It’s a question that has been brewing in fan circles for some time now? is Susan really the Doctor’s Granddaughter?

While on the face of it, it would seem there is nothing o contradict this established piece of continuity, some fans have questioned the veracity of the claim, particularly in light of the ongoing New Adventures from Virgin publishing. We take a look at a few of the comments:

“As was pointed out in Genesis of the Daleks the analysis of the Doctor by Davros’s scientists showed that he was only human “on the outside” that inside he was totally alien. How could Susan, if she was a TimeLord, have a real relationship withh a human?” - Deryk Barker

“Susan could simply have been a companion of unkown origin, referring to the Doctor as her “grandfather” for the benefit of those at the school who would need to know who her legal guardian was. I could imagine this becoming a term of endearment between the two, which could explain why she continued to refer to him as “grandfather” in “The Five Doctors”. - Sharon Ann Hamon

“Alas, the “How can we know Susan REALLY was the Doctor’s granddaughter?” thing has resurfaced.

A) Susan and the Doctor are characters in a fictional T.V. show. As such, the one true ‘canonical facts’ about these characters is found in said T.V. show, and in any novelisations regarded as canonical. QUESTION: Is there a board at the BBC that decides what is canonical? If DWM comics are, then the
Monk has made another appearance since Dalek Master Plan.

b) Throughout all of the character Susan’s ‘history’, she has been refered to as the Doctor’s granddaughter; the Doctor has been refered to as Susan’s grandfather. Yes, it is POSSIBLE that this is just a term of affectation, but there are no FACTS to base this on. It is similar to people who say “Why couldn’t Sherlock Holmes be a woman?” Because he was written as a man, folks. If Sir Doyle were alive and wrote another Holmes story where it was revealed he was a man, THEN Sherlock Holmes could be considered as a man. Not otherwise.

c) The fact that the Doctor is completely alien (although he IS a humanoid) and, presumably, so is Susan, does not mean she and David could not have a relationship. Could not have CHILDREN, yes. Sorry to shatter anyone’s illusion, but children DO NOT equal a relationship, love, trust, honesty, and a billion other factors do. Any two beings of any two species can have a relationship (No, I’m not an advocate of beastiality, although I never have met an animal I could REALLY relate to, anyway). On this planet, cats and dogs generally have a pet-to-owner relationship with their respective humans. Susan has lips to kiss, hands to hold, a voice to communicate with, presumably sexual organs, though it is not 100% necessary for a relationship that this be true. All the aspects of a relationship are available to ANY Gallifreyan and ANY non-Gallifreyan who fall in love. Yes, there will be some hardships, but aren’t there some in every love affair?” - Nathan Elke

“What is the problem with accepting Susan as the Doctor’s granddaughter? The Doctor is over 700 years old, lets say 725. Take away the 25 years on TV leaves 700 years for the original (Hartnel) to have been married and have children. In 700 years you don’t think he had time to do this? I don’t buy the idea that Time Lords can’t reproduce, or that all Galifrayians (sp?) are not Time Lords. Is there any reference that the Doctor actually graduated from the ‘Academy’? I know that there are references that he BORROWED ‘his’ ‘Tardis’. What did Sherlock Holmes say? - Eliminate the Impossible and no matter how unlikely you are left with the probable.” - Pete Mullaney

“Except that “Time’s Crucible”, one of the official New Adventures, specifically says that no child has been born on Gallifrey since Rassilhon came to power. All the children since then have been genetic recombinations woven on a sort of loom. You may not count the New Adventures as canon — but this one was written by one of the people in on the “hidden directions” the McCoy era was going.

There’s other supporting evidence that the Time Lords don’t reproduce. I mean, if I were spending years and years sharing my ship with a succession of gorgeous women without molesting them, _I’D_ have to have no sex drive! :-)

And not all Gallifreyans are Time Lords, according to “Invasion of Time”. Nesbin says as much — the Outsiders are not Time Lords.” - Jon Blum

“Actually, as near as I could figure from hunting down all the relevant passages in _Time’s Crucible,_ two things are said. First is the fact that the Pythia somehow caused all the women on Gallifrey to be incapable of giving birth. Second is the statement by the Doctor that there have been no real families on Gallifrey since Rassilon’s day. This leaves the interesting loophole of the occasional, isolated natural birth. Nobody really knows how to handle such situations, and the traditional family arrangement is not likely to be used to deal with the problem of caring for an infant in a society where infants are almost unheard of.” - Tim Soholt