If she were move to another country to start a new life (not out of the question), she might never find out that he is alive.

Or, as I said, the way would be paved for a possible future reunion somewhere down the line.

Note that I honestly do not think this scenario would ever occur - I just like exercising my creative muscles 

That would be ideal.  And the sooner, the better.

The baby should be gone?!
A tad harsh perhaps, particularly if it is John's.

Yes, but it will be real to John.

Ok.
So I am concerned about the effect upon John, of losing his child.

tonnaree wrote:

Yes, for the integrity of the show, the baby needs to be gone.  May sound harsh, but it's not a real baby, it's a plot device.

 
I totally agree.. For me Mary and the baby are Just One , so both have to disappear.. Cause John Will Never chose to let them behind.

A lot of us do feel that John should not "keep" Mary and the baby.  For a great many reasons.

That´s why it was a collosal mistake to ever add baby into this story.
I still wonder why Moftiss decided to do that? What advantage did it bring into the storyline?

As a person who has made the conscious decision not to have children, I (personally) have had friendships drift apart when almost everyone else around me starts having babies.

This is just my experience, but when friends start to procreate, they are (understandably) not around as much.  Their interests change to incorporate this new creature.  And often times, they become more boring to be around (party discussions that used to be about philosophy, science, politics, technology, etc instead become about diapers, day-care, and crappy kid shows).  This is as seen from my perspective - I can understand fellow parents bonding over similar circumstances.  My point is that oftentimes, life paths of friends begin to diverge when one starts having a family and the other does not.

I cannot help projecting my own life experiences onto my interpretation of "Sherlock".

Therefore, I see that the "safest" route for Mary and baby story-wise - that they simply melt into the background - is highly unlikely.  Having children changes ones desires and perspectives, which would lead to a chasm between childless friends.  As a father, John might be less willing to risk his life.  He might fall in with other people who share his experiences, now having more in common with other couples with kids than with Sherlock.

Even simply getting married caused a distance between John and Sherlock.  Granted, it was his honeymoon time, but just being in a marriage caused John to neglect his friendship with Sherlock for over a month (and it was only through coincidence that they even met up again that soon).  Having a baby would only be worse.  Even if John wanted to resume crime-fighting at some point, he would still need to spend a lot of time with his wife and child at first - then, over time, he might soften to the family life and gradually lose this desire.

If this show is really all about Sherlock and John's friendship, then I honestly do not see a "happy family life" going on in the background.  Instead, something must happen that severs him from this role.  Whether it's death, betrayal, or separation (e.g. Mary and baby going into hiding), I really feel that John is going to have to take some serious emotional hits so that the story can keep him close with Sherlock.  And Mary and baby are, unfortunately, the people who this must happen to.

I'm honestly not so attached to the idea of the show being just about the boys. If they keep Mary and the baby and create great stories, I'm happy. If they get rid of them and create great stories, I'm also happy. 

And yes, friendships change with marriages and children, but that could also bring an interesting new dynamic to the show as well. So I'm open for both outcomes. 

The Guy Ritchie films had Mary in it and I thought they were great films, so it can be done. 

And for Mary dying being canon: yes, I believe the 'tragic loss' that Watson talks about in The Empty House is about Mary dying, but Mary is never mentioned, nor is it explained what happened. Also, in a later story, Watson is married again, probably Doyle had just forgotten that he'd killed off Mary earlier. 

That's enough ambiguity and inconsistencies for Moftiss to come up with a new fan theory that the 'tragic loss' was never about Mary. And now I'm thinking about it, maybe that's why they introduced the baby. Maybe it's just the baby dying. Still horrible and tragic and it'd fix that inconsistency.