Shona Manderson has come forward with claims against the producers of Married At First Sight (MAFS), alleging they told her she could continue her relationship with Brad Skelly after leaving the show, despite serious accusations of sexual misconduct against him.
During an appearance on Good Morning Britain, Manderson shared that while the show’s relationship experts questioned the couple’s compatibility, the production team encouraged them to remain together. They suggested that the issues might be a product of the show’s unique environment.
Manderson detailed how welfare staff initially expressed concerns over an off-camera incident involving Skelly, which she described as involving ‘alarming behavior.’
She further alleged that the situation intensified, leading welfare personnel to voice serious concerns for her safety, with the belief that both she and Skelly would be removed from the show.
Contrary to these concerns, Manderson claimed that producers later advised the couple they could continue participating, with Skelly being instructed to ‘be on his best behavior.’
This decision left Manderson feeling bewildered, stating, “One minute you’re going, the next you’re staying.”
Ms Manderson argued that the response did not reflect the seriousness of what she says she experienced and claimed it had the effect of minimising her concerns.
She further alleged that the couple were ultimately removed from the show around an hour after she decided to speak more openly about her experiences during a filming segment called ‘the box’.
Shona Manderson claimed that while relationship experts were expressing doubts about the viability of the pairing, production staff were encouraging the couple to stay together
Mr Skelly said he understood his on-screen wife (pictured together) consented and said in a statement he categorically denied ‘any allegations of sexual misconduct’ or that he was ‘controlling’
Ms Manderson said the conflicting messages left her questioning the reasons behind the producers’ decision-making and whether her concerns had been taken seriously.
This comes after she alleged that Bradley Skelly engaged in a non-consensual sex act while they filmed the Channel 4 show, a claim he denies.
Ms Manderson told the BBC Panorama programme that she and Skelly had agreed to use the withdrawal method of contraception, but she alleges that on one occasion, he ejaculated inside her without her consent.
She said she was ‘shocked’ and ‘confused’ because they had previously agreed not to do that.
Ms Manderson, who appeared on the show in 2023, later found out she was pregnant and had an abortion, although she admits she is not sure if she fell pregnant from the alleged incident.
She said she later obtained the morning-after pill and was accompanied by a welfare producer.
Lawyers for production company CPL said Ms Manderson later told the company she did not have an issue with what had happened.
CPL’s lawyers also said Skelly told producers he had been wearing a condom. However, lawyers acting for Skelly later told Panorama that he had not been wearing one.
Skelly has denied any sexual misconduct and said he believed Ms Manderson had consented to him ejaculating inside her.
When questioned about her experience on Good Morning Britain today, Ms Manderson said: ‘So what I do want to share, and I haven’t said this before, there was this incident, which happened off camera, so there was all this like warning, alarming behavior, which they were saying we’re really concerned about and it got to this point where there was this super explosive incident on his part, and they, welfare said, ‘Right, this has got too far.
Manderson, who has waived her anonymity, alleged that Bradley Skelly engaged in a non-consensual sex act while they filmed the Channel 4 show, a claim he denies
Ms Manderson said the conflicting messages left her questioning the reasons behind the producers’ decision-making and whether her concerns had been taken seriously
‘We’re really concerned about you. We think that they will be sending you home, they being production higher up.’
‘And then we were separated, they came into our room, our apartment was allowed to be back together, and they said, ”Right, you can stay in the experiment, but Bradley, you have to be on your best behaviour.’
‘And I feel like with everything that had happened, we were being told one minute was, we’re going, next minute we’re staying, and to say you have to be on your best behavior didn’t seem like an adequate response to what I had experienced, and I feel like it minimised what I had experienced, and then we had to do this box, and all of a sudden, then we were being sent home.
‘So, for me, I decided in this box, the box is where you speak to the camera, I decided at that point I was going to be more open and honest about what I was experiencing, and then all of a sudden, I think it was like an hour later, suddenly we’re being sent home, so I was questioning, ‘are we actually being sent home for his behavior, or is it something else?’
‘And then the experts were saying, ‘right, this relationship will not work on the outside, we advise you go your separate ways,’ and then to be told by production, oh, go be together on the outside, it could be the environment for me in that position.
‘I felt extremely confused by all this mixed messaging, and I think the advice should have been consistent. I don’t think I should have been told that.’
Ms Manderson said that, at first, it [the marriage] had felt incredible. She said that he had told her he loved her while they were in the Maldives, and it had felt as though she were in a movie. She described it as an ultimate high.
However, she said that about a week later, things had changed. She explained that the criticism had seemed to come out of nowhere, as though a switch had been flipped, and that he had become very harsh and critical towards her.
She said that this was how it had started and that, from that point on, the situation had continued to deteriorate and become darker.
Ms Manderson said: ‘As you said, it was when I said, so positive, like at first it felt incredible. Told me he loved me in the Maldives, it started to rain, it just felt like I was in a movie.
‘So this ultimate high, and then it was a week later, it was just started with listing, listing kind of came out of nowhere, it was like a switch, just really harsh criticism towards me, and that’s how it started. And then from there it just progressed, it just got darker.
She further stated that stronger intervention would have been appropriate. She said that while she was there, many people appeared concerned about her, noting that she was losing her spark and walking on eggshells.
Ms Manderson explained that people generally seemed worried about her, but that, to her knowledge, there had been no interventions regarding his behaviour towards her.
According to Ms Manderson, warnings had been issued about his behaviour and decisions in other contexts, but not about the way he treated her.
The lack of intervention, she said, left her feeling isolated and questioning whether what she believed she was seeing and experiencing was actually happening.
At the time, Ms Manderson added, she did not feel able to advocate for herself.
The long-running series, in which singles are paired together by a panel of experts, has now been removed from Channel 4’s streaming service. Pictured, left to right: Show experts Paul C Brunson, Mel Schilling and Charlene Douglas
Ms Manderson said: ‘People generally seemed really concerned about me, but from my knowledge, there were no interventions about his behaviour towards me. So, why, why was I like that?
‘I felt like there were warnings for his behaviour, his choices for other things, but not for his behaviour towards me.
‘And in that environment, it made me feel really alone, like, am I actually seeing and experiencing what I feel like I am? And I wasn’t in a position to advocate for myself at the time.’
According to Panorama, Channel 4 and CPL removed the couple from the show shortly after the incident amid concerns that the relationship could be unhealthy.
Production company lawyers said appropriate safeguarding measures were taken to protect Ms Manderson’s wellbeing.
About a week after leaving the programme, Ms Manderson discovered she was pregnant.
She and Skelly remained together for around six weeks after leaving the show before separating.
She told Panorama: ‘I don’t think that because you’re going on reality TV, you deserve in any way for things like this to happen to you.’
Channel 4 has removed all episodes of Married At First Sight UK from its streaming and linear services while allegations are reviewed.
The broadcaster has commissioned an external review of welfare procedures on the programme.
Channel 4 said Ms Manderson had been clear at the time that all sexual contact was consensual.
The broadcaster said contributors had repeatedly assured producers that they felt safe, happy and wanted to continue participating.
A spokesperson for Channel 4 said: ‘In April we commissioned an external review into contributor welfare on MAFS UK, which is underway and has two elements. The first part is examining the welfare protocols in place on the programme at the time claims were raised, as well as the handling by Channel 4 and CPL of those claims.
‘The second part, led by former BBC One Controller Lorraine Heggessey, will examine if any changes should be made to current protocols for MAFS UK to further strengthen contributor welfare. The review now needs to run its course.’
Bradley Skelly’s lawyers told Good Morning Britain: ‘I categorically deny any allegations of sexual misconduct against my former partner on the show and any similar wrongdoing. Any suggestions that I was violent, controlling or that I threatened her are false. I would never behave in such a way.
‘The relationship had its ups and downs like many others but was based on mutual consent, care and affection. We did love and support one another during our time together, but sadly, it came to an end shortly after the show. I wish her nothing but the best for the future.’
The Daily Mail has contacted CPL Productions and Brad Skelly for comment.
