I don't know why people continue to say that Harry and Meghan escaped from the Royal Family when they had published a statement saying that they wanted to carve out a 'progressive new role' ( I think it was, within the Royal Family. They wanted to operate within the family or under the brand, to put it in a modern way. They were using their Sussex Royal letter heading, and in my view wanted to be royals abroad, active and high-profile, but in a modern unfussy way which reflected 21st century attitudes instead of 18th century attitudes. More use would be made of social media and foundations for charitable work, but all under the umbrella of royalty. So when they had holidayed on Canada and came back for a short while to the UK, they had a reception at the Canadian Embassy where all the staff lined up on the swirling staircase and greeted ceremoniously the royal couple. I think they wanted that status and profile to remain, but to be like the Tate Modern to the Tate Gallery. Perhaps in time, they may have thought, the Royal Family may have seen that their way of doing things was more effective in the modern age, and may have said: " Go on, you guys. Show us how it's done, and you be our official presence in the US, while we get on with looking after the draughty palaces in the UK, and perfecting recipes for Cornish wild heather oat cakes.'
I can't see 'progressive role' as anything other than high-profile, and to do that would very much have kept them in the public eye, famous and needing security.
Twenty years ago, Sophie Wessex was well-known, but now she has succeeded in keeping a fairly low profile, only carrying out official engagements and living quietly. The same for Princess Anne. How many members of the public could name or recognise Anne's partner, or Sophie's children? Hardly any. Keeping a low profile except for official engagements gives you privacy and makes security very much easier. Doing voice-over work for Disney and speaking at high-profile ecology events gives you a whole new persona and public presence.
The point of royalty is the institution highlights achievement by ordinary citizens. They are like civic mayors who open swimming pools but don't make political decisions as, say, Andy Burnham does.
I think security and poor press are a problem for royals if they diverge from the accepted pattern but still access all the publicity that goes with royalty. If you like low, people forget you, as history has shown.