Harry has a lot to answer for.

[Corcory]

I think Harry has a lot to answer for in this whole debacle. He's a 35 year old man brought up as a Royal who should know how the whole thing works and how to ensure his wife is fully educated in the rules and regs. of being a Royal. She was his wife, why on earth was she going to HR at the Palace for help with mental health problems? Harry has loads of experience and the knowledge of where to get help, what on earth was he doing? Harry knows full well that there is a rule about not being given a royal title when it comes to Archie. Why didn't he explain this to Megan? It has absolutely nothing to do with Archie's skin colour. Why is Harry moaning about having their security removed given his father paid £4m for their security after the tax payer stopped paying after they moved to California?
It is not the Royal family's decision whither or not someone has The Metropolitan Police fly over to do security duties.
Prince William sorted the press out when they were making disparaging comments about Kate, why didn't he put his foot down as his brother did?

*titles

The rules yes will not permit him to have a title but the queen changed the rules to give Williams kids a title - Prince George, Louis and Princess Charlotte - so why not the same for Harry's children? I can see why they might question this

Charles has spoken about slimming the monarchy for decades. He disagrees with Bea and Eugenie being working Royals. Zara and Peter have had more freedom without titles. Archie will be in the same position as them. Why land him with titles that will make life harder?

@Lockdownbear yes that's the point though so why change the rules for Williams kids then? Completely contradictory

I agree Lockdownbear . And Archie could have had a title - Earl of Dumbarton - but the word at the time was that H and M didn’t want Archie burdened with a title .

But William is closer in line to the throne, so the titles for his children were surely seen to be more relevant. I'm pretty sure that the RF are well aware of the fading popularity and questioning of the costs and privileges involved in the widening of the RF and are trying to appease the growing discontent amongst the public by reducing the titled members, rightly so, especially if those titles would be used for personal or commercial gain and not to benefit the country.

@Stickytreacle yes but I can see why they might have felt a bit excluded - I see your point but I feel as William and Harry are brothers they could have got the same treatment. It's just not fair purely on the basis William is going to be king IMO - if you're doing one thing for one grandson then I think you should be equal with the other, just my opinion.

I don’t think you can assume he didn’t tell Meghan. Or that she wasn’t prepared. I don’t think it’s that simole to be honest.

@ livinlavida2021 so should ALL HM’s grandchildren and great grandchildren be given titles ?

@Lockdownbear

The rules yes will not permit him to have a title but the queen changed the rules to give Williams kids a title - Prince George, Louis and Princess Charlotte - so why not the same for Harry's children? I can see why they might question this

Charles has spoken about slimming the monarchy for decades. He disagrees with Bea and Eugenie being working Royals. Zara and Peter have had more freedom without titles. Archie will be in the same position as them. Why land him with titles that will make life harder?

Exactly. Charles views on this have been known for years and can easily be proved.

He doesn't want to be royal except he wants to keep all of the best bits about being royal. I don't have time for that kind of entitled priviledge.

Meghan wants to call the shots and seems pretty successful at that.

William's DC will one day be the children of the monarch, as William and Harry are. So princes and princesses. Harry's DC will not one day be the children of the monarch. As the GC of the monarch Archie & sibling will become prince/princess but their DC won't.

If all the monarch's GGC were princes and princesses, all Charlotte, Louis, Archie's and new sibling's DC would have to be princes and princesses. By the time William becomes king there could be loads of them which doesn't happen even now, Anne is the daughter of a Queen and even her DC aren't princes & princesses. Far from slimming down the monarchy it would bloat it.

[quote livinlavida2021]@Stickytreacle yes but I can see why they might have felt a bit excluded - I see your point but I feel as William and Harry are brothers they could have got the same treatment. It's just not fair purely on the basis William is going to be king IMO - if you're doing one thing for one grandson then I think you should be equal with the other, just my opinion. [/quote]
You don't get this monarchy thing do you? It's not a primary school classroom and even there certain children are given titles such as Sports Ambassador.

@Snog

He doesn't want to be royal except he wants to keep all of the best bits about being royal. I don't have time for that kind of entitled priviledge.

Meghan wants to call the shots and seems pretty successful at that.

I think he both wants and needs to be royal. It’s a key part of who he is. I just don’t think he wants to have the constraints associated with his position as a royal. But indeed he wanted the privileges. In fact he wanted more than he was entitled to, he wanted the same privileges as his brother and his family. He wanted all of the privileges and none of the constraints. As does Meghan.

While I have every sympathy for William and Harry losing their mum, they bit come across as entitled, spoiled brats tbh. I feel sorry for both Katherine and Meghan being lumped with those two, no amount of money would be worth it IMO.

[quote livinlavida2021]@Stickytreacle yes but I can see why they might have felt a bit excluded - I see your point but I feel as William and Harry are brothers they could have got the same treatment. It's just not fair purely on the basis William is going to be king IMO - if you're doing one thing for one grandson then I think you should be equal with the other, just my opinion. [/quote]
Well that just shows how extremely naive they've been. The RF is essentially a business that continues only due to the goodwill of of the public. The queen can't just dish out titles and money against tradition because there would quite rightly be a public outcry, it has nothing to do with favouritism.

We’re commenting disparagingly on something we know nothing about.

I imagine they aren’t allowed to leave without a team of security. It’s not as though she can pop to yo sushi for a catch up with the girls. Every move they made I imagine would have to be preapproved because it would be very dangerous to go unaccompanied.

Additionally we have no idea what happened behind closed doors. Harry could have gone to his father and brother endlessly. I’m not sure how their medical care works but I think being hospitalised is very last resort. I imagine a palace doctor would have given her some anti depressants and told her to get on with it.

I feel meghan’s reaction to becoming a royal is very typical to what a normal working/middle class person would feel at such a limitation of freedom. Yes she’s got lovely clothes and she lives in a palace but you can still be stripped of your liberties and happiness when you live in a castle.

Who cares? We don't need any of them.

Meghan gets bad press, I feel for her. She doesn't come across as a particularly nice person but the behaviours she gets berated for would be seen as admirable in a man.

Given Harry had already experienced his relationships ending (if reporting was correct) over the complications of marrying into the RF and the amount of scrutiny it brought, and having been aware of the amount of shit that Diana, Fergie, and Kate all got from the press, it is completely unfathomable to me that he didn't prepare her.

I think he was worried she’d run too and he was desperate to be married and have children.

Fundamentally the problem is that Harry is thick.

I haven't seen the interview but have read and watched bits of it.
If i am right, Harry was told/overheard about concerns about baby's skin colour. Meghan wasn't there at the time. (There does seem to be some discrepancy about the timing). Harry informed Meghan of what happened, knowing how fragile she must of been feeling.
Why couldn't he of sorted it out with the person/persons involved without Meghan knowing and saving her from the distress it had caused her?
Doesn't make sense to me.

We’re commenting disparagingly on something we know nothing about.

If this is the bar for posting MN is going to get very quiet!

@LittleBearPad

Given Harry had already experienced his relationships ending (if reporting was correct) over the complications of marrying into the RF and the amount of scrutiny it brought, and having been aware of the amount of shit that Diana, Fergie, and Kate all got from the press, it is completely unfathomable to me that he didn't prepare her.

I think he was worried she’d run too and he was desperate to be married and have children.

Fundamentally the problem is that Harry is thick.

Nail on the head!!

Meghan by her own admission has a particularly interest in inequality; Harry we can see from his growing up has always been the sulky type. The two together create a potent mix of grievance mongering and a mutual appreciation society.

I think there is huge resentment and envy from both of them of W&K’s position - why should they, H&M, not be top billing?

I think back to how many folk wanted Pippa & Harry to get together, there did seem to be interest on his part (ok, media but hey!). Maybe Meghan feels she was not his first choice, so not only is she second to Kate but her sister attracted Harry.

Well that just shows how extremely naive they've been. The RF is essentially a business that continues only due to the goodwill of of the public. The queen can't just dish out titles and money against tradition because there would quite rightly be a public outcry, it has nothing to do with favouritism.

But I don't see them why break the rules for Williams children?

If the rules were in place for a valid reason why not just wait for them to become Prince and princesses in their right instead of bending the rules?

If having a title such a burden then just follow the rules set out by king george in 1917 or whenever it was.

When you bend the rules it starts to become a grey area, IMO it's not right to do that unless you're doing it across the board.

In other words then the rules are not really rules it's at the queens discretion - one minute they want the monarchy slimmed down the next they're expanding it.