@rosy71
Yes
I would have to see an extremely well-researched alternative being proposed to even consider otherwise. At the moment, I can't see a viable alternative.
Agreed that the process of actually dismantling a monarchy and its possessions would be complex, but surely it's not hard to envision the alternative in having an elected Head of State?
Look at Ireland. HoS has a seven-year term of office, no more than two terms; largely ceremonial role, with some powers of dissolving government and signing bills into law, but mostly representing the people of Ireland at home and abroad and being commander of the defence forces; salary pegged to the top of the civil servant scale and the use of a house, car, plane and security/admin staff while in the role.
Doesn't attract career politicians because of the lack of political power -- this is the error most British people seem to make when they say they don't want an elected 'President Blair or Trump', because they're confusing the role of PM/US presidency with the role of a ceremonial HoS. In fact, there's no need for the HoS to be a politician at all. In Ireland, all you have to be is 35, an Irish citizen and get the backing of a certain number of county councils or TDs to run, and past candidates have been academics, lawyers, charity campaigners etc.
And you get to vote for your candidate, not just accept them because they're next in line. And, if you don't like them, you get a change in seven years, or they can be removed from office if incapacitated or criminal, or considered by the High Court to have abused the office.
It's a perfectly rational system, far fairer and more democratic, and more genuinely representative of a nation's people. I suspect the reason that not everyone leaps at it is bound up with weird inherited ideas of deference and a liking for royal spectacle.