Optics Check: Waleses public support for Andrew: William and Catherine’s driving and embracing Andrew is a massive error?

[Foxypuppy]

Are the Waleses and the Andrew Unity Drive A bridge too far? Seriously, why were William and Catherine protecting Andrew?

I’ve always been a supporter of the Prince and Princess of Wales, but I am finding it harder and harder to defend their recent excuses and petty behavior regarding 'family unity'.

Specifically, I’m looking at the optics of William personally driving Prince Andrew to church at Balmora Daily Mail report here

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12449837/Prince-William-drives-disgraced-uncle-Prince-Andrew-church-Balmoral.html

This wasn't just a family carpool; it was a deliberate, televised statement of support. William was in the driver's seat, Andrew in the passenger seat, and Catherine in the back.

At the same time, we have royal commentators like Jennie Bond stating that William and Catherine would 'rather have Andrew as a neighbour than Meghan and Harry. Independent article here

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/royal-family/william-kate-meghan-harry-frogmore-b2295732.html.

I understand that family dynamics are complicated and that they feel betrayed by the Sussexes' interviews. However:

1. Harry and Meghan are a family feud involving books and Netflix deals, though they couldnt protect Meghan against racism, not even make an statement
2. Prince Andrew is a man associated with Jeffrey Epstein, impliyed in e-mails to ne object in the death of a girl, hes a well known liar and with multi-million dollar settlement alongside much other bizarre stuff.

How can William and Catherine justify being part of the face of Andrew’s rehabilitation even after he was impliyed while being so publicly cold toward William’s own brother? Does anyone else feel like their moral compass is slightly off here? Surely a sister-in-law isn't worse than the Andrew crimes? Why he royal family and media even tried to protect him and only acted this year?

I also don't expect First Ladies to do anything other than be supportive and decorative and to appear well at public events. That's why I can't understand why Catherine gets so much flack. By my standards she's doing a great job.

I don't think K expected or wanted to do anything other than be 'supportive and decorative' judging by the job she cadged from the woman who'd loaned them a luxury property on Mustique which she stipulated must fit around her 'relationship with a high profile man'.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/royals/kate-middleton-asked-for-a-part-time-job-due-to-her-relationship-with-this-very-high-profile-man-a4466731.html

People always bring out Eleanor Roosevelt and Michelle Obama. They ignore the dozens of perfectly average First Ladies, and some who were distinctly odd.

Did Catherine sign a job contract in addition to her marriage vows? Was there an agreement that she commit to a certain amount of public work? It sounds as though you expect that of consorts. Maybe it should be considered for the future.

If you read Lownie's book, Andrew was sent to boarding school at 7 and lost his virginity to a prostitute at 11. Doesn't sound like lots of quality time with the family to me.

What do you mean "considered for the future"? Yes, we do expect it.

Philip committed to "a certain level" of public work, so did Diana, so has Camilla, and Catherine now needs to buck up and do the same. Just like Anne, a child and sister to the monarch, and Sophie, a daughter and sister-in-law have.

With every post you sound more and more ignorant of the UK.

Comparing a queen to a Ffrst Lady is absolute apples and oranges. A first Lady is a private citizen whose husband was voted in (and can be voted out). A Queen is a public institution. Catherine married into a role that is effectively a lifetime job in exchange for extreme wealth and a level of privilege most can’t fathom.She is a future Queen Consort, and her entire lifestyle, the security, the palaces, the staff, is funded by the Sovereign Grant, which just hit a massive £132 m.

The public provides the billion-pound Duchy and the legal immunity, and in return, the family serves the public. You simply can’t have both. If they want the privacy of a private citizen without the duties, they have to give up the public funding and the titles. It’s that simple.

If there’s no agreement to work, there should be no agreement for us to fund it. Diana and Meghan both realized that if the role doesn't fit, it's ok leave the institution. In light of file drops, if a member of the family isn't adding value or worse, is enabling Andrew and not helping the victims of Epstein/AMW mess why on earth are we still sustaining it?

Agree @Musicalchef . And marrying someone who then becomes President for 8 years is completely different to deciding to marry into the Royal Family, knowing that you will be a member of the RF for life and be expected to turn up to boring stuff. She is perfectly happy to parade her children around because there is an expectation that they will be doing the same.

I've never ever seen Eleanor Roosevelt mentioned on Mumsnet, maybe I'm in the wrong place 😀
And yes as @BoxingHare says, there are expectations.
It's a bit embarrassing that her 76yo father in law who is still undergoing cancer treatment does maybe four times as many engagements.

Just incidentally, I imagine George will be going to boarding school, all the royal children do.

Not just Royal children ; I did too for a while .
Harry and William went to boarding school at 8 whereas George ( if he does go ) will be 13.
What’s your point ?
Also , as someone who has undergone treatment for cancer, different people are affected in different ways .

It’s not about being shut down by her illness, cancer is obviously a terrible thing, but it doesn't change the data. Even prior to her diagnosis, her engagement numbers were consistently the lowest in the family, often trailing significantly behind the older royals like Princess Anne. I think we have to be able to separate compassion for a person's health from a legitimate critique of their role as a state-funded public figure. If the cancer card is going to be used to silence any discussion about her work rate for the next decade, then the concept of public accountability is basically dead.

But cancer wasn't her original illness was it?

Cancer was discovered unexpectedly when she underwent surgery for another illness that has never been revealed and which could well be a chronic illness/disability.

She and William married in 2011 and she had DC in 2013, 2015 and 2018 suffering each time with HG . She had an unknown condition requiring major surgery in January 2024 then treatment for cancer .
Frankly I think she did ok to undertake the duties she has . Yes, she has money , yes she has staff but the fact she wants to be present for her young children should surely be praised . Neither the late Queen nor Diana were particularly hands on so I think the children first decision by W and C is a healthy one .

My position on this is that we don’t know what is going on with Catherine, and if the monarchy continues, there will be plenty of time once her dc are grown up, for her to
focus on the job.

I understand that she may not want the public to know about an underlying condition and she is entitled to privacy with all health matters.

So a transparent statement along the lines of “Catherine’s duties are being curtailed according to health restrictions and an update will be issued every three months” is all that is required.

However, I don’t really know why William isn’t doing more? He has plenty of support staff. And I know quite a few people who have a spouse with serious health issues, who have no choice to carry on working ft because they have bills to pay and children to support.

Btw, Mylovelygreendress, by all accounts King Charles wasn’t very hands on, but you don’t mention that! It’s just the women who take the flack!

Oh damn William is now connected to this mess in the Epstein files through his link to a charity that he was amassdor for....so much for all those posters who said he is squeaky clean 😳

Now it makes sense why he hired a new crisis manager....oh dear 🍿

Have to laugh about all the posters banging on about H&M and their charities ...where sre they now with their sleuthing skills digging in Williams.....nowhere

I think we have to be honest about the hands-on parenting narrative. Most mums in the UK would áe present for their children, but they don't have a team of nannies, housekeepers, and a private chef to handle the domestic load. Catherine was working roughly 120 days a year before she was ill that is a part-time schedule by any standard. It’s a bit of a stretch to say she can’t work, because of the kids, when she has more childcare support than 99% of the population. At what point does parenting and a past illness become an excuse for a lack of public duty? The royal crown princesses of other houses did more job than Kate while raising decent kids , why is Catherine more special than Letizia, Mary, Maxima?

Ps: I should had answered the post before yours. 🤦‍♀️. Still the point stands

Public duties at Wimbledon and film premiers for the 2 of them or other sporting events are carried out with no problem . Basically they will only go out for the stuff that interests them and nothing else. That is fine if they are private citizens but they aren’t so the royalists making excuses for them should just remain quiet there are no excuses.

Are you talking about this?

https://archive.ph/DeKH7

Maybe more will come out but based on this, his connection with Epstein is minimal.

The Duchess of Edinburgh has undertaken a lot more engagements than Catherine even when her own children were young, and she had difficult pregnancies, miscarriages etc.

As someone who stopped working when I was in my mid 30’s, due to ill health and having a few lots comments, about no longer working & being a SAHM, because i didn’t broadcast what was wrong, I feel for Kate a bit, if she has a long standing condition and not wanting people to know the minutiae.

I don't, no one does but I certainly don't have anyone in my family who's associated and been friends with known sex traffickers, taken money off them and been accused of sex crimes themselves. If they had, I can safely say they wouldn't be at any family gatherings far less would anyone be sharing cars with them.

As we were specifically talking about Catherine ( a Mum) I compared her to previous Royal mothers ( late Queen and Diana) .

So? Its still a link and since plenty of posters who love to criticise H&M for their dubious connections how funny that you downplay Williams...well actually im not really surprised.

That's an interesting article. Thanks.

No mention of Wild Aid being an Earthshot prize winner in 2023 though which seems quite cosy.

I sympathize with your situation, but the key difference is that you weren't being funded by millions in taxpayer money to represent the state. If she can't or won't work or will do questionable things, she could simply retire and stop being funded by us.

Yes that’s true. Mind you now I broadcast what’s wrong; as I got so fed up of people saying I looked fine. Well yes I did, as on those occasions I could get out.

Is it Mette-Marie who has underlying health issues and think that’s been disclosed? But she’s another mixed up with Epstein and now issues her son.

Who’d be a royal? Not me for sure.

Nobody should be forced to work, but most people who don't work don't expect the public to fund their palaces. I have total respect for SAHMs, my own mother was one and she's a wonderful woman. But it’s a private domestic choice, not a public service job, there's a world of difference between choosing to stay home on a private family income and doing so while receiving millions from the state. If a Royal wants a private family life, that’s fine, but the salary and the taxpayer-funded security should reflect that choice. Most women don't get a state salary for staying home, and the Royals shouldn't be the exception.

As for Mette-Marit, no one uses her health as a shield against criticism, even though her condition is apparently more severe than Catherine's. I think can have immense empathy for your personal journey while still holding the Monarchy to a different standard; we don't know if Catherine’s experience matches yours, yet Mette-Marit is open about her illness and deservedly doesn’t receive that same attempted protection from scrutiny.