The Queen: Would She Consider Abdication or Retirement?

[pgm1952]

How could that fine woman possibly step down? There is no doubt that she is getting older and small changes in routine hint at this (longer weekends at Windsor as well as investitures held there, and Prince Charles seeing the contents of the red boxes and doing one or two investitures himself) but the idea that Her Majesty would completely throw in the towel is almost absurd. As the granddaughter of George V and Queen Mary she knows that duty is till death. The effects of the Abdication were firmly impressed on her young mind and she saw the effect it had on her father and mother. When Queen Wilhemina of the Netherlands abdicated in 1980 the Queen of England is believed to have said "typical Dutch". Abdication is not typical British and thus not typically what she would do.

 

[IloveCP]

I dont think she should.She made a vow when she was 21 and she should stick to it.

 

[AnnEliza]

I dont think she should.She made a vow when she was 21 and she should stick to it.

I am sure that she will.

 

[Daria_S]

I dont think she should.She made a vow when she was 21 and she should stick to it.

Ditto. I think abdication/retirement are out of the question. She's very conscious of her duty.

 

[Tyger]

I think she may go into a sort of semi-retirement - never actually addicating - but having Charles assume more and more of the role she has borne until he is front-and-center while she focusses elsewhere - as is only right for someone of her age. I think there needs to be some 'letting-go' on the part of her subjects - to allow her some breathing space in her declining years. (I have seen a shift in her ease of mobility - even in her face - in the last couple of years - it also seems to me that she is wearing 'a lot' of make-up recently - oddly).

I base this idea of semi-retirement in large part on what I am seeing in the recent pictures of the Duke of Edinburgh - and watching his behavior, like with the Camerons. (The press was all jolly about it - making it sound 'funny' but think about what he was doing - and the look on the Queen's face).

The Duke is failing fast - at 90 it has to happen sometime (as to us all). This is a man who has always been there for the Queen - like her handbag that gives her comfort. (I am not saying the DoE is an accessory piece - he is far, far more than that of course - he is her confidant and the husband who rules their family). As he fails I could see her wanting to focus on him. He would have nursing, of course, but at her age, slowly nearing 90 herself, might not her priorities shift? Shouldn't she be allowed to do that, too? Finally?

She has already lost one important confidant - her mother. Losing Phillip will be hard on her - and I base this on what I know about the elderly and especially long marriages.

 

[IloveCP]

Do you think the British people will understand if she "quit" whe she turns 90 or 100 like her mother?What do you think of a 100 year old monarch?

 

[lady of hay]

Abdication is a dirty word in the UK , as said in previous posts the Queen took on this role for life making a vow at the age of 21, she had seen what the abdication crisis had done to her parents, especially her father.
I very much doubt that the British people would want her to step down, slow down yes but not give up the "top job"

 

[Tyger]

Do you think the British people will understand if she "quit" whe she turns 90 or 100 like her mother?What do you think of a 100 year old monarch?

If the monarch is not coherent - think about the scene in 'The King's Speech' with the ailing King. Its hard, no question, but it does begin to happen. The Queen Mother just had to 'appear' a few times - the Queen has a bit more to her job than just 'appearing'.

As for the abdication in the 1930's, that was a very different situation. One can't compare the two as equivalent. The Queen has done her duty. An heir is in line who is mature and well-prepared. The two situations are not equivalent.

Honestly, I think there are moments when the peoples' 'expectations' become harsh, even cruel. Unreasonable, even. Inhumane, I might venture. There comes a time when one needs to step back and pay attention to the needs of one's impending destiny. Of course, some people die in an instant - but for those who are gifted with a long curve in - why not let them to it?

 

[Vasillisos Markos]

If the Queen becomes unable to perform her duties, I imagine a regency would be put in place. Her age will probably curtail her duties, as it should, but I don't see her voluntarily relinquishing the throne.

 

[lady of hay]

If the Queen becomes unable to perform her duties, I imagine a regency would be put in place. Her age will probably curtail her duties, as it should, but I don't see her voluntarily relinquishing the throne.

Such a thing would , I believe, be more pallitable to those of us in the UK

 

[Tyger]

If the Queen becomes unable to perform her duties, I imagine a regency would be put in place. Her age will probably curtail her duties, as it should, but I don't see her voluntarily relinquishing the throne.

Why? With all the talk of the British monarchy becoming 'modern' - why not in this area as well?

 

[Tyger]

Such a thing would , I believe, be more pallitable to those of us in the UK

Because (some) people hate Charles? Is that the reason to force the Queen to serve even under extreme circumstances?

 

[Aliza]

The Queen should remain Queen as long as she lives; if necessary, a Regency can always be arranged. HM regards her Coronation as a "Holy Sacrament" and thus obligating her to remain as Queen until death.

When HM was informed of Queen Juliana of the Netherlands abdicating for her daughter, she sniffed to her Private Secretary, "how Dutch". I don't think the possibility of stepping down even occurs to her, as she vowed to serve her whole life, "whether it be long or short". And HM is a lady of her word, to say the least, God bless and save her!

 

[lady of hay]

Because (some) people hate Charles? Is that the reason to force the Queen to serve even under extreme circumstances?

I don't think anyone could " force " the Queen to do anything she did not want to do. As said in a prior post, she does have Queen Mary's sence of "duty". Prince Charles may/ may not be popular but he is heir to the throne, his mother may out live him, and who knows, Charles may decide when his time comes that he does not want to be king. After all Diana said that she didn't think he was right for the "top job" and she proberbly knew him better than we do.

 

[olebabs]

Even though I'm not Her Majesty's biggest fan, I can only admire and respect her work and her sence of duty. She has endured a lot during her reign and she deserves to take it a little easy now. I think no one would fault her for steppping down and devote her remaining years to her grandchildren and great grandchildren (I hope for some more soon ) As my grandmother used to say; they are life's dessert

 

[Tyger]

I don't think anyone could " force " the Queen to do anything she did not want to do. As said in a prior post, she does have Queen Mary's sence of "duty". Prince Charles may/ may not be popular but he is heir to the throne, his mother may out live him, and who knows, Charles may decide when his time comes that he does not want to be king. After all Diana said that she didn't think he was right for the "top job" and she proberbly knew him better than we do.

Interesting. Charles seems as duty bound as anyone if one looks at his life, Queen included. Your scenarios for him seem implausible - but maybe wishful thinking?

Regarding Diana 'knew him better' - I think all the evidence is that she didn't really know him, didn't really 'get' him - if she did, she would have stayed married to him, I would guess. Will Diana's petulant attempt at public 'payback' to Charles for whatever she felt he had or had not done to-or-for her continue to be the gauze through which Charles is to be judged/seen? I wonder what it is about Diana's string of slurs that continues to be so alluring and compelling that they are routinely restated as 'facts'.

What would be so terrible about having Charles become King? In the event the Queen decides that it is wiser to have the transition in her lifetime - to avoid any unpleasantness for him? I could see a mother - as mother but also as Queen - being concerned in that way for her son - and her heir - having to deal with the fall-out (still) from someone who smeared the RF.

 

[COUNTESS]

She will not abdicate. She doesn't feel that this is a job you can retire from. As lomg as she is healthy, she is right.

 

[Mirabel]

Anyway, I think Charles would make a fine king!
He is compassionate, intelligent, and interested in many aspects of life.

I agree that Diana didn't really know him very well (nor did he know her, that was the problem!)

But Charles is known for his willingness to take advice about all sorts of matters, so what could be better?

 

[Renata4711]

I hope that the Queen will outlive Charles.

 

[Nice Nofret]

I hope that the Queen will outlive Charles.

Do you wish to outlive YOUR children? What a terrible thing to wish for

If you like the Queen how could you wish she has to bury her own son

 

[Iluvbertie]

I hope that the Queen will outlive Charles.

What a sad comment - to wish that a mother will have to bury their own eldest child.

People do seem to forget that we aren't just talking about cardboard cutouts but real flesh and blood people with real feelings for each other.

The Queen has four children, but every mother will tell you, that there is a special bond with the eldest of those children - and for the Queen that bond is with Charles.

To wish that incredible sadness on a mother is just cruel and nasty thing to wish on any mother.

I wonder why you would want the Queen to go through that pain?

 

[Duchess of Darwin]

I hope that the Queen will outlive Charles.

Do you really hate him that much?
Do you really not care how she would feel about losing her son as long as he wouldn't get to reign?
What a terrible thing to think
Pardon me for playing moderator, but that simply is not a rational opinion.

 

[Daria_S]

I hope that the Queen will outlive Charles.

I'm sorry, but that is harsh. You may not like him as a future monarch, but think of Her Majesty's feelings as a mother. It would devastate her to burry her child. They're royals yes, but more importantly, they're a family who care about each other (even if it's in ways we cannot understand).

 

[HRHHermione]

I admire her majesty greatly, but she's aging and simple math says that she won't reign much longer (and by that I mean that even if she reigns til she's 100, it's only another 15 years, which isn't long relative to how long she already has reigned.)

I don't see her abdicating, though I could be wrong- should she succumb to alzheimers or another form of dementia in her final years, I think she might consider it. But I hope that no matter how or when her majesty's reign ends, Charles is healthy and ready to become King.

In spite of the rocky years and his marital problems, Charles never lost his sense of duty. He was born to this role, and his wife has proven over the years that she'll make a fantastic queen consort, no matter what title she ends up using in the role. I hate the idea of a break in the succession- even if his reign is short, I look forward to seeing Charles as King.

Plus imagine how devastating it would be for the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge to be thrown into the top roles in the family many years before they thought they'd have to? They'd do it, but it would certainly be a hardship for them.

I think it's incredibly short sighted to hope Charles never becomes king. It ignores everything he's done in service to the UK throughout his entire life.

 

[kathia_sophia]

I hope that the Queen will outlive Charles.

i laughed so hard after reading your comment!
its a bit sad and harsh to say what you said, because firstly the Queen is a mother and women and see her eldest child die before her, might kill her as well with so much pain for seeing her own son being buried.
althought you said that, its possible it could happen, since women tend to live longer than man, and i see the Queen living until 100 years old, but its the worst case scenario! i hope i dont see a tragedy like that, i hope for the normal circle of life, first the The Queen then Charles!

 

[glassary]

I've always been fascinated that this question comes up regarding the Queen stepping aside and abdicating. I don't think the concept even exists for HM.
It is not a job, it simply is who she is. She holds fast to the belief that she will
serve her people to her last moment.
Don't think that HM wanted to be Queen (as it would mean that death of her beloved father) but knew it would come to her and she would do her duty to the throne. She views it as a sacred trust and responsibility.
What I do see is that as she ages (and at 85 she is still going strong) she may step back a tiny bit and let Charles and other royals take over some minor roles.

 

[Tyger]

I hope that the Queen will outlive Charles.

This is Diana's legacy. No amount of sugar coating it can - for me - change the hate she set in motion. The tragedy of her death - tragic in itself, always will be- was compounded in that she could not lead her 'fans' to a healthier place regarding the RF and Charles. She could not recant - undo the damage done. So there it sits - as a fly in amber.

It seems clear that the British RF does not abdicate. The film 'The King's Speech' - was the first I knew that the old king was doddering. Is this historically accurate? I had always thought - well, I don't know what I thought - died in his sleep after a long illness, I guess what was what I always heard, or thought. But that he was mentally incapacitated - they hid that, not so? Hiding it, who then 'reigned'?

Was the Queen Mother coherent to the end? Was Princess Margaret? Do we know? If not, then there will be a genetic propensity - not saying it will happen - we are each different, yet I wouldn't be surprised. Dementia comes on over a long time and can be cloaked - look at one of our presidents! Sad to say, the suspicion is that at the end of RR's presidency he was suffering the onset of alzheimer's.

Ack! Not a pleasant subject - and so hard on any family that has to see the old ones through such a time. Consider the responsibility on Charles and Camilla's shoulders.

Its been indicated that the Queen would not abdicate because she saw the effect on her parents. Someone mentioned that the throne being thrust upon William and Kate would be a similar devastating event - consider that it would mean for William the loss of both parent and grandparent in fairly quick order. Not pleasant. Stressful.

 

[COUNTESS]

I am no fan of Charles, but to wish that he dies before his mother is awful. What a burden that would be for the queen, whom, I suppose this person admires. No, hopefully, he will out live his mother, which is the natural order of things.

 

[olebabs]

Just look what happened to QEQM, dying just a few months after her youngest daughter. It was inevitable, I know, but I think it took the life out of her. NO ONE should have to bury their children, no matter what age they are.

 

[EIIR]

I hope that the Queen will outlive Charles.

I was sure that I had mis-read that comment for a moment. I'm amazed at its utter crassness.