The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #741  
Old 05-30-2014, 09:26 PM
Al_bina's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: City, Kazakhstan
Posts: 7,032
Quote:
Originally Posted by COUNTESS View Post
Yes, indeed. What a very foolish statement. Yes, she is his daughter, biologically, but not spiritually. It was a 1 night stand. The woman got pregnant and had the child. He supports her, financially, (better than a lot) and perhaps, personally, I do not know that. To leave his real wife behind, what , I must say, I am trying to be polite, ridiculous reason. These children on here , but realistcally, not because their father wanted them. Yes, he is responsible, but their mother's more so. They knew the rules. They knew with whom they were dealing. It doesn't make it right. It is reality.
Thank you!
You have stated the argument better than I have done. I see no reason for showing off Jazmin. Neither Jazmin nor her mother accused Prince Albert of neglecting his responsibilities.
__________________

__________________
"I never did mind about the little things"
Amanda, "Point of No Return"
Reply With Quote
  #742  
Old 05-30-2014, 10:02 PM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 11,330
Quote:
Originally Posted by American Observer7 View Post
I know he is the one who said that. And that is the point. He needs to stop saying that and stop with the need of trying to hide them or in this case Jazmin.

What he needs to do is leave Charlene at home for a gala or two and have his daughter on his arm. There is nothing to be a shamed of. He should be proud of her and want to show her off.
If Albert wishes to have have a public relationship (or private relationship for that matter) with his daughter, and they both agree to do so, it should because they want to.

Neither is under no obligation IMO to show the world that they have a relationship. Being seen and photographed with your children (particularly if you area public persona) doesn't mean you are a good parent.
__________________

__________________
.

Reply With Quote
  #743  
Old 05-30-2014, 10:39 PM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 3,937
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ana Von Cleves View Post
I still feel this way very strongly. If a man does not want to have children birth control is his responsibility and his alone. No man, especially a very wealthy man, should trust someone he is not serious about on this issue, nevermind a casual encounter.

I have always been confounded at Albert's stupidity to get caught this way not once but at least twice. He and his sisters are cut from the same cloth in this. All with children conceived out of wedlock and accidents. If the wealthiest and best educated cannot govern their procreative responsibilities, how in the world can we expect anyone to?

And I'll tell you something, if I were the mother of the boy, I would be seriously considering taking his case before the euro courts and see if he cannot have rights to full inheritance pushed through. Why should he not be able to be his father's full heir? Why should this new baby have more rights than he and his half sister do?

In this day and age, with out of wedlock births becoming the accepted norm, rather than the shameful exception, it is demonstrably unfair for a child to be denied his or her rights because of a parent's actions. Maybe if men knew they had to give natural children full and equal treatment with the children of their marriage, they would learn caution.

A Very Adamant Ana
I agree with you.

If a man, especially one in Albert's situation, doesn't want to have a child he should take steps to ensure he does not impregnate his partners. And if he fails to do that, he should accept responsibility for the child in all ways. And in my opinion he owes his children a duty equal to if not greater than the duty he owes to his current wife, who was an adult when she chose to marry him and knew that he already had two children.
__________________
"That's it then. Cancel the kitchen scraps for lepers and orphans, no more merciful beheadings, -- and call off Christmas!!!"
Reply With Quote
  #744  
Old 05-30-2014, 10:46 PM
Ana Von Cleves's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Our Town, United States
Posts: 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cris M View Post
As far as I know, the European Court of Human Rights to not dare to mess with monarchical rules of succession and titles.
I am just playing devil's advocate here. And I think these discussions are quite fun, so please bare with me!!!

I don't see why this rule of undoubted legitimacy can't be changed. After all, less than 50 years ago, it was unthinkable that a first born girl should hold a place above a younger brother in the succession. Yet, even GB has given way on this one. It's just one more out dated rule that should fall by the way side.

Do a quick roll call in your head of the older sisters who would have been Queens Regent under todays rules.

Among the heirs today under the age of 12, I believe only Prince George of Cambridge and Prince Christian of Denmark will be Kings, the rest will be Queens though I am probably missing someone. And at least two of those girls have younger brothers. Let's not forget that when Carl Philip was born he was the heir of Sweden, then the rules changed and this was stripped from him and given to his elder sister. I am not sure of the rules in Spain, should they have a son, but I think the old male preferred rules still apply there.

Getting back to my original argument, I think that the example of the demise of male primogeniture would be a great argument that the laws of legitimacy are likewise unfair and outdated and should be done away with.
Especially now that paternity can be proven absolutely. It is no longer "mama's baby, daddy's maybe."

Ana
Reply With Quote
  #745  
Old 05-30-2014, 10:51 PM
Victoria's Secret's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Bangkok, Thailand
Posts: 219
He has accepted responsibility. But nobody has a right to dictate to him how his relationship with his children should be in public. It is something private between them. And his priority should be his wife, first and foremost.
Reply With Quote
  #746  
Old 05-30-2014, 10:58 PM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 11,330
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ana Von Cleves View Post
Long ago and far away, when I was in college, a male college was complaining to me that his wife had gotten pregnant again on purpose because she wanted another and he didn't. I asked him what he was doing for birth control and was very unsympathetic when I pointed out that if he didn't want children the responsibility to prevent conception was on him.

I still feel this way very strongly. If a man does not want to have children birth control is his responsibility and his alone. No man, especially a very wealthy man, should trust someone he is not serious about on this issue, nevermind a casual encounter.

I have always been confounded at Albert's stupidity to get caught this way not once but at least twice. He and his sisters are cut from the same cloth in this. All with children conceived out of wedlock and accidents. If the wealthiest and best educated cannot govern their procreative responsibilities, how in the world can we expect anyone to?

And I'll tell you something, if I were the mother of the boy, I would be seriously considering taking his case before the euro courts and see if he cannot have rights to full inheritance pushed through. Why should he not be able to be his father's full heir? Why should this new baby have more rights than he and his half sister do?

In this day and age, with out of wedlock births becoming the accepted norm, rather than the shameful exception, it is demonstrably unfair for a child to be denied his or her rights because of a parent's actions. Maybe if men knew they had to give natural children full and equal treatment with the children of their marriage, they would learn caution.

A Very Adamant Ana
What exactly do you mean by full inheritance? I was under the impression that some sort of financial arrangements had been made between Albert and his children. Of course, we will never know the specifics.

In regards to Alexandre and Jazmin super ceding their future half brother/sister...isn't one of the requirements of a Monaco heir being that the child is born within a legal marriage. Or if the parents marry after the child is born, thereby legitimizing the child. Since Tamara was already married by separated...that nullifies Jazmin. And Albert had plenty of time to marry Nicole before he met and/or married Charlene. But apparently had no interest in doing so. So I would imagine that Nicole wouldn't have a leg to stand on in court.

Otherwise, I totally agree with your post. If you are having a one night stand both parties should use protective measures IMO. Forget pregnancy, let's talk about diseases. No, we really don't need to discuss diseases. Add in Albert's position (public persona, fairly wealthy, heir to a throne) and you have to question Albert's thought process.

If you are in a relationship with someone (and it does appear that some type of relationship was going on with Nicole and Albert), its possible that they discussed a potential pregnancy and/or safeguarding against a potential pregnancy. I don't know, again in Albert's position you would think he would have exercised better judgement and not just depended on Nicole to take appropriate measures.

Maybe its just me...I know I can't control everything but things I can control I don't give that power to anyone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ana Von Cleves View Post
I am just playing devil's advocate here. And I think these discussions are quite fun, so please bare with me!!!

I don't see why this rule of undoubted legitimacy can't be changed. After all, less than 50 years ago, it was unthinkable that a first born girl should hold a place above a younger brother in the succession. Yet, even GB has given way on this one. It's just one more out dated rule that should fall by the way side.

Do a quick roll call in your head of the older sisters who would have been Queens Regent under todays rules.

Among the heirs today under the age of 12, I believe only Prince George of Cambridge and Prince Christian of Denmark will be Kings, the rest will be Queens though I am probably missing someone. And at least two of those girls have younger brothers. Let's not forget that when Carl Philip was born he was the heir of Sweden, then the rules changed and this was stripped from him and given to his elder sister. I am not sure of the rules in Spain, should they have a son, but I think the old male preferred rules still apply there.

Getting back to my original argument, I think that the example of the demise of male primogeniture would be a great argument that the laws of legitimacy are likewise unfair and outdated and should be done away with.
Especially now that paternity can be proven absolutely. It is no longer "mama's baby, daddy's maybe."

Ana
I respectfully disagree with the last bit. To me, its an apples to oranges comparison in regards to the discussion of male primogeniture vs laws of legitimacy. Having a child is not like buying a car/house or even marriage. IMO Having a child is lifetime commitment more than an actual marriage. Right now you have people having kids with people they barely know (a good example is Albert and Tamara) and they don't even really know each other. Add is additional children and it can be a nightmare!

What if Jazmin is the heir because she is the oldest child (regardless of legitimacy or not) and she is groomed to be the ruler of Monaco. But guess what, Albert had a child in college, and now that child is the heir and hasn't been groomed to rule and doesn't know what is expected of him/her. Do you turn around and say...sorry about that Jaz...he/she was born first?! That's is disruptive and pretty crummy IMO.

Nope its better to be born with the confines of marriage, and therefore everyone knows what is expected of them.
__________________
.

Reply With Quote
  #747  
Old 05-30-2014, 11:01 PM
Ana Von Cleves's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Our Town, United States
Posts: 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Victoria's Secret View Post
He has accepted responsibility. But nobody has a right to dictate to him how his relationship with his children should be in public. It is something private between them. And his priority should be his wife, first and foremost.
I quite agree. And lets not forget that his daughter is old enough now to make her feelings on the matter clear. He is probably doing what she wants and helping her keep the privacy she obviously wants. If she wanted publicity, all she has to do is start parading in front of cameras and they will follow her every move. You know, do a few interviews about evil daddy. The tabs would eat that up with a fork and spoon.

Ana
Reply With Quote
  #748  
Old 05-30-2014, 11:09 PM
Moonmaiden23's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 6,468
Is it possible that Nicole Coste's latest press offensive was a result of her having heard rumors from her contacts in Monaco that "that girl" is expecting a legitimate heir?
__________________
"Be who God intended you to be, and you will set the world on fire" St. Catherine of Siena
Reply With Quote
  #749  
Old 05-30-2014, 11:12 PM
Ana Von Cleves's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Our Town, United States
Posts: 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zonk View Post
What exactly do you mean by full inheritance? I was under the impression that some sort of financial arrangements had been made between Albert and his children. Of course, we will never know the specifics.
In my little worldview, the succession in Monaco would be (if no male primogeniture & legitimacy doesn't count) would be Jazmin, Alexandre and then the baby. Not going to happen, I know. Just thinking of fair play.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zonk View Post
In regards to Alexandre and Jazmin super ceding their future half brother/sister...isn't one of the requirements of a Monaco heir being that the child is born within a legal marriage. Or if the parents marry after the child is born, thereby legitimizing the child. Since Tamara was already married by separated...that nullifies Jazmin. And Albert had plenty of time to marry Nicole before he met and/or married Charlene. But apparently had no interest in doing so. So I would imagine that Nicole wouldn't have a leg to stand on in court.

Otherwise, I totally agree with your post. If you are having a one night stand both parties should use protective measures IMO. Forget pregnancy, let's talk about diseases. No, we really don't need to discuss diseases. Add in Albert's position (public persona, fairly wealthy, heir to a throne) and you have to question Albert's thought process. .
EXACTLY! I thought I was long winded enough without going into the awful risks he was obviously taking with his life.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zonk View Post
If you are in a relationship with someone (and it does appear that some type of relationship was going on with Nicole and Albert), its possible that they discussed a potential pregnancy and/or safeguarding against a potential pregnancy. I don't know, again in Albert's position you would think he would have exercised better judgement and not just depended on Nicole to take appropriate measures.

Maybe its just me...I know I can't control everything but things I can control I don't give that power to anyone.
Reply With Quote
  #750  
Old 05-30-2014, 11:25 PM
Skippyboo's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 3,337
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ana Von Cleves View Post
In my little worldview, the succession in Monaco would be (if no male primogeniture & legitimacy doesn't count) would be Jazmin, Alexandre and then the baby. Not going to happen, I know. Just thinking of fair play.
If there were no male primogeniture, Albert wouldn't be ruler since Caroline is older.
Reply With Quote
  #751  
Old 05-30-2014, 11:27 PM
Moonmaiden23's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 6,468
Tamara Rotolo was legally the wife of another man when she got pregnant, which means that Jazmin is the result of adultery. According to Monagasque law, nothing, not even a papal dispensation, can put a child conceived in adultery in the line of Succession. As for Nicole I know that she was married and has other children. I am not sure if she was technically married to her husband during her affair with Albert but the same goes for Alexandre if she was.

However, even if they can't have the Throne they are entitled by law to a sizable chunk of Albert's fortune.

It's very sad that these kids have been deprived of a normal paternal relationship due to the behavior of stupid, selfish adults. But, as COUNTESS pointed out, they are still miles ahead of millions of other children born out-of-wedlock. They are not unloved. They are financially set for lives of ease, privilege, comfort and luxury most of us can only dream of.

And Albert does not fit the definition of a "deadbeat dad".
__________________
"Be who God intended you to be, and you will set the world on fire" St. Catherine of Siena
Reply With Quote
  #752  
Old 05-30-2014, 11:28 PM
Ana Von Cleves's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Our Town, United States
Posts: 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zonk View Post

I respectfully disagree with the last bit. To me, its an apples to oranges comparison in regards to the discussion of male primogeniture vs laws of legitimacy. Having a child is not like buying a car/house or even marriage. IMO Having a child is lifetime commitment more than an actual marriage. Right now you have people having kids with people they barely know (a good example is Albert and Tamara) and they don't even really know each other. Add is additional children and it can be a nightmare!

What if Jazmin is the heir because she is the oldest child (regardless of legitimacy or not) and she is groomed to be the ruler of Monaco. But guess what, Albert had a child in college, and now that child is the heir and hasn't been groomed to rule and doesn't know what is expected of him/her. Do you turn around and say...sorry about that Jaz...he/she was born first?! That's is disruptive and pretty crummy IMO.

Nope its better to be born with the confines of marriage, and therefore everyone knows what is expected of them.

Well, I think that some of those that have been prepared all their lives have made terrible hashups of it, so those who are unprepared can hardly do worse. And, anyway, if one knew a given child was the heir regardless, one wouldn't wait until college graduation to begin their training or refuse to acknowledge them for 14 or 15 years.

I don't think anyone should be made to take on the role if they really don't want it. In my readings about Edward VIII I have always had the distinct impression that he didn't want the throne and insisting on Wallis was rather like a wild animal chewing off a foot to escape a trap. I also feel that William is at least somewhat reluctant, but grimly determined to do his duty.

It really is a gilded cage and they should be allowed honorable escape if they want it. But that's a whole different topic.

And, yes, of course it is always better to be born within a marriage. But more and more this is not the case and the laws regarding legitimacy punish the children not the parents.
Reply With Quote
  #753  
Old 05-30-2014, 11:34 PM
Ana Von Cleves's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Our Town, United States
Posts: 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonmaiden23 View Post
Tamara Rotolo was legally the wife of another man when she got pregnant, which means that Jazmin is the result of adultery. According to Monagasque law, nothing, not even a papal dispensation, can put a child conceived in adultery in the line of Succession. As for Nicole I know that she was married and has other children. I am not sure if she was technically married to her husband during her affair with Albert but the same goes for Alexandre if she was.

".
A man wrote that law and a person can equally well write another law or amend that one.

And, yes, of course I know these young people are far far from disadvantaged ghetto kids. They are far luckier than most.

Ana
Reply With Quote
  #754  
Old 05-30-2014, 11:37 PM
Ana Von Cleves's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Our Town, United States
Posts: 97
Response toSKIPPYBOO True!

It's been great fun chatting with everyone, but my parrot is sitting on his cage solemnly announcing that it is bed time and if the lights don't go out soon, he will start squawking.

Good Night!

Ana
Reply With Quote
  #755  
Old 05-31-2014, 12:56 AM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,938
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ana Von Cleves View Post
In my little worldview, the succession in Monaco would be (if no male primogeniture & legitimacy doesn't count) would be Jazmin, Alexandre and then the baby. Not going to happen, I know. Just thinking of fair play.



EXACTLY! I thought I was long winded enough without going into the awful risks he was obviously taking with his life.

You bring up an interesting idea, but I think ultimately it would be unfeasible to introduce.

Consider the situation in Monaco. In 2005, it was confirmed that Albert had fathered Alexandre, then about 2 years old. The next year it was confirmed that he had fathered Jazmin, then 14. If Alex had been the heir then he would have been displaced in the course of a year. And you would never know if Jazmin could some day be replaced by another, older illegitimate child.

By insisting that the heir be legitimate (either, as in most countries, by birth, or, as in Monaco, at least later on) then there is a stability to the succession. We know who the eldest legitimate child of, for example, Prince Charles is, so the government system doesn't have to worry about his heir being displaced by the emergence of some new previously unknown child.

If you wanted to go with the argument that children born out of wedlock but later on legitimized should be able to inherit, I would probably agree, but just outright illegitimate children is a tricky thing.

I also personally wouldn't look at a throne or title as being something really passed on from one person to the next - at least not in most European nations - as it is an government institution that has a hereditary head. As such, it's not something that all children of a monarch should be able to inherit equally, regardless of how they're born. Monaco is not simply one of Albert's possessions to pass on to his children and Jazmin is being denied the opportunity because of her birth - the monarchy within Monaco is a family-run business and government institute that has strict (albeit lax by other standards) rules for who the next CEO gets to be. It's like... Donald Trump wouldn't leave his business to an illegitimate child he'd had minimal contact with just because he/she was the eldest - he's going to leave it to the legitimate children who have been groomed to take over the business. Why should a monarchy be any different?

Also, in response to your earlier statement about the current heir situation. Belgium's heir is Elisabeth, Denmark's is Frederick then Christian, Liechtenstein is Alois then Joseph Wenzel, Luxembourg is Guillaume, the Netherlands is Catharina-Amalia, Norway is Haakon then Ingrid-Alexandra, Spain is Felipe then Leonor, Sweden is Victoria then Estelle, and the UK/Commonwealth is Charles, then William, then George.

Of the male heirs, Haakon and Felipe both have elder sisters, while of the female heirs, Ingrid-Alexandra and Victoria both have younger brothers. The rest are all the eldest legitimate child.
Reply With Quote
  #756  
Old 05-31-2014, 03:45 AM
LadyMacAlpine's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: *****, United States
Posts: 2,304
Quote:
Originally Posted by COUNTESS View Post
Yes, indeed. What a very foolish statement. Yes, she is his daughter, biologically, but not spiritually. It was a 1 night stand. The woman got pregnant and had the child. He supports her, financially, (better than a lot) and perhaps, personally, I do not know that. To leave his real wife behind, what , I must say, I am trying to be polite, ridiculous reason. These children on here , but realistcally, not because their father wanted them. Yes, he is responsible, but their mother's more so. They knew the rules. They knew with whom they were dealing. It doesn't make it right. It is reality.
It was not a one night stand she was in Monaco two or three weeks.
Reply With Quote
  #757  
Old 05-31-2014, 04:00 AM
Moonmaiden23's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 6,468
Two or three weeks is not a one-night stand...but it is a FLING.
__________________
"Be who God intended you to be, and you will set the world on fire" St. Catherine of Siena
Reply With Quote
  #758  
Old 05-31-2014, 04:37 AM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 3,937
No matter whether it's a committed relationship, a fling, or a one night stand, if a man is going to dip his wick and doesn't want to have a child with the woman he takes precautions to prevent it happening. And even if both of them take all reasonable precautions there is still a risk of conception and both parties should know that. In the absence of any knowledge of the arrangements they took or didn't take to prevent pregnancy, I think both parties must be considered equally responsible for the conception and therefore equally responsible for the care and welfare of the child.
__________________
"That's it then. Cancel the kitchen scraps for lepers and orphans, no more merciful beheadings, -- and call off Christmas!!!"
Reply With Quote
  #759  
Old 05-31-2014, 05:48 AM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,938
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roslyn View Post
No matter whether it's a committed relationship, a fling, or a one night stand, if a man is going to dip his wick and doesn't want to have a child with the woman he takes precautions to prevent it happening. And even if both of them take all reasonable precautions there is still a risk of conception and both parties should know that. In the absence of any knowledge of the arrangements they took or didn't take to prevent pregnancy, I think both parties must be considered equally responsible for the conception and therefore equally responsible for the care and welfare of the child.
I was going to say similar.

There are a lot of accusations being thrown around here, namely that Albert was essentially an irresponsible idiot who got not one but two women pregnant out of wedlock, then had to be forced by the courts to acknowledge either of them and pay for them, and now neglects his children.

I'm not going to try to say that none of this is true, because it very well could be, but I'm inclined to think that it's not nearly that simple.

First of all, as Roslyn so nicely pointed out, while Albert is responsible for his part in the conception of his children and should be held accountable for it, the mothers were also responsible. Albert didn't force himself on either of the mothers of his children, and none of us were privy to whatever conversation (if any) Albert had with them about birth control. Some very big assumptions are being made here, and all the responsibility (and blame) seems to be put at Albert's feet.

Understandably, this could very well be because Albert didn't jump to acknowledge either of his children at first, even going so far as to take 12 years to acknowledge Jazmin. Except, given the nature of his relationship with the mothers of both of his children, and Albert's status, position, and wealth, he would have been an idiot to have simply taken either women at their word when they claimed he'd fathered their children. Albert had had a fling/affair/one night stand/whatever with them. It wasn't like he'd been in a long term relationship with either then claimed that he couldn't have fathered their child. For all he knew, either mother could have gotten pregnant shortly before/after their affair then decided to try to foist the child on him because of who he was. He made a mistake, in my opinion, in not handling the issue of Jazmin's paternity more swiftly, or either issue either more privately or more openly - he screwed up by having it outed by others and not really responding to it, enabling us to draw our own conclusions.

In both cases, Albert has stressed that his relationship with them is a part of his private life. Like many other royals, Albert protects his private life and relationships with private individuals very closely - consider how his sisters and their children act. Not only that, but both of his children are private individuals who are not included in the line of succession to the Monegasque throne. We don't know what kind of that relationship is, nor do we know what conversations are occurring between Albert and his children about things. He's being criticized for not going to Jazmin's graduation, but for all we know she asked him not to go (or she asked him to go and he didn't and is hugely disappointing her, it could be either, it could be neither, we don't know). He's being criticized for not having a relationship with his son, but the person who is telling us that is Alexandre's mother and she's not exactly the most unbiased of people. For all we know she could be making it difficult for Albert to have a relationship with Alex and enjoys publicly badmouthing him (it's not the first time she's done so). Or he could be avoiding a relationship with Alexandre because he doesn't want to have one with the boy. Or he could actually have a relationship that we simply don't see because it's a private one, and she's well aware of that but wants to publicly badmouth Albert because she knows he won't defend himself and she wants something. Or it could be something else. We don't actually know this, we're just jumping to conclusions.
Reply With Quote
  #760  
Old 05-31-2014, 05:51 AM
HighnessN's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Cape Town, South Africa
Posts: 89
I do not know what kind of a father Albert is to his children, so I won't pass judgement on that.

I do however have a problem with the way the situation with the children was handled PR-wise. In fact, I have a problem with the PR team in Monaco, they are not good with handling scandals, they should take advice from the British Royals.

I think the situation should have been handled in a similar way as the Charles and Camilla situation. They should have made it clear that Albert is not ashamed hot his children and they are none negotiable. Yes the children's privacy is important but Albert attending a graduation as a proud papa would have gone a long way PR-wise. As I said, he might have been very proud in private but he needed to be proud in public as well.

This is important especially now with the baby coming. People would not debating whether he is a good father or not if the PR team and his advisors had done their job. Instead people would be like " he is such a good father to his other children, he will be a good father to this baby as well."
It does not help the Prince to be seen as a good father to his legitimate child but as a bad one to his illegitimate children.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Royal House of Savoy: History, Older News, Stories and Pictures Tosca Royal Families of Italy 129 10-22-2016 11:03 PM
February 2008 Newsletter: Older Royal Couples Avalon Picture of the Month, Special Features, Blogs and Articles 10 02-05-2008 08:50 AM




Popular Tags
ascot 2016 best gown best gown september 2016 best hat best outfit best outfit poll catherine middleton style coup d'etat crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mary fashion crown princess mette-marit current events duchess of cambridge e-mail fashion poll grand duke jean greece kate middleton king abdullah ii king felipe king felipe vi king willem-alexander member introduction monarchy new zealand nobel gala norway november 2016 october 2016 october and november 2016 opening of parliament picture of the week prince bernhard prince charles princess madeleine princess marie princess marie events princess mary princess mary daytime fashion princess mary fashion princess mary hats queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen letizia style queen mathilde queen mathildes outfits queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania queen rania in washington royal fashion september 2016 state visit state visit to denmark succession sweden the duchess of cambridge the duchess of cambridge casual wear the duchess of cambridge daytime fashion the duchess of cambridge fashion the duchess of cambridge hats the duchess of cornwall working visit


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:15 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2016
Jelsoft Enterprises