To not want a minute by minute account of Kate's pregnancy and little sympathy for her.

(512 Posts)
babbas Mon 03-Dec-12 21:15:03

She's rich, she has all the support in the world and will have no cooking, cleaning, vocational work or responsibilities. I really really really do not want to have daily updates on her condition or her pregnancy for the next nine months! It's so typical of everything she stands for that they have already announced she will have to be on rest for the foreseeable future. As opposed to doing what exactly??!

My best friend had HG and lost a stone in 8 days. She went to hospital and was told to pull her herself together as most women had morning sickness. No time off work, no help whatsoever.

sue52 Thu 06-Dec-12 15:08:21

eek, rudeness

squoosh Thu 06-Dec-12 15:30:33

Prince Andrew is the pits, I get the feeling even the Royals think so too.

Yellowtip Thu 06-Dec-12 19:49:50

Longtalljosie well you got the jist, despite my bad typing.

But it wasn't rude of Anne in the context particularly, I guess you had to be there. The officer's wife in question was the female version of Mr Collins, only worse (quite markedly worse). Anne sensibly wanted to spend time with the soldiers far more than she did with the officers. Let alone creepy crawly officers wives.

Hence my vote. The kids didn't mind, they just wanted to play, not wave silly flags.

Yellowtip Thu 06-Dec-12 20:02:11

LtEve I swore a similar oath when I joined the Brownies as a Twyleth Teg, way back. I haven't officially renounced that oath. I had to swear it whilst putting my hand on a papier mache mushroom so I guess it was intended to mean something too? But it didn't affect my behaviour or mould my views. it was just what you had to do to be eligible for the job. A tick list thing.

But as an army wife, I swore no oath. Overwhelmingly though, when it came to a visit, the officers wives were as eye wateringly obsequious as their DHs. Unreal.

I think Anne just prefers the tell it how it is approach of the soldiers (and I guess perhaps their wives?). Good on her.

soverylucky Thu 06-Dec-12 20:28:41

One of the things that was really tough with HG was people's attitudes. The comments like " oh I had morning sickness I know how you feel" or "you are over reacting". When I had HG and was pg with my first I had people tell me that being sick was normal so what was I complaining about.

To see the comments questioning the length of time that Kate was in hospital shows yet again the insinuation that HG is not to be taken seriously. If her doctors have said she has HG then she has HG. If she is well enough to go home - a home where her doctors know she can potentially be waited on and have the use of a private nurse and doctor, then she is well enough to go home.

amillionyears Thu 06-Dec-12 20:49:13

The thing is, soverylucky, that Yellowtip and maybe some others on here have lost trust in some of the royals because of the royal pr machine. If you dont believe everything the royal pr machine has said in the past, then it is difficult to get the trust back again.
I suppose what I am thinking, is that wouldnt all the royals then have to collude together in it all? And I cant quite see that.

LtXmasEve Thu 06-Dec-12 20:49:50

LtEve I swore a similar oath when I joined the Brownies as a Twyleth Teg, way back. I haven't officially renounced that oath. I had to swear it whilst putting my hand on a papier mache mushroom so I guess it was intended to mean something too? But it didn't affect my behaviour or mould my views. it was just what you had to do to be eligible for the job. A tick list thing.

Yes well, it was more than a tick list for me. Just as joining the Army was more than just a job. I am very happy with my choices, behaviour, views and actions. It has made me the person I am - and I like the person I am.

Hmm... I'm from a forces family you see. Not anywhere near elevated enough for my mother to have been greeting royalty in years gone by - but anyone who was a forces brat knows services life is about the whole family. Princess Anne should have known that too...

fedupofnamechanging Fri 07-Dec-12 09:43:26

Those kids probably spent ages practising that song - I agree that it was very rude of Anne to decline listening to it. Just another example of how certain members of the royal family feel entitled to do as they please, irrespective of anyone else.

Yellowtip Fri 07-Dec-12 10:09:08

I'm not going to defend Anne to a great extent Longtalljosie and karma and I get the point about the kids at school practising (which they did a bit) but unfortunately this wife (my neighbour) was so appallingly creepy that I assume Anne wanted to make the point that the soldiers were her main concern, not hand wringers such as this wife. There's no doubt Anne's brusque. I'm still a bit cross with myself for conceding, under huge pressure, to go to the tedious dinner a few days after giving birth, but being told in absolute terms that I couldn't bring the baby to feed (no hope of expressing in my case) because Anne wouldn't want that at all. I'd tell them to stick it now, but I didn't then. Myriad similar instances of having to toe the line or else.

I agree that services life should be about the whole family but far too often around the time I was 'in', the ancillary conditions in some places were truly appalling - housing, maternity care, schools etc. And worse for those who didn't dare speak up for themselves or who lacked the purchasing power to
ameliorate their lot. Unfortunately, frequently, husbands were reluctant to speak up and dissuades wives from speaking up because of the culture of rank, and fear for the impact on their promotion and jobs.

LtEve's roseate view of conditions certainly doesn't square with mine and I'm not clear what seismic change has occurred in society in the past 20yrs to warrant such a huge transformation. I wonder if it really is so different. Of course there was also plenty about the life which was good, but too much which was unneccessarily bad.

Yellowtip Fri 07-Dec-12 10:11:54

dissuaded. More rubbishy typing.

LtXmasEve Fri 07-Dec-12 10:28:18

LtEve's roseate view of conditions certainly doesn't square with mine Because your views are 20 years old.

I'm not clear what seismic change has occurred in society in the past 20yrs to warrant such a huge transformation Really? You cannot see the huge changes in all aspects of society in the last 20 years? In the Army alone, without taking a breath I can think of at least 8 major changes off the top of my head that had far reaching implications for soldiers and their families.

I wonder if it really is so different Yes it is, no need to wonder.

Yellowtip Fri 07-Dec-12 10:55:23

Obviously you're a little younger than me LtEve so I guess you can't properly compare, unless you've been part of the policy making machine working through these major changes in the MoD, which of you might well be: someone has to drive and see through policy changes, no reason why it shouldn't be you.

I'm interested though: what are these eight major changes? If you tell me how the army has attempted to put right the deficiencies then I can more easily judge, rather than simply being told. I'm probably up to the task. You said you could name at least eight, which were major.

I myself thought things were pretty equal and unchauvinist in the mid-late eighties and early nineties tbh. Then I discovered the army. But in my other world things had seemed to be pretty equal. So I suppose I wonder why the army was so out of touch then and so in touch now. The army must have had to change far, far, far more than society has done in the past twenty years if it's really caught up.

So, hit me, please! smile

Yellowtip Fri 07-Dec-12 10:56:44

which of course you might well be.

LtXmasEve Fri 07-Dec-12 11:18:22

I'm 40 years old, and have been in the Army for 22 years.

I enlisted in 1989, joining my first unit in 1990. Off the top of my head, since I joined, some major changes are:

1. The disbandment of the WRAC and the removal of the "non-combatent" status for females.
2. Removal of automatic discharge for pregnant females.
3. Allowing single parents (of either sex) to remain in service.
4. Allowing openly gay males and females to remain in service.
5. Introduction of Compulsory Drugs Testing.
6. Recognition of Civil Partnerships.
7. Introduction of JPA.
8. Introduction of receipt based expense allowances.
9. Introduction of MHS (bad decision) and handing over of SFA control to a civilian contractor.
10. Closure of (almost all) Military hospitals and the introduction of Military Wings to NHS hospitals

Thats just a start.

Yellowtip Fri 07-Dec-12 12:06:28

Well you're certainly well and truly into acronymns, as one might expect!

At first glance, and without being able to decipher all of the acronyms, this list looks as though it does bugger all to address families issues and the pervasive chauvinism meted out to wives. But what is JPA, MHS and SFA? Why was the introuction of MHS a bad decision? (I'm guessing this is housing).

Hobbitation Fri 07-Dec-12 12:23:59

Someone I was following on Twitter thinks she should "get on with it, as other pregnant women do". I pointed out they werebeing ignorant, as hyperemesis gravidarum is NOTHING LIKE normal pregnancy nausea. He replied that he doesn't believe she has that and the royal family are just making it up for the publicity...

You can't win with some people. They are never going to get it.

LtXmasEve Fri 07-Dec-12 12:24:34

Joint Personnel Administration - which means (very basically) that everyone, male and female, all 3 services, are treated the same. Same allowances, same 'perks', same administration.

Modern Housing Solutions. A civilian company charged with the care and repair of military accommodation allowing services spouses to be 'in charge' of their own homes rather than relying on the service person. A bad idea solely because the contract was given to the cheapest bidder (as ever) and they did not realise (or care maybe) what a huge task it was. The jobs are done, but not as speedily as they should be.

Service Families Accommodation. No longer controlled by the MOD and again allows the service spouse to contact them direct. All SFA has been or is currently being improved and updated - something that is long overdue.

You didn't ask for changes directly related to service spouses (not 'wives' - falling into your own trap there). But of the list above, numbers 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 all directly or indirectly relate to families and have improved service family life.

Yellowtip Fri 07-Dec-12 12:35:09

LtEve I tend not to fall into traps. Wives is a perfectly good shorthand.

Nope, none of those things are really going to have a huge impact on wives and children. Indeed you make it sound as if the housing repair situation has got worse, not better. And houses still haven't been updated? Wow. How about easing life for school tranfer? Anything sensible done there?

It's the chauvinistic culture really that I'm interested in, of which these practical aspects are only a part.

LtXmasEve Fri 07-Dec-12 12:49:24

Nope, my Service Spouse - MALE, would be seriously unimpressed to be called a Wife.

You are not, nor have you ever been a serving soldier. You were an Army Spouse 20 years ago. You cannot say that none of those changes had an impact on wives spouses and children - because they did. For example, back in the 90s there was no such thing as a Civil Partner. A same sex partner had no standing with regards to pay, pension, death in service, service accn and so on. They did not exist, therefore no allowance had to be made for them. They could not be employed, could not live within the community, so could not live overseas in most cases, could not be treated medically, could not be included as Next of Kin or Emergency Contact - They wouldn't even be told if their partner had died. Now they can - it's a huge and great change.

As for chauvinistic culture - well when I first joined women were treated differently and pretty badly. Once we received equal status and equal opportunities things improved, and an still improving daily. At my last post I was one of only 3 female soldiers in a Regiment of 420. I was never treated as anything other than a soldier, a friend and a comrade (well until I puked on the Regimental Carpet - which was a black, black day in Germany grin)

hf128219 Fri 07-Dec-12 12:51:54

Yellowtip. Your comments!

"Overwhelmingly though, when it came to a visit, the officers wives were as eye wateringly obsequious as their DHs. Unreal."

I am a serving Officer's wife, including a stint as the CO's wife. I have a career, live in our own home and have a life!

LtXmasEve Fri 07-Dec-12 12:52:49

Wow. How about easing life for school tranfer?

Arms Plot Moves now take place in August and Regiments are given up to a years notice of them.

Soldier moves take place in August wherever possible, but if not possible Early Mover Status is given to families to allow them to move before or after their soldier to assist with school applications.

Yellowtip Fri 07-Dec-12 13:05:34

LtEve as a serving soldier yourself you're looking at life from a different perspective. You do give the impression that you perceive yourself to be somehow superior to 'mere' wives. The chances are you probably aren't - just different.

hf that's good to hear. Hopefully that's much more common these days. A huge amount still must depend on a spouse's type of career and whether one can buy one's own home and is prepared to live apart. I'm aware of a few wives who were doctors, nurses and teachers but the range of options wasn't huge. Germany going makes a difference too of course. I'm afraid in my then cloistered world the set of wives I was with were eye wateringly obsequious, along with the DHs. Sorry, sad but true. Perhaps they were atypical: the particular branch and regiment might well have lent itself to that smile Apologies if your lot are all rather more cool.

LtXmasEve Fri 07-Dec-12 13:13:06

As I said before Yellowtip, I have also been a soldier's wife - my husband was serving when we met and married. So no, I certainly don't see myself as superior, in fact I see myself as someone in the best position to see both sides. Whilst on Maternity Leave I was a 'mere' wife as you put it, and was able to see the difficulties that they have to overcome. I am glad to report that improvements have been made that benefit everyone. My husband is currently a SAHD (by choice), so a Service Spouse and can see quite clearly how much better things are than when he was married to his first wife (20 years ago).

BartletForTeamGB Fri 07-Dec-12 13:40:48

"Quite interesting that the fact that she's already at home after only a couple of days is being ignored. The obgyns won't be taking any chances either. What a joke. Lets hope this doesn't diminish the difficulties faced by those with serious hg."

Don't think it is strange at all that she has been discharged after a few days. I have had HG in two of my three pregnancies and the thinking now is generally to come in as a day case for fluids and to do that repeatedly if needed. I felt so, so, so much better within a few hours of IV fluids that I would have been happy to go home.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now