The queen has custody!!

[Slazengerbag]

Bored shitless tonight and I was snooping around twitter and I came across the awful megxit tweets. The conspiracy theories are WOW 🤣

Anyway on one comment it said that the queen has custody of all royal children. I obviously thought it was bullshit but google has confirmed it. The Queen has full legal custody of any children born in to the royal family!

Am I the only person who didn’t know this?

Only mute swans I think .. dunno what a mute swan is ( I know what a mute is , but how does one know the swan is a mute 🤔)

I have no real clue but it did dawn on me mid Old MacDonald had a farm that I have no clue what noise a Swan makes. Then came a lightbulb moment maybe thats why they are called mute?

A mute swan is the white one with orange beak.

The reason the Queen owns them all is that they used to be a staple of the royal banquet table as they apparently taste really good.

I posted years ago wondering what would happen if Kate decided she no longer wanted the royal life for George (it was only him back then).

It got zero responses.

This is interesting.

So, Kate can't decide to give her kids a normal life and buy a back-to-back in Nottingham, send the kids to the local comp, get a job in the BHS cafe...

Lyralala

Your clearly more up on swans than I am! If they're are swans which aren't mute and actually make noise - what noise do they make - just for my next rendition of Old MacDonald

Mostly sounds like sneezing--no kidding.

www.allaboutbirds.org/guide/Mute_Swan/overview#

Kate buying a back to back

I guess that's the reason Diana never disappeared with Will and Harry. If Lizzy has the right to say No

Ed Not really, I only know that because my DS is obsessive and for a while it was all things royal!

However, having looked there apparently mute swans are less vocal than other swans, hence the name.

Nanna I think that was one of the things that came up when it was rumoured that William and Kate didn't have a pre-nup. Usually they do and it's always the case that the children primarily belong to the royal family.

@NannaNoodleman - if Kate and William both wanted that life for them and the kids then william could relinquish his title and do what he wants and Harry would become heir and Archie after him.

Nancy cheers for that link it's brilliant.

Although it's American it would make you think only mute swans are found in Europe.

The Cornell Lab of Ornithology is the best! Yes, v American, but their public interface is great and free sound collection is amazing.

@manechanged William can't decline for George now. He could have before he was married (like the Duke of Windsor), but not now. Only George (then the other two) can give up their own position once it's theirs.

I often think that the royal family must be the worst in laws to have... absolutely do not envy Kate or Meghan.

Diana's fear of losing her DC was cited as the reason for various of the wackier things she did.

But custody doesn't even exist in English law anymore?

Surely the parents have automatic parental responsibility like anyone else? They can't turn around and say "It was Liz! she fed them solely on coco-pops for a week - not us!"

I imagine it stems from times when royals tended to marry foreign royals.

When the Duke of Kent died Princess Marina was left with three very young children. Had they been closer to the throne then the royals wouldn't want her upping and moving them off to Greece or Denmark when they may be needed on the throne.

Queen Victoria is a better example. They wouldn't have wanted her being taken off abroad by her mother when her father died.

You can only abdicate for yourself and any future DC (born to you after you exited the succession). That's what Ed VIII was doing - he had no DC when he abdicated no was making it clear that if he did have any, they would not be in line for the throne (which had already passed to next one along)

Those already in the line of succession are not affected, and just keep their place in line

The reigning monarch has custody of all children born to her direct heirs.

Prince Charles will have the same power when he becomes King.

And yes, OP, it looks as though you're the only person who didn't know this.

Who was the Duke of Kent?

Yes, I knew about this - possibly one of the worst aspects is that it's such an obvious tool for controlling the mothers

Don't like it any more? Fine, go ... but don't expect to keep your kids

King Archie. Can you imagine! 😂😂

@EdTheBear The Duke of Kent was the Queen's uncle. Father of the current Duke of Kent, Princess Alexandra and Prince Michael of Kent.

Does the monarch have custody of all grandchildren too?

Is it the rules haven't caught up with the fact people inc the Queen are living longer?

The things that you learn on MN

lyralalala they weren't concerned about foreign royals - the issue was that a prince or princess who might inherit the throne would fall under the sway of Catholics.

Thanks Lyralala!

"Is it the rules haven't caught up with the fact people inc the Queen are living longer?"

Quite possibly - at least one the Georgian edicts on this specified monarch's children and grandchildren. Ditto the one about use of prince/ss by descendants.

I think it's right to treat those in the front of the line of successsion as if they were grandchildren of a monarch (because unless PoW predeceases his mother, then the Cambridge and Sussex will one day be just that.