Help protect children from gaming harms.

Take our survey

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think Meghan Markle has every right to worry about her security?

532 replies

Hardware252525252525 · 20/08/2026 22:07

I’m not a monarchist and haven’t really taken much notice of the whole saga, but obviously do know the main points.

However, the comments across Mumsnet and multiple newspapers and websites are absolutely insane and unhinged. People who don’t know them insisting she’s leaving Harry and the kids, is controlling him, that they’re skint and tge
kids will have to go to state school if Charles doesn’t pay, people saying they hope a random stranger sees her and gives her ‘some home truths’.

It is absolutely crackers and I worry about the sanity of the people who seem to really believe they know them.

OP posts:
AnitaCam · 21/08/2026 11:44

The use of the word hate nowadays is so incredibly toxic and lazy. What happened to airing doubts, discussing ambivalence, deciding against, etc… it’s all over emotionalised under a hyperbolic label of ‘ hate’. Truly absurd.

OrangeAxolotyl · 21/08/2026 11:46

AnitaCam · 21/08/2026 11:44

The use of the word hate nowadays is so incredibly toxic and lazy. What happened to airing doubts, discussing ambivalence, deciding against, etc… it’s all over emotionalised under a hyperbolic label of ‘ hate’. Truly absurd.

Yes, I agree, it's certainly over used. Then it loses it's potency.

2026letsgo · 21/08/2026 11:46

TaraRhu · 21/08/2026 11:03

I feel really worried for her returning to the UK. She must love Harry to put herself back here. The press we're horrendous to her and there are nut cases who want to harm them. I hope people can get behind her a bit.

She’s got a job over here apparently.

OrangeAxolotyl · 21/08/2026 11:47

EasternStandard · 21/08/2026 11:37

I didn’t really get the conclusion from Burnham’s statement re a private matter.

The media seemed to interpret it as he’ll cover it himself but it surely means the tax payer will fund it we just won’t know by how much. Unless there’s a way with FOI but maybe security is out of that remit.

Yes, it is, for obvious reasons.

metellaestinatrio · 21/08/2026 11:47

simpsonthecat · 21/08/2026 11:33

No. Totally understandable.

But now you have been corrected, do you accept that @rocklivia was not referring to “some made up DM shit” but instead to pictures Meghan freely chose to post on her own social media account of her children? The picture of Lili, for example, was shared by Meghan with the world on social media as she (M) was travelling to Geneva to make a speech about the harm social media can do to children…

Missey85 · 21/08/2026 11:47

Backtoschooloncemore · 21/08/2026 11:35

In terms of privacy, H&M have put in a huge amount of effort courting publicity. They have gone to great lengths to get people interested in their lives - through documentaries, interviews, books, tours, etc, In doing so Harry has been worse than the tabloids he claims to hate in selling private details of his family.

Lol he hates the tabloids because they don't pay 😂 but that's it his happy to spill all if they give him a cheque first

EasternStandard · 21/08/2026 11:47

OrangeAxolotyl · 21/08/2026 11:47

Yes, it is, for obvious reasons.

So we are paying and the press got it wrong?

OrangeAxolotyl · 21/08/2026 11:49

Activelife · 21/08/2026 11:16

Ive never understood the hatred for them.
I mean their just people 🤷 like the rest of us.
Live die end of.
I read some threads on here with nothing but hate and think my god some need a rain check, in 20 30 50 years none of it will matter.

I even stopped watch some news channels because all I was hearing was hate hate hate for the couple.

What news channels do that? I only watch the BBC and C4 news, read online the Independent, Guardian and the Times, so I don't see it.

metellaestinatrio · 21/08/2026 11:50

AnitaCam · 21/08/2026 11:44

The use of the word hate nowadays is so incredibly toxic and lazy. What happened to airing doubts, discussing ambivalence, deciding against, etc… it’s all over emotionalised under a hyperbolic label of ‘ hate’. Truly absurd.

Agreed. None of the examples referred to on this thread count as “hate” for me, but we have had countless posters referring to it - one said all they see on certain news channels is “hate hate hate” for this couple. That simply isn’t true. Meghan and Harry, and their supporters, perceive any commentary that is not 100% positive as “hate”.

OrangeAxolotyl · 21/08/2026 11:52

metellaestinatrio · 21/08/2026 11:50

Agreed. None of the examples referred to on this thread count as “hate” for me, but we have had countless posters referring to it - one said all they see on certain news channels is “hate hate hate” for this couple. That simply isn’t true. Meghan and Harry, and their supporters, perceive any commentary that is not 100% positive as “hate”.

I would imagine that any news channel in the UK spewing "hate, hate, hate" would soon be in breach of the law, if not broadcasting standards.

TheHatTrick · 21/08/2026 11:53

mathanxiety · 21/08/2026 01:11

You're not at all unreasonable.

The level of seething hatred I've seen here toward her over the years has been very troubling.

I hope they bring seasoned security with them. Presumably the security situation has been assessed and plans are in place for every eventuality. I sincerely hope that is the case, because there are unhinged people out there (and here).

You want them to bring Americans who cut their teeth as club bouncers. Men who are accustomed to carrying weapons (and openly, at that). The California boys who could not even manage to navigate an NYC block. That’s who you’d choose to handle their security in a vastly different terrain, OK.

Are you actually wanting to see them safe?

Isitevensummer · 21/08/2026 11:57

It is silly season, and newspapers know that stuff about harry and meghan pushes engagement. But you are 100% spot on about the way people talk about them. And not just them - Lucy Letby, Amanda Knox - the British press loves to stir up a witch hunt, and lots of people are too stupid to understand that. Questioning choice is one thing but the vitriol we see is something else. As poor Jason Arday and his family have tragically just discovered.

SmashThePatriarchy · 21/08/2026 11:58

It’s no wonder they left in the first place when you read the absolute vitriol about them.

OrangeAxolotyl · 21/08/2026 11:59

SmashThePatriarchy · 21/08/2026 11:58

It’s no wonder they left in the first place when you read the absolute vitriol about them.

No, they didn't leave because of online comments. I would guess online in the US isn't much different.
They left for economic opportunities in the USA and a different kind of lifestyle.

simpsonthecat · 21/08/2026 12:01

No, they didn't. That's your interpretation of a situation.

SmashThePatriarchy · 21/08/2026 12:01

OrangeAxolotyl · 21/08/2026 11:59

No, they didn't leave because of online comments. I would guess online in the US isn't much different.
They left for economic opportunities in the USA and a different kind of lifestyle.

Harry has spoke openly about how Megan is treated by the media in this country. It was definitely a contributing factor.

LoafofSellotape · 21/08/2026 12:04

MiceSpiders · 20/08/2026 22:18

I just don't understand how the UK was too dangerous for her and the children 2 weeks ago, causing her to change travel plans last minute and cancel public engagements, but now they are moving here and enrolled in schools. Has the threat disappeared?

I don't have a strong opinion about either of them but they do seem to make a lot of noise for a couple who don't want public attention

Don't they just? 😂

OrangeAxolotyl · 21/08/2026 12:06

Well, @SmashThePatriarchy, if it was that bad, why return?

metellaestinatrio · 21/08/2026 12:09

simpsonthecat · 21/08/2026 12:01

No, they didn't. That's your interpretation of a situation.

Based on Meghan and Harry’s own words in their original leaving announcement, when they said they would be half in half out…

Filoparcels017 · 21/08/2026 12:10

Backtoschooloncemore · 21/08/2026 10:04

Harry was born into the Royal family and the quid pro quo for the restrictions it imposed was wealth. He also grew up with huge privilege. In terms of job, he was limited more by ability and being accustomed to wealth and privilege than by the royal family. He could get a lower level job but wouldn’t because of his perception of his status. He didn’t need a lower level job because he was wealthy enough not to work (but not to live at the level he would like).

It wasn’t quite quid pro quo though was it?

The heir and the spare benefit from the considerable Duchy profits.

And lots of properties.

Harry saw his uncles Andrew and Edward each living in enormous piles each worth about £35 million for which they were, and are, paying peppercorn rents.

He saw Andrew making lucrative HIHO side deals from his trade envoy job and no one objecting.

Even the way the separate offices are arranged is quite toxic, with the briefings against more minor royals deemed acceptable if it casts the senior royals in a better light.

Charles hasn’t been as generous to his children as the late QE3 was to hers.

Frogmore Cottage has never been on the open market but is probably worth £3 to 5 million. And H&M famously spent over £2 million turning it from separate cottages in to a four bedroom house. Bagshott Park has 120 rooms apparently.

And H&M had to pay that amount back when they left and then were asked to vacate the property even though it was a gift from the late Queen and apparently is still empty now.

That all seems rather spiteful tbh when Charles and William live in such luxury, particularly Charles.

Plus Harry will have been told that budgets were tight and then he will have got to hear about £12 million being provided to AMW to make a trial go away,

Harry marrying Meghan was the pinnacle of his “career” in the RF. He isn’t going on to be crowned king. And he found himself, yes in
an extremely comfortable and privileged position compared to most of us, but in the context of the RF, at the bottom of the pile.

You would think that a hierarchical organisation like the royal family would at least play by their own rules, but Harry and Meghan ended up in a worse position than many of the family members further from the crown in terms of succession

  • 1–4. Prince William and his children (George, Charlotte, Louis)
  • 5–7. Prince Harry (Duke of Sussex) and his children (Archie, Lilibet)
  • 8–13. Prince Andrew (Duke of York) and his children/grandchildren (Beatrice and Eugenie)
  • 14–16. Prince Edward (Duke of Edinburgh) and his children (James, Louise)
  • 17–24. Anne, Princess Royal, and her children/grandchildren (Peter and Zara)

Why is that ?

Could it be the equivalent of the often seen scenario on Mumsnet where once a man remarries, the children of the first marriage can be overlooked somewhat?

This isn’t entirely Charles’s fault as his parents were pretty poor role models too, and he had a miserable childhood, but it’s interesting that both William
and Harry seem to struggle in their relationships with him.

William as heir can bide his time and doesn’t need to protest because he has the Duchy income and soon he will be taking over the reins and will be more in control of his own life.

Harry doesn’t have the same level of monetary income, or the security and purpose of a defined role and, before he left, was totally at the mercy of everyone elses’s decisions about his life. If the king or some senior man in a grey suit had paid attention to that, this whole debacle could have been avoided.

To be fair, the death of PP and the Queen’s failing health and Covid were probably other reasons why they dropped the ball with Harry.

Similarly with the security issue. It’s about status to Harry and how much he is valued within the institution. And of course he is super sensitive about it because of the way his mother died.

Charles could solve all of this by selling a Caravaggio and paying Harry the income and for the security he wants, but I don’t think he feels he should have to.

Of course all of the above is ample reason why it really would be better to have a head of state who wants to take on the role, has earned it on merit, who can be appointed by vote, and removed if they disappoint, as opposed to a dysfunctional family living within a toxic institution and all the attendant misery that brings.

SmashThePatriarchy · 21/08/2026 12:11

OrangeAxolotyl · 21/08/2026 12:06

Well, @SmashThePatriarchy, if it was that bad, why return?

Probably for the schools and so the children can grow up around family. Maybe they now think they can block out the hatred better? Who knows.

I honestly don’t understand fully grown adults typing abuse out on internet forums or commenting on social media. You don’t have to agree or like everyone but you don’t have to be unkind. It’s pathetic.

Xanhi · 21/08/2026 12:16

The problem with the Royals is that the press will make up any old crap about them and then everyone picks over it and usually blames Meghan.

The risk of appearing in Spare II probably makes Harry rather unpopular with friends and family, but I wouldn't speculate beyond that.

MintChocCat · 21/08/2026 12:16

Andnowshesatoddler · 20/08/2026 22:08

Completely agree.
I am not anti royal or pro royal but I seriously don't understand the hate for Meghan Markle.

Same here.i think they need security.

OrangeAxolotyl · 21/08/2026 12:17

SmashThePatriarchy · 21/08/2026 12:11

Probably for the schools and so the children can grow up around family. Maybe they now think they can block out the hatred better? Who knows.

I honestly don’t understand fully grown adults typing abuse out on internet forums or commenting on social media. You don’t have to agree or like everyone but you don’t have to be unkind. It’s pathetic.

Nor me. I certainly don't read this kind of stuff. Unfortunately, other royals, politicians and celebrities get this, it's a curse of our times.
Harry and Meghan's official leaving statement didn't refer to it, however. They gave other reasons.
Perhaps they were lying about those reasons

OrangeAxolotyl · 21/08/2026 12:18

MintChocCat · 21/08/2026 12:16

Same here.i think they need security.

Does anyone think they don't need security?!