I’m aware of the fact that this is a very unpopular opinion on this forum, so I hope I will not get crucified.
I don’t like the idea of explaining Leia’s memories in Return of the Jedi in a literal way, that is by making Padmé survive to the events of Revenge of the Sith. Force visions are the best way to explain Leia’s memories, especially when you consider that her descriptions in Return of the Jedi are very vague. In fact, Leia herself said that she only remembered vague images, so I don’t get why they couldn’t just be the product of Force visions. After all, in The Empire Strikes Back it was Yoda himself who said that the Force allows you to see “the future, the past, old friends long gone”, so there is no contradiction really. Also, Padmé being alive at the end of Revenge of the Sith and not appearing in A New Hope is super-jarring, especially if you watch the movies in chronological order, and having her death occur between the two trilogies without actually showing it is not a good idea in my opinion.
I won’t crucify you - but… I think it’s obvious that a “Force vision” wasn’t the original intent of the person who wrote Leia’s dialogue in Return of the Jedi. Clearly, they meant to communicate to the audience that Leia/Luke’s mother was alive when Leia was a young child. The Prequels changed this for no real narrative benefit. They didn’t even use Padme’s death for some compelling narrative purpose - like for example, having Padme’s death push Anakin over the edge and fall to the Dark Side. Instead, it was only the fear of Padme potentially dying that pushed Anakin over the edge. Padme didn’t even need to actually die, yet for some reason Lucas made her die anyway, despite the cost of violating continuity with ROTJ.
Overall, it’s not such a big deal. Attempting to explain the discrepancy with a “Force vision” is fine - and certainly not the worst attempt at damage control from fans - but it’s still just fan damage control after an obvious (and pointless) retcon.