The Handmaid’s Tale creator wanted to kill off Serena Joy in the series, but didn’t. Why?

The Handmaid’s Tale isn’t the kind of series that plays it safe. It doesn’t hold the viewer’s hand or offer comfort in the middle of chaos. And it certainly doesn’t make character decisions based on what people expect. When Bruce Miller, the showrunner, shared that he originally planned to kill Serena Joy, it felt surprising. But not because of the intention. What stood out more was the fact that he didn’t follow through.

This wasn’t one of those vague creative ideas tossed around in early drafts. The plan was solid. There was even a specific way it would happen. Serena would die at the beginning of season six. Quickly, brutally, and without much ceremony. A death that, to some, might have seemed well-earned. To others, maybe overdue. But the decision was reversed. And that shift reveals a lot about how stories sometimes choose their own direction.

A decision that could have ended it

At first, the idea was clear and simple. Serena would be pushed off a moving train with her baby in her arms. It would be immediate. No dramatic speeches, no lingering last words. Just a moment that would cut her out of the narrative and bring some sense of closure. Or justice. Or maybe just quiet.

Bruce Miller described this moment as something that made sense at the time. It would’ve mirrored the harsh world of The Handmaid’s Tale, where mercy is rare and consequences are sudden. But in the end, the team behind the show didn’t go through with it. And that choice changed the shape of the season.

Layers that made things complicated

Serena Joy was never a flat character. She started as an enforcer of Gilead’s rules, even helping to write the very laws that oppressed her. But as the story unfolded, her role became harder to define. She wasn’t a pure villain, but not a victim either. At least, not in the traditional sense.

She’s the kind of character who sparks arguments. People either want to see her punished or think there’s something left in her worth saving. That tension is hard to write. It’s also hard to let go of. In The Handmaid’s Tale, that complexity became part of the reason why the idea of removing her didn’t sit well with everyone.

Reports suggest that Elisabeth Moss, who plays June, had strong feelings about keeping Serena alive. Their dynamic had become too important. Scenes between them carried weight. Emotionally, narratively. Cutting that short might have flattened the story right when it needed more depth.

The train scene that changed the tone

There’s a moment in the fifth season that shifted the atmosphere completely. Serena is on a train. Alone, scared, holding her newborn. A crowd begins to turn on her. She’s cornered. What happens next isn’t something most people saw coming. June steps in. Not with kindness, exactly, but with resolve. She helps Serena escape. A decision that doesn’t feel like forgiveness. It feels like recognition.

This scene reframed what Serena meant to the story. It wasn’t about making her likable or redeemable. It was about showing how difficult decisions become in a world like that. In The Handmaid’s Tale, the complexity of choosing to protect someone who once caused so much harm is central to its emotional weight. Keeping Serena alive gave the story more room to explore those questions.

Performance and presence

A lot of this wouldn’t have worked without Yvonne Strahovski. Her performance as Serena made it impossible to predict what the character would do next. One moment, she seemed composed, in control. The next, broken by guilt or fear or pride. That unpredictability became one of The Handmaid’s Tale’s most interesting elements.

Characters like Serena are hard to place. She’s not a hero. She’s not an outright villain. But she represents something dangerous. The kind of person who believes in a system because it once protected her, only to turn on it when it stops. She’s loyal to power, not necessarily to people.

Her survival in the story isn’t meant to comfort anyone. It’s not a reward. It’s a reminder that some stories don’t have clean endings. And that some people remain even when their time seems to be up.

A broader context

As The Handmaid’s Tale progressed, real-world events added another layer to the experience of watching it. Political shifts, changes in reproductive laws, and debates about freedom and control made the show feel more like a reflection than fiction. Within that context, Serena’s continued presence felt relevant.

It wasn’t about sympathy. It was about relevance. About showing how power can be lost and reclaimed. How people justify the roles they play. How belief can become a shield, even when it starts to crack.

Keeping Serena alive opened up more space for those conversations. Not as a statement, but as a question that never really goes away.

What to expect from the final season of The Handmaid’s Tale

The sixth season will be the last. No official release date yet, but expectations are growing. With Serena still involved, the story in The Handmaid’s Tale feels unsettled. Her relationship with June, her role in Gilead, her uncertain place in the outside world - all of it is still in motion.

There’s still room for consequences. For difficult choices. For unexpected turns. Nothing feels safe, and that’s part of what keeps people watching.

Why the story stays important

The Handmaid’s Tale never promised resolution. It shows a world built on control and silence, and then asks what happens when people start pushing back. Characters like June lead that resistance. But characters like Serena show how deep the structure goes.

She is not an easy person to watch. Her choices have caused pain. Her beliefs have allowed cruelty. But in keeping her alive, the show resists the urge to simplify. It allows discomfort to linger. And sometimes, that’s what makes a story last.