that warrants that, and nothing April has shown has made me think she would take the baby from Jackson. Im assuming Catherine wants to prove fraud to invalidate the divorce papers so that they could be redone to include that child, legal rights and custody, because in Catherine's mind waiting until the baby gets here to do that is too risky. However I feel if the papers get pulled back they won't be re-filed.

[windsprints]

I'm torn on the children issue. It's an extremely rare child actor who can add anything positive to TV shows. You either get little oddballs like Lily from MF, or just distractingly poor acting. But how hard is it to simply have the characters mention their children and where they are? When both Callie and Arizona were out getting their groove on, how about one of them mentioning Sofia's at a sleepover?

 

I agree, I don't care that we don't see the kids. A few lines of dialog sprinkled throughout a season would take care of the issue. As it stands know I roll my eyes when Meredith says something like "I have 3 kids, I know you're making a face". Really? She doesn't appear to acknowledge her 3 kids when people are sledgehammering the wall, Maggie is slapping and screaming at a guy in the hallway or the baby is in the house while she's doing her once every 10 years cleaning. I know we see tiny portions of a character's life and a lot is assumed off screen but my impression of Meredith as a mother is that she is cold & puts herself above her kids all the time because I keep seeing her do that and its not balanced with anything else.  They seem to want to have Meredith behave childless most of the time they drop the mom card for comic relief or to show she's busy/tired, etc. 

 

It definitely extends to Callie and Arizona too but I think it bothers me less because we see them separately often (so I can assume Sofia is with the other) and they barely bring up that they are mothers.

 

LOL I don't expect realism from Greys at all and I'm not even sure why this grates on me so much. I think its because its something so easily addressed - just add a couple of lines of dialog.

 

Speaking of unrealistic - how many surgeries were canceled at SGM when the head of general, the head of neuro, the head of cardio and the head of peds all took off at the last minute for Meredith problem?

[Joana]

 

Speaking of unrealistic - how many surgeries were canceled at SGM when the head of general, the head of neuro, the head of cardio and the head of peds all took off at the last minute for Meredith problem?

 

Not to mention De Luca's surgery that also got cancelled! Must have been a slow day at the hospital. 

[admiralrodcocker]

I'm really loving this season. Even Owen and Amelia (my two most hated characters) don't bug me much anymore. Talk about character rehabilitation. 

 

I liked Maggie and DeLuca as a couple, but I wasn't overly attached them either, so I'm all right with them breaking up, whether it be for a short while or permanently. I actually like Maggie's interaction with Riggs.

 

Speaking of Riggs, he's an example of a good character introduction. What I mean is, he's around, but not being shoved down my throat, so as a newbie, I don't mind him. I also don't necessarily mind Penny, but at the same time agree with the majority that she and Callie have zero chemistry and that she's overall very dull. She should have stayed in season 11 with Derek's death episode (although that dinner episode was one of the best, if not the best episode this season).

 

I did not see the Catherine angle coming at all. I was moved by her scene with April, and then blindsided, and let down by her plot to destroy her afterwards. It's obvious that Jackson will side with April against his mother and that this will bring them closer together, which I approve of because I want to see them happy with a healthy baby. I'm still mad that they killed off Samuel.

Edited April 3, 2016 by admiralrodcocker

[Deanie87]

I agree, I don't care that we don't see the kids. A few lines of dialog sprinkled throughout a season would take care of the issue. As it stands know I roll my eyes when Meredith says something like "I have 3 kids, I know you're making a face". Really? She doesn't appear to acknowledge her 3 kids when people are sledgehammering the wall, Maggie is slapping and screaming at a guy in the hallway or the baby is in the house while she's doing her once every 10 years cleaning. I know we see tiny portions of a character's life and a lot is assumed off screen but my impression of Meredith as a mother is that she is cold & puts herself above her kids all the time because I keep seeing her do that and its not balanced with anything else.  They seem to want to have Meredith behave childless most of the time they drop the mom card for comic relief or to show she's busy/tired, etc. 

 

It definitely extends to Callie and Arizona too but I think it bothers me less because we see them separately often (so I can assume Sofia is with the other) and they barely bring up that they are mothers.

 

LOL I don't expect realism from Greys at all and I'm not even sure why this grates on me so much. I think its because its something so easily addressed - just add a couple of lines of dialog.

 

Speaking of unrealistic - how many surgeries were canceled at SGM when the head of general, the head of neuro, the head of cardio and the head of peds all took off at the last minute for Meredith problem?

 

I agree that I don't want to see any of the kids either, but they choose the weirdest things to mention.  The writers don't go out of their way to explain where the kids are in the morning carpool, for example, because we can hand wave it, its just a show.  But then they DO go out of their way to show how many other different characters are taking care of the kids, rather than Meredith or they make the kids a plot point but then we are expected to handwave it when they don't feel like dealing with it.  Just in this episode, alone, it seemed that Amelia was doing all of the childcare, they go out of their way to mention it.  Why not have Meredith mention that she just put the kids to bed or something?  What they do take the time to explain or show, is almost never Meredith being a responsible mother, IMO.  I don't care that she slept with Will, she can sleep with a different guy every night for all I care, but she can go to a hotel if she is worried about the kids seeing him or if she wants him to leave first thing in the morning, or go to his place.  Of course, DeLuca is there as well and I guess now maybe Owen will be there soon so I guess that just isn't a problem. 

 

I think that in making the show more Meredith-centric, they are trying to show how much support she has, but to me it often comes off as other people doing things that she just isn't interested in doing, or other people catering to her every whim, and she just comes off as selfish and entitled.  I get that she has suffered, but each of her new tragedies/problems/freak outs has diminishing returns for me and, you know, other people exist.

[statsgirl]

The whole Jackson/April/Catherine/baby situation is a complete WTF? to me.

 

• Jackson and Catherine have so much more money than April ,it's not even in the same county.  Suing April for fraud wouldn't make any difference except to be nasty to April.  Since she is the mother of the child, that would only make things worse.
• In terms of being the heir to the Avery dynasty, that's only going to become important in later years. And it's not going to help Catherine grooming the child if the kid knows his/her mother hates Catherine's guts
• Jackson is the one who wanted the divorce, not April.  Proving that she signed the papers fraudulently and the divorce doesn't stand would be hurting him, not her.
• Jackson is the child's father whether they were divorced or not.  I don't know about WA's custody laws but it would make no difference where I live if they're divorced or not.
• What is Catherine supposed to get out of this?  Raising an infant is the last thing she probably wants at this time in her line; it's certainly the last thing Richard wants.  And she runs the risk of alienating her only child.

[BabyBBQKendall]

Perhaps Catherine is concerned that April will run off again (she has form) before the father's paternal rights can be established? Catherine doesn't know April that well, last she heard she was ditching her job and her spouse indefinitely to play soldier. And before that, abandoning her fiancé at the altar. In any case I think Richard and Jackson will be able to talk Catherine down from the ledge, she can't stay a moustache-twirling villain forever if she's to stay married to the Chief.

Edited April 3, 2016 by BlindMaryIngalls

[RedheadZombie]

I will very reluctantly grant the point about Catherine possibly looking out for Jackson's rights if April chooses to move out of state with the baby. I was shocked to find out a few years ago that Georgia (and I just discovered, Illinois), have laws that require a father to claim and prove biology if his children are born out of wedlock. Doesn't matter if his name is on the birth certificate. Doesn't matter if he was in a long term relationship with their mother.

So perhaps Washington has similar laws. But perhaps Catherine should focus less on her ownership of a baby that won't show up for seven months, and more on helping reduce the stress for the woman growing this fetus.

[mhaines]

I figured Catherine had an angle, but dang! I didn't see fraud as the angle. But I'm still not clear as to what it would mean for April. Could she be prosecuted? That just came out of nowhere.

Yes, and possibly lose custody.  The problem is, if you sign divorce papers and state that you have no children together, the paperwork includes a statement, "And XX is not currently pregnant."  So she committed fraud when she signed the paperwork without disclosing she knew she was pregnant.

[gator12]

Since April wasn't the one that file for divorce, she and her lawyer weren't the one that file those papers work and those papers were file before the signed them and before she new she was pregnant. 

[gator12]

April just couldn't wins, if she said she was pregnant on the last day when the divorce became final than she was stuck in a marriage her spouse didn't want to be in and be accuse of trapping him... if it was a home pregnancy it could have been a false possible and miscarriage is very likely early in pregnancy

 

Since she didn't say anything, now she's a liar, committed fraud (she didn't, she ain't gaining anything financially or otherwise other than being stuck for 18 years with a rich ex and ex-family who could make her life hell ) for not letting the world know what was going on with her body. 

[mhaines]

Since April wasn't the one that file for divorce, she and her lawyer weren't the one that file those papers work and those papers were file before the signed them and before she new she was pregnant. 

It doesn't matter, that language is still included in divorce proceedings when there are no children involved (and I'm pretty sure its also on my divorce paperwork from that lists all of our children in the custody arrangements, also, but I'd have to double check.)  My first divorce when I was 21 was childless, which is why I know this. (Brief marriage to a guy who thought it appropriate to end arguments by throwing me into a wall kind of thing.)

 

April just couldn't wins, if she said she was pregnant on the last day when the divorce became final than she was stuck in a marriage her spouse didn't want to be in and be accuse of trapping him... if it was a home pregnancy it could have been a false possible and miscarriage is very likely early in pregnancy

 

Since she didn't say anything, now she's a liar, committed fraud (she didn't, she ain't gaining anything financially or otherwise other than being stuck for 18 years with a rich ex and ex-family who could make her life hell ) for not letting the world know what was going on with her body. 

No, it doesn't have anything to do with her "trapping him into the marriage".  Legally, if she's pregnant while they are still married, then the divorce agreement has to include things like custody arrangements, child support agreements, and so forth, and he has the legal right to have those proceedings.  

"It was a home pregnancy test so it could have been false, or she could have a miscarriage" really isn't an excuse here.  She intentionally concealed information from him that he had a legal right to know.

Look, I get where they were going with this: even the thought of pregnancy is traumatic for both of them; she's partially in denial, and probably suffering from a lot of grief and PTSD from the previous child.  I GET that, probably better than most.  My second child died when five months  old, and my sixth child was a miscarriage. Believe me I -get- how hard it is to keep a marriage together in the face of losing a child, or in our case, two of them.  Obviously, as mine DIDN'T stay together...  losing a second baby was just the last straw for us.  Regardless of the emotional implications, though, legally she did the wrong thing.  

I'll be honest, too, having been through what I've been through makes me a lot less sympathetic to April in a lot of this. Yes, as the mother, watching your children die is horrible. Its no LESS horrible for fathers, and in some ways its HARDER on fathers because everyone turns first to the mother to give HER support, leaving him on the sidelines.  Yes, its hard to get out of your own head and actually be supportive when you're deep into grief.  But she's constantly acted like how he felt just didn't matter.  I think they've -both- been very rigid, but I also have more sympathy for his position, because he was bleeding just as much, but tried to support her, whereas she just didn't give a crap how he felt, because she made it all about her.

I do think given the fact that she walked in the room and said, "I need to talk to you" then he should have taken it as truth when she said, "I was just coming to talk to you." 

I'm also really not a fan of Catherine in this.  She exploited every vulnerability in a heartless, ruthless way.  If she was actually sincere in what she did, it might have gone a lot way to actually healing a lot of the pain between the two of them, and helping them be understanding parents together, even if they didn't end up married together.  But she used that sympathy as a weapon, instead.  I was grossed out.

[betsyboo]

Look, I get where they were going with this: even the thought of pregnancy is traumatic for both of them; she's partially in denial, and probably suffering from a lot of grief and PTSD from the previous child.  I GET that, probably better than most.  My second child died when five months  old, and my sixth child was a miscarriage. Believe me I -get- how hard it is to keep a marriage together in the face of losing a child, or in our case, two of them.  Obviously, as mine DIDN'T stay together...  losing a second baby was just the last straw for us.  Regardless of the emotional implications, though, legally she did the wrong thing.  

I'll be honest, too, having been through what I've been through makes me a lot less sympathetic to April in a lot of this. Yes, as the mother, watching your children die is horrible. Its no LESS horrible for fathers, and in some ways its HARDER on fathers because everyone turns first to the mother to give HER support, leaving him on the sidelines.  Yes, its hard to get out of your own head and actually be supportive when you're deep into grief.  But she's constantly acted like how he felt just didn't matter.  I think they've -both- been very rigid, but I also have more sympathy for his position, because he was bleeding just as much, but tried to support her, whereas she just didn't give a crap how he felt, because she made it all about her.

sending hugs @mhaines. I run a SIDS organization with my family and can only slightly imagine the parental heartbreak, even tho I talk to those parents every day.

 

Agreed on April on all counts. At no time did she consider that he was also grieving. I have hated her since she left him for the Army the first time. That loss is meant to be shared (carried/borne) together. Some parents come out the other side intact; some don't. But if you can't even support each other when it initially happens, there's likely no way you will be able to share a life once the fog has lifted. (IMO)

[schnauzergirl]

This is nit-picky, but it's bothered me every time I see it.  Four surgeons car pooling?  Are we supposed to believe their schedules are so coordinated (and work out all the time) that they drive home together, too?  As I say, minor -- and yes, they're being environmentally responsible -- but still ...

 

About the kids: I see Ellis Grey in how Meredith is shown as a mother.  She has turned into what was most painful and what she resented about the place she held in her mother's set of priorities.  

[gator12]

I'm sorry but going to work and asking her to tried for another baby weeks after losing Samuel than just leaving when she yells is not him supporting her. All this talk about him being so supportive, just b/c one is there doesn't mean they are being supportive.

He was fine, he was able to function and cope. He didn't communicate how he felt and since he was capable to function and work days later he was fine. 

And no it is not the same, losing a child during pregnancy, she not only went through grief but hormonal chance too. Not going to Jordan would have done nothing for them, they would have ended up divorce anyway or she might have just kill herself since she was in deep depression.  

When one grief, especially for a child, one get to make it all about themselves, hence why I'm guessing 90% of couples divorce or break-up after the lost of a child. One get to be selfish. 

[mhaines]

I'm sorry but going to work and asking her to tried for another baby weeks after losing Samuel than just leaving when she yells is not him supporting her. All this talk about him being so supportive, just b/c one is there doesn't mean they are being supportive.

He was fine, he was able to function and cope. He didn't communicate how he felt and since he was capable to function and work days later he was fine. 

And no it is not the same, losing a child during pregnancy, she not only went through grief but hormonal chance too. Not going to Jordan would have done nothing for them, they would have ended up divorce anyway or she might have just kill herself since she was in deep depression.  

When one grief, especially for a child, one get to make it all about themselves, hence why I'm guessing 90% of couples divorce or break-up after the lost of a child. One get to be selfish. 

 

Re: new pregnancy... He was groping. He was flailing around for anything to try and bring them back together and help her and him heal. This obviously shows he WASN'T fine. He was nearly begging her to include him, and she told him to f off. And its actually NOT an uncommon reaction for someone who loses a young baby to talk about another one not long after. My ex-husband and I did...  we had a discussion with our doctor about it at the lunch after his funeral.  She told me that parents go both ways on this, and she supports either decision. In the end our third child was born more like two years after the second, and that actually worked out well.

Re: its hard on mothers because of hormones...  This is very disrespectful to fathers.  Just because my ex didn't give birth to my son or nurse him, doesn't mean that he doesn't still wake up at night with tears in his eyes because he misses his son. He was less personally affected by the miscarriage, but that had other complicating factors as to why.  

 

Our son a few years ago asked him, "Do you wish X had never died?" 

My ex thought about it for a few minutes, and gave him this answer, "I loved your brother very much, and I miss him every day, and I wish he hadn't died. But if I could go back and change it, I wouldn't, because it would mean I wouldn't have you and your baby sisters either. I can't think about choosing between you because I love you all."

Maybe I'm just too personally connected to this topic, but I still have more sympathy for Jackson that April in this situation.

[Biggie B]

He was fine, he was able to function and cope. He didn't communicate how he felt and since he was capable to function and work days later he was fine.

 

I would disagree. Just because he was able to get up every day and go to work does not mean he was fine. Not communicating doesn't necessarily mean a person is OK - it could mean the exact opposite. No, it's not the same for either of them. Of course April suffered the physical trauma on top of the mental anguish. But that doesn't negate or minimize anything that Jackson was going through either. It's not a matter of who is more devastated - it's the fact that both of them were affected, each in his and her own way. I think they way they showed Jackson in the immediate aftermath was pretty realistic - he was floundering to find something - anything - to say to April that might help. Yes, suggesting they try for another baby sounds simply brutal coming just days after Samuel's death  - but I think you can surmise that he said that out of desperation...looking for simply any words at all...and did not say it to minimize Samuel's existence and death, or to whitewash April's grief and shock. We've all heard that a million times - someone loses a baby and well-meaning friends, co-workers, and relatives will say, "Well, you can always try again!" I don't buy for a minute that Jackson was fine.

Edited April 4, 2016 by Biggie B

[taanja]

Wait! What??? Meredith has kids?????

 

^^^ That is what I say to myself whenever the kids are shown or mentioned.

[timimouse]

It doesn't matter, that language is still included in divorce proceedings when there are no children involved (and I'm pretty sure its also on my divorce paperwork from that lists all of our children in the custody arrangements, also, but I'd have to double check.)  My first divorce when I was 21 was childless, which is why I know this. (Brief marriage to a guy who thought it appropriate to end arguments by throwing me into a wall kind of thing.)

 

No, it doesn't have anything to do with her "trapping him into the marriage".  Legally, if she's pregnant while they are still married, then the divorce agreement has to include things like custody arrangements, child support agreements, and so forth, and he has the legal right to have those proceedings.  

"It was a home pregnancy test so it could have been false, or she could have a miscarriage" really isn't an excuse here.  She intentionally concealed information from him that he had a legal right to know.

Look, I get where they were going with this: even the thought of pregnancy is traumatic for both of them; she's partially in denial, and probably suffering from a lot of grief and PTSD from the previous child.  I GET that, probably better than most.  My second child died when five months  old, and my sixth child was a miscarriage. Believe me I -get- how hard it is to keep a marriage together in the face of losing a child, or in our case, two of them.  Obviously, as mine DIDN'T stay together...  losing a second baby was just the last straw for us.  Regardless of the emotional implications, though, legally she did the wrong thing.  

I'll be honest, too, having been through what I've been through makes me a lot less sympathetic to April in a lot of this. Yes, as the mother, watching your children die is horrible. Its no LESS horrible for fathers, and in some ways its HARDER on fathers because everyone turns first to the mother to give HER support, leaving him on the sidelines.  Yes, its hard to get out of your own head and actually be supportive when you're deep into grief.  But she's constantly acted like how he felt just didn't matter.  I think they've -both- been very rigid, but I also have more sympathy for his position, because he was bleeding just as much, but tried to support her, whereas she just didn't give a crap how he felt, because she made it all about her.

I do think given the fact that she walked in the room and said, "I need to talk to you" then he should have taken it as truth when she said, "I was just coming to talk to you." 

I'm also really not a fan of Catherine in this.  She exploited every vulnerability in a heartless, ruthless way.  If she was actually sincere in what she did, it might have gone a lot way to actually healing a lot of the pain between the two of them, and helping them be understanding parents together, even if they didn't end up married together.  But she used that sympathy as a weapon, instead.  I was grossed out.

 I am so sorry for your losses and the fact that you can talk about it so openly here is truly amazing. I have dealt with a similar situation but still don't have the strength to talk about it. Just goes to show how people grieve in different ways.

I too agree that Jackson coped differently, but it didn't mean he wasn't hurting too.

[windsprints]

timimouse & MHAINES - I'm sorry for your losses. I can't even begin to imagine how difficult it must have been/is watching Japril's storylines last season and this season. 

Edited April 4, 2016 by windsprints

[Artymouse]

All of the discussion about divorce laws made me think about the stuff i had to sign when I was divorced 12 years ago. I live in the South, so I realize the laws are different here, but there were no questions about whether I was or could be pregnant. I did have to swear under oath that the ex and I had not been together sexually during the separation -- which in my state would have negated the legal separation and required us to start the separation from scratch. We did have to testify that our son was the only child covered in the custody agreement. So if I had been pregnant, that would have meant that we had been together during the separation. But if I'd lied about it, that would have been perjury, not fraud.

So I'm guessing the stuff Japril signed had to be signed off on by a judge, although no divorcing couple on this show has ever, to my recollection, gone to court for a divorce. If my only divorce knowledge came from this show, I'd probably assume that lawyers are the ones who pronounce a couple officially divorced.

And MHaines and timimouse, my condolences as well. I'm so sorry that you both had to go through a tragedy like that.

[Deanie87]

Just also wanted to add my condolences to all of you who have been sharing your stories (PrincessTT also from earlier in this thread as well).  It really does add to the discussion and I"m glad that Greys can still touch people, for better or for worse.

[DrKarevFan]

I wonder if things would have been different if Jackson had been the one to go to Jordan, and April had stayed behind. Would they have been having the same problems?

[DearEvette]

 

The whole Jackson/April/Catherine/baby situation is a complete WTF? to me.

 

• Jackson and Catherine have so much more money than April ,it's not even in the same county.  Suing April for fraud wouldn't make any difference except to be nasty to April.  Since she is the mother of the child, that would only make things worse.
• In terms of being the heir to the Avery dynasty, that's only going to become important in later years. And it's not going to help Catherine grooming the child if the kid knows his/her mother hates Catherine's guts

 

Not really.  For one thing we don;t know what the terms of the post-nup were.  How are children provisioned?  What is April entitled to?  Obviously Catherine would have made sure the post-nup was not going to hurt them, but bitterness + money + resentment + hurt feelings can make a lot of people do things they wouldn't normally do.  Look at the earlier episode that starred Rita Morena.  She didn't care about her husband's money when they got married but when he fell in love with someone else she refused a divorce to get the 30 million dollars she was entitled to if she was still married to him when he died.

 

Also, the ability to mold the mind and ideals of of a person while they are young is a major deal, especially when you are talking  the type of influence such as a foundation like Harper-Avery is supposed to have.  I mean they had enough money to buy a hospital and not feel the pinch.

 

For instance, how are they going to decide on the religious guidance of the child? Who gets to decide there?   Let's pretend April's faith was the sort that didn't believe in rights for gay people.  In a case like that,  then this child, influenced by said religion at an early age, could theoretically use the might of that power to throw money behind things that are opposed to LGBT interests.  It is just an example, but those are the sorts of things that come into play when you are talking about who gets to control and influence a small child who will later come into a lot of money.  Gloria Vanderbilt is a famous case of a child heiress whose various family members fought control over her.

[statsgirl]

Rita Moreno's character was angry and bitter because she thought she had been treated badly  She still loved her husband but she was angry at how he had treated her and she wanted revenge.  That is exactly the scenario Catherine is setting up for April, feeling cheated and wanting revenge.

 

.I don't think the Vanderbuilt scenario would apply unless both Catherine and Jackson were dead and even at that she could tie up the money and stipulate a trustee like Richard or a lawyer to administer it.  There was a fight over Gloria because her mother wanted the money to live the glamorous lifestyle and her aunt resented that. I don't see April doing that, as well as the modesty she's a surgeon and makes enough money for herself and the kid without needing any of Jackson's.

 

Why can't they both have input into the religious guidance of the child?  Christian when with April and whatever Jackson is when with Jackson.

 

I know the Jesuits said "give me a child until he is seven and he is mine forever" but everyone I know votes like their parents when young and then many people change their minds as they get older and more independent-thinking. Even if a child is taught to be anti LGBT when young, they can change their minds when they grow older and can handle more complex ideas.

 

Unless Catherine pulls something very dirty (like bribing the judge), April is going to have at least joint custody.  That means the child, if she/he is healthy, is going to spend a lot of time with April    Catherine's best option for influencing the child is to have a good relationship with April, not to antagonize the mother of the child.  Getting April angry and wanting revenge means everyone loses.

 

Not going to Jordan would have done nothing for them, they would have ended up divorce anyway or she might have just kill herself since she was in deep depression.  

When one grief, especially for a child, one get to make it all about themselves, hence why I'm guessing 90% of couples divorce or break-up after the lost of a child. One get to be selfish. 

 

50% according to the studies.  I don't think it's about being selfish though.

 

The death showed up the problems in Jackson and April's marriage and they couldn't communicate enough with each other to get past it and help each other through.

Edited April 5, 2016 by statsgirl

[gator12]

April never said he wasn't grieving, she said he was coping, which base on his action he was. And signing up to serve in the military is not the same as running away.

And speaking of running away, April should have left Seattle after signing the divorce paper and have that child turn up 34 years later like Maggie did with Richard

[Madding crowd]

Not all religious people are against gay people, that is a generalization. April has never said or indicated she feels negative toward gay people. That is a non issue here. I do want to say I feel for the people who have brought up their personal stories here. I lost three babies myself (all at later stages of pregnancy but before term). I agree that father's grieve as well but I don't agree that hormonal issues don't play a part. Men do not have the flood of hormones that accompany birth. This doesn't mean they are not feeling, but it means the woman can feel more emotional. 

 

Speaking personally, my husband seemed to feel and cope in a much better way than myself. I did attribute some of that to hormones which scientifically are proven to create intensive feelings. 

 

I can only assume this storyline was created to somehow get April and Jackson back together. I really don't see what could possibly be done before the baby is born. I still believe April would have to be proven to have some intent behind committing fraud in order to be convicted of anything or having her baby taken away. I know some of you know the laws in WA better than I do, but I have never seen a case anywhere where a man initiates divorce, then sues his pregnant ex-wife because she defrauded him out of something. What did she defraud him out of ? She didn't get any money, she didn't want the divorce, and the baby is months away from being born.

 

i also see no indication that April is planning to flee with the child. Considering Jackson suggested abortion, I don't see why he would really care if she did. April's stint in the medical corp is not something she would be able to do with a newborn baby. I am having trouble understanding the animosity towards April and the desire to have her somehow legally punished. For what exactly/ For signing divorce papers that she begged Jackson not to file? For desiring to wait until the likely threat of miscarriage passes before informing her ex-husband? What if she told him and the pregnancy test turned up as a false positive? Then Jackson would be told to sue her for fraud as well. 

[upperco]

The melodramatic direction further burdened an already schizophrenic script, in which a lot went on but so little of it made sense. A weaker entry from Season 12. 

[Biggie B]

So I'm guessing the stuff Japril signed had to be signed off on by a judge, although no divorcing couple on this show has ever, to my recollection, gone to court for a divorce. If my only divorce knowledge came from this show, I'd probably assume that lawyers are the ones who pronounce a couple officially divorced.

 

That's correct. A judge will issue the final order. No one need be present, the judge will do it as part of his/her regular paperwork in chambers, and then it will be entered on the record and become final and binding. So just because Jackson and April signed the documents in a conference room in one of the attorney's offices does not mean they are officially divorced just yet. Of course, emotionally, it's pretty much a done deal, but logistically, it's not quite over. I'm speaking very generally as well - of course each state has its own rules pertaining to procedure, but for the most part, in many, many situations, you do not need to appear in a courtroom. And right, no attorney can deem a couple divorced - they're just the conduit to making it happen.

Edited April 5, 2016 by Biggie B

[gator12]

Well in Shondaland, they are officially divorce, you knows, they might change it in later episode and follow the 90 days rule

[kingshearte]

I wonder if things would have been different if Jackson had been the one to go to Jordan, and April had stayed behind. Would they have been having the same problems?

Well for one thing, I doubt there would be any debate at all over whether the leaving was a fair thing to do. A father abandoning his grieving wife who's just lost her baby? It's pretty hard to defend that when you flip the genders, which is why I find it awfully hard to defend either way.

 

That said, they would definitely be having the same problems, because the military stints were not really the problem; they were merely a symptom. Their problems are that they don't communicate well, have very little in common, and are both pretty adamant about their own stances and not particularly willing to compromise. Those things would not change if the Jordan situation had been reversed, if they had both gone, or if it had never happened at all.