The Duchess of Cambridge Current Events 3: January-December 2013


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
US Royal Watcher said:
I wish the media didn't publish this sort of thing. Pictures and stories of them at public events are fine. But, as much as I am interested in Catherine and William, they have made it clear they enjoy their privacy. They have not revealed much about their private life and I think they are entitled to live their nonpublic life without intrusion.
Click to expand...

I agree wholeheartedly.
 
These photos of her shopping show her looking somewhat tired. Doesnt look like she has been getting enough sleep, you think? Other than that she is looking pretty good. She is back down to her slender self. :)
 
LadyGabrielle said:
These photos of her shopping show her looking somewhat tired. Doesnt look like she has been getting enough sleep, you think? Other than that she is looking pretty good. She is back down to her slender self. :)
Click to expand...

Ask any mom with a newborn if they're getting sleep and 10-1 the answer will be "What's sleep?" :D
 
I'm just wondering how many engagements the future Queens Consort Alexandra, Mary and Elizabeth undertook, when they were mothers of young babies? and concerned that Catherine is undertaking too much at this stage...
 
Those ladies had a house full of servants and handed the baby over to the nannies (plural). And it was either the equivalent of formula or a wet-nurse.
 
cepe said:
Those ladies had a house full of servants and handed the baby over to the nannies (plural). And it was either the equivalent of formula or a wet-nurse.
Click to expand...

I agree. It was a totally different way of raising children back then. The upbringing of the children was left to nannies and governesses and the old adage "children should be seen and not heard" rang true. This in no way means that the parents weren't involved in their lives or that they weren't well loved and cuddled but the parents of the high born royals and aristocracy had full engagement books filled with duties and social obligations.
 
I am concerned that Catherine is undertaking too much at this stage.
 
GracieGiraffe said:
In the meantime, Kate is busy earning her wings:

Kate, Duchess of Cambridge, taking flying lessons, but is Prince Harry her teacher? | Mail Online
Click to expand...

She didnt actually say she was having flying lessons. According to the Express Reporter who was actually there, she said that she had tried flying to see if she liked it. In the past 12 months she has been ill, presgant and had baby, so not likely to have had "lessons" recently.

Harry is not qualified to teach someone to fly.

but hey, the story is in a Comic which is where one finds jokes and made up stories.
 
Future Events

Thursday 5th December 2013

The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge will attend the Royal Film Performance 2013, the UK Premiere of Mandela: Long Walk to Freedom, at the Odeon Leicester Square, London.
 
Roslyn said:
Neither one of them has to deal with a screaming George. If they do, they are masochists.
Click to expand...

Its all part of being a parent. We've always known that George is quite a vocal little one and they both probably have their own special ways of dealing with it when it happens. It seems mostly that when one parent is out, the other one is staying home with the baby with each parent loving it and forming their own special relationship with George. I like that. I can imagine that with George, Mom is the soft cuddle up one and Daddy is the one that's fun and plays tickle games and makes funny faces
 
Osipi said:
Its all part of being a parent. We've always known that George is quite a vocal little one and they both probably have their own special ways of dealing with it when it happens. It seems mostly that when one parent is out, the other one is staying home with the baby with each parent loving it and forming their own special relationship with George. I like that. I can imagine that with George, Mom is the soft cuddle up one and Daddy is the one that's fun and plays tickle games and makes funny faces
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but in the case of William and Kate I think this idea is rubbish. They are not ordinary parents. There's no need whatsoever for them to be hands on parents all the time, and if they are insisting on doing it, which I doubt because I believe they have more help than they admit to, they are fools. Thanks primarily to the fact that his parents divorced and Diana got a huge settlement and then promptly died, William is an extremely wealthy man and they could, and should, have engaged staff to look after their apparently difficult child when duty calls them both to other activities. Had a nanny been engaged at the beginning a close relationship would have been established with that nanny which would have allowed William and Kate to escape the screaming more often.
 
What happened to William old nanny? Wasn't she going to watch after Prince George?
 
Roslyn said:
... Had a nanny been engaged at the beginning a close relationship would have been established with that nanny which would have allowed William and Kate to escape the screaming more often.
Click to expand...

really? you are criticizing them for being too hands on and depriving a nanny of establishing a relationship with their child?

Yes they have the resources to have around the clock nannies, but they have made a conscious choice to be the primary caregivers in their child's life for as long as reasonable. George will have nannies in his life, but I applaud the effort W&K are making in these early months to be the 'first responders'.
 
Harry's comments smack more of envy than anything else
 
Roslyn said:
I'm sorry, but in the case of William and Kate I think this idea is rubbish. They are not ordinary parents. There's no need whatsoever for them to be hands on parents all the time, and if they are insisting on doing it, which I doubt because I believe they have more help than they admit to, they are fools. Thanks primarily to the fact that his parents divorced and Diana got a huge settlement and then promptly died, William is an extremely wealthy man and they could, and should, have engaged staff to look after their apparently difficult child when duty calls them both to other activities. Had a nanny been engaged at the beginning a close relationship would have been established with that nanny which would have allowed William and Kate to escape the screaming more often.
Click to expand...

When William said he escaped from a screaming George, I took it to be a tongue in cheek remark. Although those times are harried and annoying for parents sometimes, its a part of being a new parent. I don't think either of them would really want to turn their child over to a nanny just to "escape" him.

Many parents, no matter the size of their bank accounts, really do prefer to be totally hands on and prime caregivers of their children. They feel that their child is the most precious thing in their lives and the child is their top priority and responsibility. IMO, Will and Kate are this type of parents. Just because George can be quite vocal and loud, it doesn't necessarily brand him a difficult child. Its how wee ones express themselves and also is quite good exercise to strengthen up the lungs.

The time will come in the future where as Will and Kate do take on full time royal duties and their calendars fill up, they will most likely have a full time, live in nanny that will be close to George as William and Harry were close to their nannies.
 
William said that George was screaming when he left. That is what the early reports said.
Reporter license coupled with Harry's inane comments probably led to exaggeration. No surprise there.

Good posts OSipi - thank you
 
MichelleQ2 said:
really? you are criticizing them for being too hands on and depriving a nanny of establishing a relationship with their child?
Click to expand...

No, I'm saying, or intended to say if I didn't make it clear, that they should have engaged a nanny from the start so she would have been a part of his life from the start and it would have been easy for them both to be away at the same time. Introducing someone later means that person has to establish a relationship with the child and that might not be easy.
 
Catherine is someone who likes to know all there is to know about everything. William wants his children to have as "normal" a life as possible. Catherine is still getting used to having staff.

She is someone who will understand bringing up a child before she hands them over to a nanny - because she wants to decide what it is she wants. When#2 comes along there will be a nanny. This "transitional" year will enable them to decide how to balance royal vs "normal"
 
cepe said:
Catherine is someone who likes to know all there is to know about everything. William wants his children to have as "normal" a life as possible. Catherine is still getting used to having staff.

She is someone who will understand bringing up a child before she hands them over to a nanny - because she wants to decide what it is she wants. When#2 comes along there will be a nanny. This "transitional" year will enable them to decide how to balance royal vs "normal"
Click to expand...


I agree. The term "transitional" is correct as he is adjusting to life outside of the RAF, they'll both be taking on more royal duties and engagements and adjusting to being parents.
 
Roslyn said:
No, I'm saying, or intended to say if I didn't make it clear, that they should have engaged a nanny from the start so she would have been a part of his life from the start and it would have been easy for them both to be away at the same time. Introducing someone later means that person has to establish a relationship with the child and that might not be easy.
Click to expand...

Maybe its just me but I think doing that with a nanny from the start actually would be detrimental to the child. In the first year of their lives, its the crucial stage where an infant bonds with his parents and having nanny on board getting close to George would seem like he had three parents. This way, its Mom and Dad his inner circle. They know the difference between the cries. Hunger? Attention? Dirty diapers? Teething? This is a unique bond that parents establish with their children basically from being there, being hands on and dealing with the giggly child as well as the uncomfortable child.

Yes, in time he will form a relationship with a nanny but by that stage, he will be able to differentiate between his parents and other members of his own inner circle such as grandparents, siblings, nanny and the Cookie Monster. Its all part of the growing process.
 
If George is known as a 'screamer', it may be that he has colic. This horrible situation is common in perhaps 20 percent of babies. No one knows what causes it, although theories abound. It can last for 4-6 months, perhaps a little longer, so there may be light at the end of the tunnel. My baby didn't have it- TG!- but I wouldn't have left him suffering on his own if I had a choice.

There is nothing in the UK- or the world- more important for W and K to do than to raise their child as they see fit. And if they see fit to almost never leave him with a nanny or a granny, good for them. Poor Catherine looks rather tired, but for a new mother that's a badge of honor. Of course she can put him on formula- if he isn't already- and hand him off to a nanny. But she's doing the natural thing in taking care of her own baby. Sooner or later he will sleep through every night, and life will return to normal for his parents.
 
Wasn't Prince William a fussy baby also?


Sent from my iPad using The Royals Community mobile app
 
Roslyn said:
I'm sorry, but in the case of William and Kate I think this idea is rubbish. They are not ordinary parents. There's no need whatsoever for them to be hands on parents all the time, and if they are insisting on doing it, which I doubt because I believe they have more help than they admit to, they are fools. Thanks primarily to the fact that his parents divorced and Diana got a huge settlement and then promptly died, William is an extremely wealthy man and they could, and should, have engaged staff to look after their apparently difficult child when duty calls them both to other activities. Had a nanny been engaged at the beginning a close relationship would have been established with that nanny which would have allowed William and Kate to escape the screaming more often.
Click to expand...

I could not disagree more. William and Catherine are trying to make sure that THEY are the main influence in the life of their child (and more than likely future children too). That is to be commanded, rather than criticized. As George gets older, he'll be bombarded with a lot of people; nannies, teachers, PPOs, etc., and it'll be very important for him to know who his parents are, and that THEY love him, care about him, and be there when something bad occurs. I've worked with a little girl last year, from what I gathered, she and her twin sister were brought up by TWO nannies from day one. The mother always complained that she needed 'adult' time, and chose to hand her daughters over to complete strangers as soon as they were born. It was heartbreaking to see them cry for their nanny when their mother came to pick them up from school. This year, I have at least two kids in my class who cry because they have to go home, and their parents have told me that they dread weekends, because the kids don't want to be with them. They want to be in school, because there they get some one-to-one attention they may not get at home, because the parents are busy, and employ a nanny, who on top of taking care of the children, has to take care of the house too. I'd hate to see the same thing happen to any other child. It's not healthy, and creates problems later on in life.

MichelleQ2 said:
really? you are criticizing them for being too hands on and depriving a nanny of establishing a relationship with their child?

Yes they have the resources to have around the clock nannies, but they have made a conscious choice to be the primary caregivers in their child's life for as long as reasonable. George will have nannies in his life, but I applaud the effort W&K are making in these early months to be the 'first responders'.
Click to expand...

Exactly! I think we've become a society that has adopted the philosophy that 'it takes a village to raise a child', which results in nannies, and teachers being he primary caretakers of the children. I think that if a parents are able to get by without a nanny (even if it means not going to a function), then they should. It creates a strong bond, and gives the child a sense of security. Nannies can come and go, but parents don't, so the strongest bond needs to be with the parents. Caregivers can come later, when the child is aware of who 'Mommy and Daddy' are, and that they're the ones who will be providing for the basic needs of the child. The nanny is there to help, and not to raise, and the children need to understand that (along with the parents).

Osipi said:
Maybe its just me but I think doing that with a nanny from the start actually would be detrimental to the child. In the first year of their lives, its the crucial stage where an infant bonds with his parents and having nanny on board getting close to George would seem like he had three parents. This way, its Mom and Dad his inner circle. They know the difference between the cries. Hunger? Attention? Dirty diapers? Teething? This is a unique bond that parents establish with their children basically from being there, being hands on and dealing with the giggly child as well as the uncomfortable child.

Yes, in time he will form a relationship with a nanny but by that stage, he will be able to differentiate between his parents and other members of his own inner circle such as grandparents, siblings, nanny and the Cookie Monster. Its all part of the growing process.
Click to expand...

You took the words out of my brain :D! I cannot say how happy I am that William and Catherine are taking the 'hands-on parents' approach. All parties involved will be happier in the long run.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

iceflower
Princess Caroline Current Events Part 4: January 2024 -
Replies
6
Views
3K
iceflower
iceflower
iceflower
Prince Albert & Princess Charlene Current Events Part 6: January 2024 -
Replies
9
Views
3K
iceflower
iceflower
An Ard Ri
  • Sticky
Prince Daniel's Current Events, Part 4
Replies
15
Views
2K
LadyFinn
LadyFinn
iceflower
Queen Mary, Current Events Part 1: January 2024 -
2 3
Replies
75
Views
11K
Izzie
Izzie
iceflower
King Frederik X, Current Events Part 1: January 2024 -
2 3
Replies
69
Views
9K
Izzie
Izzie

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom