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:
KittyTinker · Yesterday 17:05

Hardware252525252525 · Yesterday 16:59

Okay. So it’s not really relevant then.

I still think it is but if you don’t that’s fine too.

Benjithedog · Yesterday 17:06

KittyTinker · Yesterday 17:05

I still think it is but if you don’t that’s fine too.

At least she didn’t insult you l. I’d take that as a win

Backtoschooloncemore · Yesterday 17:12

Blades2 · Yesterday 17:03

Markle has enough money to buy her own personal protection.
and for a pair that left the uk to not be “famous” anymore, they sure as hell tried every avenue to continue being famous over there.

The reported cost of security in California was very significant even in terms of their level of wealth. It was potentially unaffordable in the long term as their projected income failed to materialise.

OrangeAxolotyl · Yesterday 17:13

Hardware252525252525 · Yesterday 17:03

You cannot read.

There's really no need to insult people. It's just a discussion and posters are free to disagree.

maddiemookins16mum · Yesterday 17:13

She is a woman with young children, the UK public have not warmed to her (despite 99.99% having never met her). Her high profile husband (Son of the King no less) is also at risk from harm. This country wastes money on all kinds of shite, protecting H and M should happen if only for the sake of the two wee ones. They had no part in the ‘mistakes’ H and M have made (yes M that ridiculous curtsey thing you did where your husband looked as if he wanted the floor to open up). Protecting them properly will be cheaper than the cost of clearing up the result of something awful happening. I’d never wish harm on someone who was forced to walk behind his Mum’s coffin aged 11 through the streets of London.

OrangeAxolotyl · Yesterday 17:14

Backtoschooloncemore · Yesterday 17:12

The reported cost of security in California was very significant even in terms of their level of wealth. It was potentially unaffordable in the long term as their projected income failed to materialise.

Yes, I read that their security costs were very high. Doesn't surprise me.

OrangeAxolotyl · Yesterday 17:14

maddiemookins16mum · Yesterday 17:13

She is a woman with young children, the UK public have not warmed to her (despite 99.99% having never met her). Her high profile husband (Son of the King no less) is also at risk from harm. This country wastes money on all kinds of shite, protecting H and M should happen if only for the sake of the two wee ones. They had no part in the ‘mistakes’ H and M have made (yes M that ridiculous curtsey thing you did where your husband looked as if he wanted the floor to open up). Protecting them properly will be cheaper than the cost of clearing up the result of something awful happening. I’d never wish harm on someone who was forced to walk behind his Mum’s coffin aged 11 through the streets of London.

They get protection.

Benjithedog · Yesterday 17:14

OrangeAxolotyl · Yesterday 17:13

There's really no need to insult people. It's just a discussion and posters are free to disagree.

It’s this posters only method of response

OrangeAxolotyl · Yesterday 17:15

Benjithedog · Yesterday 17:14

It’s this posters only method of response

I just don't think there's a point to engaging anymore.

Benjithedog · Yesterday 17:16

maddiemookins16mum · Yesterday 17:13

She is a woman with young children, the UK public have not warmed to her (despite 99.99% having never met her). Her high profile husband (Son of the King no less) is also at risk from harm. This country wastes money on all kinds of shite, protecting H and M should happen if only for the sake of the two wee ones. They had no part in the ‘mistakes’ H and M have made (yes M that ridiculous curtsey thing you did where your husband looked as if he wanted the floor to open up). Protecting them properly will be cheaper than the cost of clearing up the result of something awful happening. I’d never wish harm on someone who was forced to walk behind his Mum’s coffin aged 11 through the streets of London.

If you offer taxpayer funded protection to these you will open up the door to having to pay it to Andrew’s children. You okay with that?

Hardware252525252525 · Yesterday 17:16

OrangeAxolotyl · Yesterday 17:14

Yes, I read that their security costs were very high. Doesn't surprise me.

Yes, I would be a nervous wreck if I was her and seen the level of hatred from people who didn’t know me. It must be particularly worrying with kids.

OP posts:
maddiemookins16mum · Yesterday 17:18

Benjithedog · Yesterday 17:16

If you offer taxpayer funded protection to these you will open up the door to having to pay it to Andrew’s children. You okay with that?

I’m ok with any woman or child being protected.

Benjithedog · Yesterday 17:18

OrangeAxolotyl · Yesterday 17:15

I just don't think there's a point to engaging anymore.

You are right I know but it’s clear to me they just want to insult all those who disagree off of this thread so it becomes an echo chamber. So maybe I’ll stick a bit longer to point out other insults.

Backtoschooloncemore · Yesterday 17:18

Backtoschooloncemore · Yesterday 16:51

They will clearly be insured against the costs.

Their collective insurance only covers up to £16.2 million in costs but there is a potential £18.3 million shortfall that Harry and the others may have to pay.

Another point about insurance - the premium for this insurance would have been well over £5 million possibly as much as £10 million. And the insurance only covered DMs costs, not his own.

OrangeAxolotyl · Yesterday 17:19

Hardware252525252525 · Yesterday 17:16

Yes, I would be a nervous wreck if I was her and seen the level of hatred from people who didn’t know me. It must be particularly worrying with kids.

I don't know, I've not seen the US press or social media.
I think it's expensive because so many people carry guns.

PropertyD · Yesterday 17:19

Beesandhoney123 · 21/08/2026 00:54

MM will be able to avoid danger by going about her day without posting on social media where she is, where she will be etc. If you court publicity and the press, then the price is high for privacy and public opinions which might not always go your way.

She needs to stop gobbing off and using people to brief out on how awful everyone is being to her.

She can lead a quiet life but somehow she won’t.

Benjithedog · Yesterday 17:19

maddiemookins16mum · Yesterday 17:18

I’m ok with any woman or child being protected.

Well as long as they pay for it themselves I certainly don’t have a problem with that.

OrangeAxolotyl · Yesterday 17:20

Benjithedog · Yesterday 17:18

You are right I know but it’s clear to me they just want to insult all those who disagree off of this thread so it becomes an echo chamber. So maybe I’ll stick a bit longer to point out other insults.

Yes, fair enough. It's certainly baffling in many respects, though.

Benjithedog · Yesterday 17:20

Hardware252525252525 · Yesterday 17:16

Yes, I would be a nervous wreck if I was her and seen the level of hatred from people who didn’t know me. It must be particularly worrying with kids.

But you’re not her and she can pay for security so what’s the issue?

Benjithedog · Yesterday 17:21

OrangeAxolotyl · Yesterday 17:20

Yes, fair enough. It's certainly baffling in many respects, though.

Oh totally

OrangeAxolotyl · Yesterday 17:23

PropertyD · Yesterday 17:19

She needs to stop gobbing off and using people to brief out on how awful everyone is being to her.

She can lead a quiet life but somehow she won’t.

It's funny because people on another thread have said they saw Prince Edward on the tube, Sophie cycling in London, Louise using a regular train service and Princess Anne and her husband at a very modest restaurant. Charles regularly goes walking in Scotland and chats to other hikers. I think sometimes it's very possible to be royal and still lead a relatively normal life.

Benjithedog · Yesterday 17:24

OrangeAxolotyl · Yesterday 17:23

It's funny because people on another thread have said they saw Prince Edward on the tube, Sophie cycling in London, Louise using a regular train service and Princess Anne and her husband at a very modest restaurant. Charles regularly goes walking in Scotland and chats to other hikers. I think sometimes it's very possible to be royal and still lead a relatively normal life.

Exactly if you want to lead a normal life that is

AnitaCam · Yesterday 17:24

OrangeAxolotyl · Yesterday 17:23

It's funny because people on another thread have said they saw Prince Edward on the tube, Sophie cycling in London, Louise using a regular train service and Princess Anne and her husband at a very modest restaurant. Charles regularly goes walking in Scotland and chats to other hikers. I think sometimes it's very possible to be royal and still lead a relatively normal life.

Equally, people can mistakenly identify others, very easily indeed.

Backtoschooloncemore · Yesterday 17:25

Benjithedog · Yesterday 17:16

If you offer taxpayer funded protection to these you will open up the door to having to pay it to Andrew’s children. You okay with that?

Protection should be provided to everyone according to their level of risk and overall available budget. That includes women being stalked by their ex, politicians including Farage and Diane Abbot, and Andrew MW’s children. Meghan’s children as no more special than anyone else’s though the risk may be higher.

Hardware252525252525 · Yesterday 17:25

OrangeAxolotyl · Yesterday 17:19

I don't know, I've not seen the US press or social media.
I think it's expensive because so many people carry guns.

I suspect the costs won’t be any cheaper here. I imagine the intelligence services are all over monitoring the threat, but I think it would be an awful way to have to live.

OP posts: