Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

The royal family

Feeling sorry for the Duchess of Sussex

1000 replies

8AndGreat · 10/09/2022 09:22

It must be so surreal for her to be caught in everything that is happening at the moment. I know H&M are controversial to say the least but they came here to do a feel good tour and are now caught up in everything that's going on. If I were Meghan, I'd travel back to the US to be with my dc and leave Harry with trusted family and aids. It was odd that the Sussexes said they'd both travel to Balmoral and the media now say that King Charles said that Meghan wouldn't be welcome. I can understand why as only close family attendee's Balmoral.

To sum it up, I feel sorry for both Harry and Meghan, I think they are out of their depth. Their autobiography will be interesting.

OP posts:
Wonnle · 10/09/2022 12:25

Bollocks to the bloody lot of em !

StolenWillowTree · 10/09/2022 12:25

Of course if the website is correct then it proves that Meghan was telling the truth on Oprah, and Charles was planning to change the law once he became King, to strip them of their automatic right to HRH.

I'm sure eventually we'll have proper confirmation as to whether Charles did change the law or not.

IcedPurple · 10/09/2022 12:26

StolenWillowTree · 10/09/2022 12:24

Not true.

The current law states that their new titles are automatic and happen the very second the Queen last passes breath.

The only way to remove their new HRH titles is for Charles to issue new Letters Patent.

it is literally the law.

Sorry, but a website does not overrule actual law.

Plus the succession website is often very slow to update. There have been changes in the past that took days to be updated there.

It's not just a 'website' is it?

It's the official royal Line of Succession.

And William is already listed as Prince of Wales, and his children 'of Wales' even though that was only announced yesterday evening. Why would the Sussex children not have their titles updated if it were 'automatic' as you claim?

Wonnle · 10/09/2022 12:26

StolenWillowTree · 10/09/2022 12:25

Of course if the website is correct then it proves that Meghan was telling the truth on Oprah, and Charles was planning to change the law once he became King, to strip them of their automatic right to HRH.

I'm sure eventually we'll have proper confirmation as to whether Charles did change the law or not.

Has he the power to change laws then ?

lifeturnsonadime · 10/09/2022 12:26

If social media had been around in Diana's days, she'd have had her haters too. Social media has a lot to answer for the toxicity in modern society.

Totally and utterly agree.

Wouldloveanother · 10/09/2022 12:26

Diana did plenty of ‘boring’ engagements, and some very very tough ones such as hospices and people with AIDS. I can’t remember Meghan ever doing such an engagement - I don’t think she would have the grit or emotional depth to do it successfully and without trotting out one liners from Disney. I think she quite fancied Diana’s fame and iconic status though.

DamnUserName21 · 10/09/2022 12:27

Kashmirsilver · 10/09/2022 12:21

I agree, Harry has exposed his family publically at the behest of his wife Meghan.
Idiotic, foolish disrespectful behavior. She couldn't hack the standards needed so decided to berate them instead. He's a disgrace to his family, and as a husband. I'm embarrassed for him.

At the behest of his wife?? Does he not have a brain and balls?
H issues with his family began long before M came on the seen. He obviously felt he no longer needed to be silent about it.
Also, H has his own agency so why blame M for this?!

StolenWillowTree · 10/09/2022 12:27

lifeturnsonadime · 10/09/2022 12:22

What I find extremely interesting is that both the Duchess of Sussex and Diana were vocal in their negative views about the Firm.

One is sainted, the other vilified.

It's only because she died. She was vilified at the time. If MN had been around then, Diana would have been as hated as Meghan.

Weirdly a lot of the lies made up about Meghan, are actually true for Diana (and there are things said about Meghan that are not true for Meghan, but true for Kate - odd projection going on).

DamnUserName21 · 10/09/2022 12:28

Wonnle · 10/09/2022 12:26

Has he the power to change laws then ?

Through parliament-yes. Might not be approved though.

QuebecBagnet · 10/09/2022 12:28

Regardless of what Meghan has done in regards to interviews, books, etc if I was on my deathbed I would not want my grandson’s wife who I’d only met a few times even if I got on ok with her. I’d want close relatives only, people I felt comfortable with in an undignified situation. So no she didn’t need to go.

And then when you throw into the mix the tell all books, the constant sniping, etc……well it’s a bit rich to go shooting up there. 🤷‍♀️

CristinaNov182 · 10/09/2022 12:28

lifeturnsonadime · 10/09/2022 12:22

What I find extremely interesting is that both the Duchess of Sussex and Diana were vocal in their negative views about the Firm.

One is sainted, the other vilified.

Well Diana didn’t try to make money out of it, for one.

she also didn’t start talking about how in life “it’s not enough to survive, you need to thrive” during any of her many visits at hospitals, in front of people with HIV

But MeGain did say exactly that while on a trip to Africa when she was there to “supposedly “ highlight the plight of Africans !

theveg · 10/09/2022 12:28

@DamnUserName21 interesting. Does that apply in UK law?

FurAndFeathers · 10/09/2022 12:28

gatehouseoffleet · 10/09/2022 11:33

The extreme and non-stop hate and overt racism during the runup to the wedding and after the wedding is well-documented

Was it? You'd barely even know she was mixed race unless you'd seen her mum. If pressed, I might have thought she had Hispanic origins.

Anyway I liked her until she and Harry started lecturing us about the environment and then proceeded to fly around the world on private jets and have two children. Hypocrisy is unattractive.

I assume you hold William and Catherine to the same standards then? No one has done more lecturing on the impact of children on the environment whilst continuing to churn them out than William. Though to be fair he was only suggesting that people in Africa control their family size. I suppose if you’re rich and white it’s ok?
www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2021/11/30/experts-critique-prince-williams-ideas-on-africa-population

but definitely no racism in that family.

yeah Meghan’s obvious and very clear connection with her black mum probs didn’t influence the media reporting either

its seems folk really can believe 6 impossible things before breakfast

Wonnle · 10/09/2022 12:29

DamnUserName21 · 10/09/2022 12:28

Through parliament-yes. Might not be approved though.

So that's a no then !

IcedPurple · 10/09/2022 12:29

DamnUserName21 · 10/09/2022 12:28

Through parliament-yes. Might not be approved though.

That's not correct.

Princely titles are in the gift of the sovereign. He can grant or revoke such titles at the stroke of a pen.

DamnUserName21 · 10/09/2022 12:29

DamnUserName21 · 10/09/2022 12:28

Through parliament-yes. Might not be approved though.

He has just granted us serfs an extra BH to mourn QE!

lifeturnsonadime · 10/09/2022 12:29

Wouldloveanother · 10/09/2022 12:26

Diana did plenty of ‘boring’ engagements, and some very very tough ones such as hospices and people with AIDS. I can’t remember Meghan ever doing such an engagement - I don’t think she would have the grit or emotional depth to do it successfully and without trotting out one liners from Disney. I think she quite fancied Diana’s fame and iconic status though.

Diana was the wife of the heir to the throne.

Of course she had more prominent public engagements than the wife of the brother of the heir.

They do seem to have learned and toned it done a bit with the new Princess of Wales though.

LOL at her being shallow because she had the temerity to do a real job before marrying into the Royal Family!

EdithWeston · 10/09/2022 12:29

IcedPurple · 10/09/2022 12:23

The updated Line of Succession confirms that they do not have royal titles.

They are plain Master and Miss Archie and Lili Mountbatten-Windsor.

www.royal.uk/succession

a) that website currently has a front page caveat that some parts may be inaccurate at present

b) it also does not describe the Wessex DC as TRH Prince and Princess even though they are entitled to use them. The Wessex parents (and Lady Louise once she turned 18) decided not to use them. The Letters Patent gave the Sussex DC the right to use the styles of TRH Prince and Princess, as they have become the DGC of a monarch, and so it is now up to the parents to decide if they bring them in to use

misteek · 10/09/2022 12:29

Re Meg allegedly being suicidal when pregnant with Archie, why did they expect her father in Law to arrange help ? she would have been seen regularly by her Private Obstetrician and her private Midwife why didnt she mention her feelings to the professionals?

WhileMyGuitarGentlyWeeps · 10/09/2022 12:29

darmaka · 10/09/2022 12:14

Loads of people marry foreigners and make a choice on where to live. Whether you call that fecking off or not - it's a daily reality for most families. They will not divorce, much to your disappointment,

We'll see. Wink

StolenWillowTree · 10/09/2022 12:29

Wonnle · 10/09/2022 12:26

Has he the power to change laws then ?

Yes by issuing new Letters Patent.

Issuing LP is the only way to change the current law which states that all grandchildren of a monarch are automatically HRHs and automatically hold the title of Prince and Princess.

Why would the Sussex children not have their titles updated if it were 'automatic' as you claim?

It's a website. Someone has to manually do it. They probably don't know yet whether Charles is planning to issue new Letters Patent or not, or whether Harry and Meghan plan to accept or reject the HRH titles, and they want to avoid a PR storm by changing the titles then removing them again.

Plus like I said, whoever runs their digital and online content is really not very good. Often that list of succession has taken days to be updated.

Readinginthesun · 10/09/2022 12:29

StolenWillowTree · 10/09/2022 12:25

Of course if the website is correct then it proves that Meghan was telling the truth on Oprah, and Charles was planning to change the law once he became King, to strip them of their automatic right to HRH.

I'm sure eventually we'll have proper confirmation as to whether Charles did change the law or not.

Or maybe they have declined the titles ? I would think most people would agree that would be the right thing to do .

DamnUserName21 · 10/09/2022 12:29

IcedPurple · 10/09/2022 12:29

That's not correct.

Princely titles are in the gift of the sovereign. He can grant or revoke such titles at the stroke of a pen.

I was talking about laws in general, not titles.

Greengianttrees · 10/09/2022 12:30

LittleBearPad · 10/09/2022 12:21

Its not a taxpayer resource - he owns it.

Not quite, and if we were to become a Republic, the revenues would part of our national income, instead of going to an individual who has done nothing to earn this.

www.republic.org.uk/taking_back_the_duchy

Blossomtoes · 10/09/2022 12:30

H issues with his family began long before M came on the seen

Did they? It was very, very well hidden if that’s true.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.