Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Princess of Wales

343 replies

Ormside · 17/01/2024 16:07

The abdominal surgery must have been pretty huge to expect a fortnight stay in hospital. I had a total gastrectomy and total vagotomy and only stayed ten days.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
notthatthis · 19/01/2024 19:16

quisensoucie · 19/01/2024 08:47

You need to do some serious research into anatomy if you thing the King's operation is on hiss 'ball'. Prostrate totally different

The prostate is a ball. It's not a testicle but it's a ball.
What did you think it was? A square?

notthatthis · 19/01/2024 19:13

avocadotoaststoppedmebuyingahouse · 19/01/2024 17:48

Nurses and teachers have to apply for their job. I would be fine if you had to apply to be a royal family member.

I've always said this

notthatthis · 19/01/2024 19:12

KimberleyClark · 19/01/2024 06:31

At 42 Kate is not young, she’s approaching middle age!

For a patient, she's young

avocadotoaststoppedmebuyingahouse · 19/01/2024 17:48

Nurses and teachers have to apply for their job. I would be fine if you had to apply to be a royal family member.

IcedPurple · 19/01/2024 17:41

Don't be silly. Most of those you mention actually WORK for the benefit of all of us. Great value for money for our taxes IMV. What do the Wales' do that benefits you or any of us?

You've moved the goalposts there. First you said that Kate is 'public property' because she's 'paid for by our taxes'. Now you're saying that because, in your view, she is not 'good value', then we basically 'own' her.

As Princess of Wales and future Queen, Kate has a constitutional role. You may not agree with that, but it is the case. You still don't own her.

couiza · 19/01/2024 17:36

IcedPurple · 19/01/2024 17:02

She is public property. Paid for by our taxes

Most people are net recipients of 'our taxes'. Are they 'public property' too?

Are teachers, nurses, police officers and other civil servants 'paid for by our taxes' also 'public property'?

Don't be silly. Most of those you mention actually WORK for the benefit of all of us. Great value for money for our taxes IMV. What do the Wales' do that benefits you or any of us?

Recipients of benefits are more than entitled to them. If they qualify, they qualify and with the cost of living in this country they bloody well need it. But benefit bashing is a sport on MN, much more so than a critique of the Royal Family. And don't give me the spiel about them "working", I doubt they'd know a day's work, childcare, the cost of living, commuting, NHS, GP wait times either. They don't need to you see.

I doubt any of the aforementioned recipients of taxpayer money can afford private health care, or two or three houses complete with staff and all the rest of it either.

Mylovelygreendress · 19/01/2024 17:21

Allfur · 19/01/2024 17:19

Wow, pp are so protective over a complete stranger who'll most likely never read this thread.

I sincerely hope she doesn’t read this thread . So many snide comments.,

Allfur · 19/01/2024 17:19

Wow, pp are so protective over a complete stranger who'll most likely never read this thread.

Mymilkshakebringsallthepapstomycar · 19/01/2024 17:13

IcedPurple · 19/01/2024 17:02

She is public property. Paid for by our taxes

Most people are net recipients of 'our taxes'. Are they 'public property' too?

Are teachers, nurses, police officers and other civil servants 'paid for by our taxes' also 'public property'?

Yes, quite. Furthermore:

In FYE 2022, 53.8% of all UK individuals were net recipients (living in households receiving more in benefits than they paid in taxes).

Previous financial year: Civitas analysis of Office of National Statistics (ONS) data from 2020/21 showed a record 54.2% of individuals – or 36 million people – now live in households which received more in benefits – including non-cash ones such as NHS and education services – than they contributed in taxes (source: The Independent, 23/1/23).

Those people who are net payers should be able to treat the beneficiaries as public property going by that logic.

IcedPurple · 19/01/2024 17:02

She is public property. Paid for by our taxes

Most people are net recipients of 'our taxes'. Are they 'public property' too?

Are teachers, nurses, police officers and other civil servants 'paid for by our taxes' also 'public property'?

couiza · 19/01/2024 16:54

She is public property. Paid for by our taxes and a few million here and there from Duchy lands. While I do accept her right to medical and personal privacy, as we all would, I am not sycophantic.

Speculate away I say, the way the information was given ensured speculation would happen anyway.

peakygold · 19/01/2024 16:52

After suffering with hyperemesis for two pregnancies like Catherine, I had developed gallstones so had my gallbladder removed. Complete bastard of an operation. If it's that (or anything else similar, to be fair) she has my sympathy.

Ferraria · 19/01/2024 16:42

It's her body. She's entitled to keep her medical conditions private, just as anyone else is. Give the woman some space.

GladAllOver · 19/01/2024 16:29

For fucks such leave the woman alone. It's not anyone's business why she's in hospital apart from her family and her doctors.

ChardonnaysBeastlyCat · 19/01/2024 15:47

couiza · 19/01/2024 15:33

The Palace could be "economical with the truth" for sure! Especially if her treatment is for a delicate reason.

When they didn't state the reason for her surgery, they left it open for all and sundry (myself unapologetically included) to speculate left, right and centre.

I cannot see why the reason (a general one) could not be given. As if having (e.g.) a hysterectomy (call it gynae), bowel work (call it digestive) etc. was something to be ashamed of. TBH if they had given a reason it might have been great publicity on the POW's part to encourage others to look out for certain symptoms. The King announced his prostate op for just such reasons.

Which of course makes me suspect other - shall we say "embarrassing" reasons or reasons that have a stigma around them.

Well, of course they are "economical" with the truth.

She doesn't have to share her medical history with the nation.

couiza · 19/01/2024 15:33

avocadotoaststoppedmebuyingahouse · 19/01/2024 15:14

The Palace said she had surgery. Are they lying? It is possible I guess.

The Palace could be "economical with the truth" for sure! Especially if her treatment is for a delicate reason.

When they didn't state the reason for her surgery, they left it open for all and sundry (myself unapologetically included) to speculate left, right and centre.

I cannot see why the reason (a general one) could not be given. As if having (e.g.) a hysterectomy (call it gynae), bowel work (call it digestive) etc. was something to be ashamed of. TBH if they had given a reason it might have been great publicity on the POW's part to encourage others to look out for certain symptoms. The King announced his prostate op for just such reasons.

Which of course makes me suspect other - shall we say "embarrassing" reasons or reasons that have a stigma around them.

lieselotte · 19/01/2024 15:19

A friend of mine was in hospital for 17 days last year with Crohn's. Not everything is straight-forward and allows a hospital to kick you out.

I think it's a pelvic floor repair - she's had three kids after all. And it would fit with the long recovery time, you can't do much for three months. Yes, you can be out of hospital quickly but they're hardly going to kick the future Queen out of hospital like they do the plebs, are they?

avocadotoaststoppedmebuyingahouse · 19/01/2024 15:14

The Palace said she had surgery. Are they lying? It is possible I guess.

couiza · 19/01/2024 15:09

avocadotoaststoppedmebuyingahouse · 19/01/2024 14:41

It is not a psychiatric hospital so she has not been admitted for a psychiatric disorder. The only exception it could be is if the surgery was necessary because of self harm. But it is clear she has had surgery.

What was it like being in theatre with her? How clear can you be about this unless you were there.

guineverehadgreeneyes · 19/01/2024 14:46

Porridgeislife · 19/01/2024 14:04

Same. They divided all the stuck together bits and shaved off some of my bowel. Just one night for me despite a 5 hour op. This was at a top London private hospital. They don’t want you there any longer than necessary!

A bowel resection is a longer stay though, my sister had that & was in for about a week. It takes some time for the bowels to work again.

In 2011, my husband had 8 inches of colon resected to remove a cancerous tumour, in an NHS hospital. He spent two nights in hospital and was discharged on the morning of the third day. (He was on a rapid discharge programme.) He could eat and drink OK; he could just about get upstairs to bed, but we had to cobble together a rope pully to get him in and out of bed, as sitting up was painful and difficult for him. He could barely walk for the first few days. I provided all his care in the coming days apart from one visit from a district nurse to check his dressing.

I had complex hip replacement done in a UK private hospital in late 2022 (self-funded). I was booked for at least two nights stay (though my surgeon does sometimes do hip replacements as day cases under spinal block, which I had in preference to GA, within the NHS and when working privately). I could have done with at least one additional night in hospital as I was so tired. But I was deemed fit enough to be discharged on the morning of day 3, post-op, as I could sit on a perching stool to wash without help, could manage the toilet without help, could walk with crutches, was able to do a few stairs, my incision wasn't leaking and my pain under control. I paid a little under £15K for a surgical package which included a number of post-op physio sessions and a couple of follow up clinical and consultant appointments.

Had I wanted to spend additional nights in hospital, I would have been charged extra for the room, meals and nursing care over an above the £15K package as I was deemed well enough to return home. So unless you can afford to pay extra (or your medical insurance pays for extra days), you don't always get longer to recover in a private hospital than you would in the NHS. One of the non nursing qualified health care staff told me they were being paid minimum wage rates.

avocadotoaststoppedmebuyingahouse · 19/01/2024 14:41

It is not a psychiatric hospital so she has not been admitted for a psychiatric disorder. The only exception it could be is if the surgery was necessary because of self harm. But it is clear she has had surgery.

Vettrianofan · 19/01/2024 14:34

BitchBrigade · 18/01/2024 13:43

She has clearly had a tummy tuck after her third and final child. Left long enough to not seem as sus. I can't believe no one seems to have figured that out.

10 days post surgery is a moot point. Of course a member of the royal family with have the best treatment and 10 days off after major surgery. She isn't a pled like the rest of us women whos pain docs refuse to treat for decades before taking us seriously, nevermind free plastic surgery and a 10 day luxury stay

Haha, wondered how far into the thread I would get before someone suggested this 🤣 DH thinks that as well.

guineverehadgreeneyes · 19/01/2024 14:08

notthatthis: "Apparently, it's mental heath related..."

Really? According to which verifiable source? Some random on SM or Twitter/X?

What's your source for this statement?

Porridgeislife · 19/01/2024 14:04

TheLogicalSong · 19/01/2024 08:45

I had exactly that - my ovaries were fused to my bowel - done privately, and I was still only in for two nights.

Same. They divided all the stuck together bits and shaved off some of my bowel. Just one night for me despite a 5 hour op. This was at a top London private hospital. They don’t want you there any longer than necessary!

A bowel resection is a longer stay though, my sister had that & was in for about a week. It takes some time for the bowels to work again.

Mrsjayy · 19/01/2024 13:54

avocadotoaststoppedmebuyingahouse · 19/01/2024 13:30

I have no idea why Kate often has plasters on her hands.
But my friends are largely sporty and rarely have plasters. They get sporting injuries like torn ligaments, sprained ankles, etc, but not cuts requiring plasters.

maybe the dog is scratching her.