Is ‘had had’ necessary in this sentence?

[TrialOfStyle]

“Some had had to suffer through a few daughters before siring a precious son...”

Bridgerton series (don’t judge) - one page in. It’s grating on me. Wouldn’t “some had to suffer...” suffice?

No, it’s the pluperfect tense, denoting previous to the simple past tense.

Like most things its just colloquial, you learn from listening to those around you. no sweat

You'll like this sentence OP

James while John had had had had had had had had had had had a better effect on the teacher

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_while_John_had_had_had_had_had_had_had_had_had_had_had_a_better_effect_on_the_teacher

I used to write like this as uni, funnily enough. Not it just feels uncomfortable. I see why it’s right but it’s grates regardless.

Now*

[quote TFSRM]You'll like this sentence OP

James while John had had had had had had had had had had had a better effect on the teacher

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_while_John_had_had_had_had_had_had_had_had_had_had_had_a_better_effect_on_the_teacher[/quote]
Ah, that is just painful! I cannot get my head around it, even with the punctuation.

Past perfect tense, perfectly correct in the example. Yes, we can survive without it, it just helps to signpost chronology in more complex sentences.
my first homework every year is to give the kids the "had had" sentence.

I write "... had had ..." sometimes and it always bothers me. I feel like I have to do it in certain sentences, but I don't like it. I usually go back and rewrite/rearrange my sentence so I can remove it.

Actually, one of the things I think when I do a double had, is that nobody but me does this. I can never recall reading it anywhere but my own writing. I'm quite pleased it's in a book.

I always try to combine the first had, as in 'I'd had', 'he'd had', if there's no other option, I just drop the first had, because it is too clunky

It’s correct. Use it.