George's exams

[everetting]

Kate is not going with william to Singapore as George has important exams. What exams would a 10 year old be sitting in November?
I know nothing about private school systems so hoping someone here does.

Did you miss the bit about the massive inbalance of power?

Princess Margaret's grandsons all went to Etone I believe. Her child were at Bedales. James didn't go. Peter didn't go. It was only Harry and William in that family. And that was because it was where the Spencers went to school.

I read your post but don’t see it the same way. The parents could say no.
it was a book reading promo. Not life or death

@Samcro

At least we can agree it was a ‘book promo’ and not the requested rebrand as
“Something about community support [of] the arts? Please." to make it sound more substantial

However, Eton is near to Windsor, so close to family

And close to a royal estate where is will be convenient to base the security personnel (much lower costs when using existing staff accommodation)

George, as heir in direct line, will get security for himself quite early on. His siblings may or may not get it (depending on what they do with their lives - a working royal, outside the direct line, based in can expect to get security when on duties (like Anne and Edward).

I hope he passes or he’ll never get a job…. 😂

The parents could say no. it was a book reading promo. Not life or death

(Just to repeat what was already said in other threads) Toya Holness wrote several emails in which she negotiated the terms of the appearance of H&M, times of arrival, what to put in the release - coming up with a happy medium, discussing what the footage would be used for (documentary), discussing the appearance release - giving the option of not filming the children at all - asking the press secretary to ensure that the release was read over by school district lawyers to make sure they were happy with it and even highlighting the specific bit that they should look over before signing. So all in all standard - Toya Holness did a great job in ensuring that everyone was happy and represented especially for flagging up the NDA bit to the press team, which of course Meghan is being castigated for, for a read over by the school district legal team before anyone signed it.

And just to remind people that all the British publications which were specifically named as being barred from another event which presumably extended to the book reading one and the media company that got the FOI request because they noticed the British press freeze - all wrote “Meghan asked 5 year olds to sign NDAs” and not the real story which is “PR lady did her job efficiently” or “H&M successfully prevented access to 4 major UK tabloids - what this means for UK media”.

Royal children have been appearing on these mags forever. It's part and parcel of the role.

And what do the royal children get out of this arrangement?

Many people have real concerns with the visibility of royal children and you will find many of us making similar comments about children of celebrities and the worst of the bunch - social media influencers. Children in these situations frequently have their privacy invaded and as children really don’t really have a full grasp of the long-term consequences of their general lack of privacy and autonomy. These children are also at risk of exploitation as they cannot give informed consent - their parents could gain influence, money or more fame from using their children. Children in these circumstances are at higher risk from threats and harassment and all of this can affect their emotional well-being, as the pressure to maintain a curated image can lead to anxiety or low self-esteem.

When it comes to the royal children - I’m not convinced that the “perks” are worth what is essentially living in a goldfish bowl. Many wealthy people with influence have the same access to the perks as the royal children but none of the elements of press and media that royal children have to engage with. None of Elizabeth’s children are completely well adjusted functioning adults- even Anne and Edward.

skullbabe · Today 00:57
None of Elizabeth’s children are completely well adjusted functioning adults- even Anne and Edward.

This is, sadly, true to some extent. Anne does best, probably because females are tougher.
Royal women in times past seem to have had no idea how to "be a mother", and I include QE in that, though I'm sure she loved her children.

The Wales children are lucky to have a mother who was brought up by her parents, not by nannies.

The Wales children are lucky to have a mother who was brought up by her parents, not by nannies.

Agreed, they are very lucky to have the best of both worlds: lots of time spent with their 'normal' grandparents (the Middletons) but also access to the Royal life with all that entails. Plus the strong parental security and support to navigate both.

hopefully we will see less of the children now that all the big occasions are over for a while. hopefully Kate will use a different reason next time (she is a parent there will be a next time)
I do feel for any child that is pushed into the public eye, there is a little lad who lost his legs due to abuse, his adoptive mother had pushed him into the public eye, told his story public. I often wonder how he will feel when he is older.
must be the same for all the royal children. nothing is private.

This misses the point entirely.

It doesn't matter how well something was carried out, when it is something that shouldn't have been done in the first place.

If we really want to go there with discomfort about discussing kids, Meghan gave her kids as a reason for not being at the well child event and arriving a few days later at Invictus, I mean, we all now know her kids like milkshakes, is that an invasion of their privacy. In that same vein, Meghan is now discussing her kids being too young for SM, well hello, thats obvious, does she need to bring them up, is that an invasion of their privacy. It is just a ridiculous excuse to find something to diss them about.

Personally, I don't find anything wrong with either of both families mentioning their kids, but some people seem to, so it becomes a bit one sided when only Catherine gets criticism for mentioning something that most people understand the timing of and why she is likely staying at home, it's not privileged information, she isn't discussing a doctor visit, its as irrelevant as Meghan discussing her kids getting milk shakes.

This misses the point entirely.

It doesn't matter how well something was carried out, when it is something that shouldn't have been done in the first place.

It is absolutely standard practice to sign a release of some sort before being filmed (I have done so) - and it is also ok for people to set their own terms. It is good practice to highlight the deviations from the norm (the non disparagement clause) and to allow for an opt out as Toya did in this case.

There is a very big difference between a release and a NDA.

Exactly - the execution of it was fine.

Also it's a tool that may be appropriate in other circumstances where it's use is indeed standard and routine

But that still doesn't mean it should have been done at all in these circumstances.

No I heard she kidnapped them and made them do it...

again, isn't this thread about George? Why is everyone talking about Meghan, again.

Everyone signs releases for schools,
extra curricular a etc so kids can be part of pictures posted on SM

But I have NEVER been asked to sign a NDA

has anyone else been asked to sign a NDA at their kids school or activities, because this sounds very unusual and would make me uncomfortable

My kids have attended International schools in several countries, where they have had the fortunate opportunity of having speakers from all walks of life, politicians, ex politicians, an ex US president, celebrities, controversial figures, adventurers, scholars and they, nor us, have ever been asked to sign an NDA.
It could be the case the school has been asked to sign on behalf of the students, us parents, teachers, but I think we would have heard about it as I suspect there would have been outrage and no one would have felt the speaker was welcome under those restrictions.

I have met a president of Ireland, who was in role at the time, and I was never asked to sign an NDA.

Ditto @themessygarden apart from the Irish president.

Personally, I don't find anything wrong with either of both families mentioning their kids, but some people seem to

It is ok to mention and talk about your children - it is not ok to put the spotlight on them which is what the objection is. Kate has a tough line to walk as a Royal Spouse and Mother and it is a difficult one for the Royal Family as a whole to be able to navigate. It's important that the RF are relatable and so of course discussing things about exams, school runs and milkshakes are indeed relatable but some things shouldn't be shared in the interest of the child. George has selective exams coming up - this might be a stressful time for him - who knows. What doesn't help George is over 63 million people knowing about this. I think William and Kate could have said that Kate wasn't joining him because ?carbon footprint ?competing engagement ?wanting to focus on the nominees - and yes, they and especially her, would have had a pasting from some elements of the media but at least the child would not have been brought into it. I'm not sure I'm explaining it well but for instance saying that George likes croissants for example is different kettle of fish to telling people of major milestones in his life.

It does seem a bit telling that all the posters expressing concerns about George's privacy on this thread:

A) Have no concerns about the privacy of the dc at Meghan's book promotion
B) Have no concerns about the privacy of the Harry & Meghan's dc in their Netflix show (including of private moments and bathtime)
C) appear to be anti-royalists or supportive of Harry and Meghan (with a large overlap there)

There is a very big difference between a release and a NDA.

Indeed there is and the release did not have a non-disclosure agreement aspect to it which people commonly know as an NDA. It had a non-disparagement clause which is not an NDA.

because this sounds very unusual and would make me uncomfortable

Just as well that there wasn't an NDA. However Toya was at pains to highlight the non disparagement clause twice in the emails that have been clipped and shared in the press and allow for an opt out entirely. She also wanted the school's lawyers to look over the release to make sure evryone was happy - and they presumably were.

The thing is George is an important child being a future King and people may well be interested in his life . Hence why Kate is being slagged off by some on here for referring to it. H and M's children are much less important in those terms to many. Maybe this is why M makes reference to them and allows intimate footage of them - she loves them, they are her family, they detract from the previous toxicity and brings what is possibly seen as "weight" to her takes on things.