Who should Kirsty be with ?

[haaxhaa]

Miles.

Kane never did her any good. And he expected a lot out of her.

When Kirsty is with Miles she seems to be happier and Miles adores her where as Kane likes to control her.

The only connection she has with Kane is that they share a child together other then that they have nothing.

Although I will admitt that since Kirsty has been with Miles she has become more serious and does act a lot older. But even though in most peoples eyes Miles is a boring 'oaf' I think that they are one of the only normal couples in the bay, who will one day settle down get married and have a family. No added drama, although now and again Kane does come back into their lives to stir it up. But Kirsty has become more maternal.

If a fun loving guy near Kirsty's age was to come into the Bay then I would reconsider and say screw Miles. But for now I'm sticking to KM.

[DinerLandlord]

Miles.

Kane never did her any good. And he expected a lot out of her.

When Kirsty is with Miles she seems to be happier and Miles adores her where as Kane likes to control her.

The only connection she has with Kane is that they share a child together other then that they have nothing.

Although I will admitt that since Kirsty has been with Miles she has become more serious and does act a lot older. But even though in most peoples eyes Miles is a boring 'oaf' I think that they are one of the only normal couples in the bay, who will one day settle down get married and have a family. No added drama, although now and again Kane does come back into their lives to stir it up. But Kirsty has become more maternal.

If a fun loving guy near Kirsty's age was to come into the Bay then I would reconsider and say screw Miles. But for now I'm sticking to KM.

The problem is Miles wants that to happen now! He clearly isn't the right man for her. I think it's better to be alone than to be with the wrong person.

[Red Ranger 1]

Miles.

Kane never did her any good. And he expected a lot out of her.

When Kirsty is with Miles she seems to be happier and Miles adores her where as Kane likes to control her.

The only connection she has with Kane is that they share a child together other then that they have nothing.

Although I will admitt that since Kirsty has been with Miles she has become more serious and does act a lot older. But even though in most peoples eyes Miles is a boring 'oaf' I think that they are one of the only normal couples in the bay, who will one day settle down get married and have a family. No added drama, although now and again Kane does come back into their lives to stir it up. But Kirsty has become more maternal.

If a fun loving guy near Kirsty's age was to come into the Bay then I would reconsider and say screw Miles. But for now I'm sticking to KM.

The problem is Miles wants that to happen now! He clearly isn't the right man for her. I think it's better to be alone than to be with the wrong person.

Yes, he wants it to happen now but what's wrong with that?As far as I can see, he hasn't crossed the line into demanding it happens now.I don't think either of them is handling it well, they need to sit down and sort out what they both want rather than avoiding the issue or saying what the other person wants to hear.But I do think they're good for each other and I'm hoping they can sort it out.

[haaxhaa]

^

^

^

I totally agree with RR1, I mean OK maybe they haven't talked things out and maybe they are rushing into it. The only reason Miles wants a family and to get settled down is because he loves Kirsty and wants to share something special with her, I think it's sweet that after everything he has chosen her to be the one and only in his life and he wants her to be the mother of his future kids. I find that sort of romantic, although right now it doesn't look it.

Kane was a manipulator and I can understand when people say he should be with Kirsty because he was her first love, but that doesn't excuse the things he has done and he expected Kirsty to drop everything for him when he came back. He told her to move on with her life and when she did he emotionally blackmailed her by holding the fact they share a child together and they have a past over her head.

Miles may not be the most exciting guy, but he treats Kirsty right and theres nothing wrong with ordinary when you know you're garanteed security.

[I love music]

^

^

^

I totally agree with RR1, I mean OK maybe they haven't talked things out and maybe they are rushing into it. The only reason Miles wants a family and to get settled down is because he loves Kirsty and wants to share something special with her, I think it's sweet that after everything he has chosen her to be the one and only in his life and he wants her to be the mother of his future kids. I find that sort of romantic, although right now it doesn't look it.

Kane was a manipulator and I can understand when people say he should be with Kirsty because he was her first love, but that doesn't excuse the things he has done and he expected Kirsty to drop everything for him when he came back. He told her to move on with her life and when she did he emotionally blackmailed her by holding the fact they share a child together and they have a past over her head.

Miles may not be the most exciting guy, but he treats Kirsty right and theres nothing wrong with ordinary when you know you're garanteed security.

There's A LOT wrong with ordinary if you don't love someone. A brother, a sister, a parent, or a friend (male or female) can "treat someone right" and offer security. That's a friendship kind of love, not deep romantic love. Plus both partners in a relationship should be equal. It has to be about what Kirsty wants too and not just about what Miles wants.

Incidentally, the writers totally changed Kane's character because Sam Atwell wasn't interested in returning full time. If they had stayed true to character with him, the "emtional blackmail" would never have happened.

[haaxhaa]

There's A LOT wrong with ordinary if you don't love someone. A brother, a sister, a parent, or a friend (male or female) can "treat someone right" and offer security. That's a friendship kind of love, not deep romantic love. Plus both partners in a relationship should be equal. It has to be about what Kirsty wants too and not just about what Miles wants.

Incidentally, the writers totally changed Kane's character because Sam Atwell wasn't interested in returning full time. If they had stayed true to character with him, the "emtional blackmail" would never have happened.

Kirsty does love Miles, unless you were on about something else?

And I do totally agree that it should be about what Kirsty wants too, and if this is the case she shouldn't be lying to Miles by making him beleive she wants a baby when she doesn't.

In Miles's mind he beleives that Kirsty is happy and wants to start a family with him which she has stated, so I have no sympathy for her in the respect it should be about what she wants when she hasn't been straight with Miles.

And the fact of the matter is, the writers "didn't" stay true to Kane's character and Kane did emotionally blackmail Kirsty so even if it had never of happend, the fact is, it did.

[I love music]

There's A LOT wrong with ordinary if you don't love someone. A brother, a sister, a parent, or a friend (male or female) can "treat someone right" and offer security. That's a friendship kind of love, not deep romantic love. Plus both partners in a relationship should be equal. It has to be about what Kirsty wants too and not just about what Miles wants.

Incidentally, the writers totally changed Kane's character because Sam Atwell wasn't interested in returning full time. If they had stayed true to character with him, the "emtional blackmail" would never have happened.

Kirsty does love Miles, unless you were on about something else?

And I do totally agree that it should be about what Kirsty wants too, and if this is the case she shouldn't be lying to Miles by making him beleive she wants a baby when she doesn't.

In Miles's mind he beleives that Kirsty is happy and wants to start a family with him which she has stated, so I have no sympathy for her in the respect it should be about what she wants when she hasn't been straight with Miles.

And the fact of the matter is, the writers "didn't" stay true to Kane's character and Kane did emotionally blackmail Kirsty so even if it had never of happend, the fact is, it did.

If you love someone, you don't lie to them. If a relationship doesn't have trust, then there is no relationship.

Re your last sentence: I have to admit this is one of the reasons I no longer watch H&A. But I don't mean because of Kane/Kirsty in particular, I mean because of the lack of continuity with several of the characters.

[haaxhaa]

Yup I totally agree with you that you don't lie to someone you love because trust is the key to all relationships and without what is it based upon - and maybe Kirsty feels that she has to lie to Miles because of what has happend in the past and she really does want to make it work. Miles is besotted with Kirsty and loves her dearly so Kirsty is willing to lie to him if it makes him happy - which inevinatebly is wrong.

However it is only wrong on Kirsty's behalf.

But everything will eventually come out in the wash.

[-Kevin-]

There's A LOT wrong with ordinary if you don't love someone. A brother, a sister, a parent, or a friend (male or female) can "treat someone right" and offer security. That's a friendship kind of love, not deep romantic love. Plus both partners in a relationship should be equal. It has to be about what Kirsty wants too and not just about what Miles wants.

Incidentally, the writers totally changed Kane's character because Sam Atwell wasn't interested in returning full time. If they had stayed true to character with him, the "emtional blackmail" would never have happened.

Kirsty does love Miles, unless you were on about something else?

And I do totally agree that it should be about what Kirsty wants too, and if this is the case she shouldn't be lying to Miles by making him beleive she wants a baby when she doesn't.

In Miles's mind he beleives that Kirsty is happy and wants to start a family with him which she has stated, so I have no sympathy for her in the respect it should be about what she wants when she hasn't been straight with Miles.

And the fact of the matter is, the writers "didn't" stay true to Kane's character and Kane did emotionally blackmail Kirsty so even if it had never of happend, the fact is, it did.

If you love someone, you don't lie to them. If a relationship doesn't have trust, then there is no relationship.

Re your last sentence: I have to admit this is one of the reasons I no longer watch H&A. But I don't mean because of Kane/Kirsty in particular, I mean because of the lack of continuity with several of the characters.

But the fact is people DO lie to those they LOVE !!

Its not a fair statement to say that people don't lie to people they love because they do.

[Ashleigh <3 Lincoln]

MILES