The Late Diana, Princess of Wales News Thread 4: September 2006-April 2007


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Madame Royale said:
'If' Diana in any way suffered from a psychological disorder then I do say shame on those who have for years spoken ill of her in ways which would be a clear reflection upon any mental hurdle she faced.

Of course It doesn't Elspeth ;), but people will continue to go to lengths so as to claim "their" piece of what was, really, a tragic life. How pathetically sad in every possible way :mad:

My first ever angry face...hope I never feel the need to use that again!
Well, I think it's safe to say that Diana did suffer from psychological issues, such as low self esteem and a distorted sense of herself, hence her bulimia. But to say she suffered from paranoid schizophrenia or borderline personality disorder isn't a call anyone should make, unless they were treating her directly in a doctor/patient relationship-which, obviously, this author was not. Of course, to be fair, it's impossible for any of us to judge that she didn't suffer from such disorders, since we never treated her, either. The fact that she managed to maintain such a composed professional role for an extended period of time, under intense scrutiny by press and public, raises doubt that she suffered from anything more than certain psychological quirks-something which can be applied to most people.

I doubt that this man, who was a 'friend of Prince Charles' was exposed to Diana's private self, and is making his judgement based on her public persona and the War of the Waleses, when neither Charles nor Diana acted all that rationally. How pathetic that he feels the need to make this claim at all, much less for money.
 
This chap claims he is a friend of Charles', whether he is or not is a different matter.

The article highlights some of the points taken from a 35 page chapter in a book, which the author claims are based on conversations with her doctors. One unnamed medic says he was summoned after the princess had "violent tantrums" and she once had to be "physically restrained" at Highgrove.

Although a Clarence House source branded the claims "deeply offensive and hurtful", they did not confirm or deny them.
 
the person who wrote the book says that he is a friend of prince charles? find it hard to believe. and did princes charles says otherwise? bet not. and he could have conversation withe diana's doctors? what happen to doc/patients confidentiality?
 
quote

Skydragon said:
This chap claims he is a friend of Charles', whether he is or not is a different matter.

The article highlights some of the points taken from a 35 page chapter in a book, which the author claims are based on conversations with her doctors. One unnamed medic says he was summoned after the princess had "violent tantrums" and she once had to be "physically restrained" at Highgrove.

Although a Clarence House source branded the claims "deeply offensive and hurtful", they did not confirm or deny them.

Just because Clarence House did not confirm or deny it. It doesen't mean that its true.
 
Skydragon said:
This chap claims he is a friend of Charles', whether he is or not is a different matter.

The article highlights some of the points taken from a 35 page chapter in a book, which the author claims are based on conversations with her doctors. One unnamed medic says he was summoned after the princess had "violent tantrums" and she once had to be "physically restrained" at Highgrove.

Although a Clarence House source branded the claims "deeply offensive and hurtful", they did not confirm or deny them.

"Claims" and "unnamed" being significant here. I can 'claim' to have spoken with the Princess' doctors, and unnamed sources, as well-very easy to do if I don't have to provide names or specifics.

Clarence House shouldn't confirm or deny them, since these are claims from unnamed doctors and unnamed medics, quoted by someone who may or may not be a friend of Prince Charles. They are much better off not addressing the whole issue any further than they already have.
 
sassie said:
Clarence House shouldn't confirm or deny them, since these are claims from unnamed doctors and unnamed medics, quoted by someone who may or may not be a friend of Prince Charles. They are much better off not addressing the whole issue any further than they already have.
Precisely.
 
Skydragon said:
Book claiming Di was 'psychotic' causes outrage

A new book claiming that Princess Diana may have been schizophrenic is in the eye of a storm.

Book claiming Di was 'psychotic' causes outrage

Thanks for sharing Skydragon.

Books like these make me mad and want to get on my soapbox because I just can't stand how people can just bandy around words like schizophrenia about a person when its a very serious and debilitating disease. I've known families with members that suffered from severe mental illness and these illnesses are far different than most people think just by reading a newspaper or sensational book.

This author must not know anything about schizophrenia. People can't function with it and it is mostly incurable, getting progressively worse with time. I find it almost impossible for a public person such as Diana to have schizophrenia with no one figuring out till now.

Plus there is a genetic component to schizophrenia and no one else in Diana's family has exhibited anything like it. On the contrary, the two illnesses we know she did suffer from, the eating disorder and the tendency to self-harm, were both exhibited by other members of her family and they too have a genetic component. With that family history, it is fair to say that she may have exhibited the eating disorder and the tendency to self-harm even if she had never married Charles.

But schizophrenia? No.
 
The sections of the new book on Princess Diana reads like it is anti-Di. I am getting sOOO tired of all these books.:wacko:
 
quote

georgiea said:
The sections of the new book on Princess Diana reads like it is anti-Di. I am getting sOOO tired of all these books.:wacko:

I couldn't agree more with you. These anti-Diana books has been getting on my nerves for years.
 
sirhon11234 said:
I couldn't agree more with you. These anti-Diana books has been getting on my nerves for years.

Me too.
I am so tried of this people that write the books
 
georgiea said:
The sections of the new book on Princess Diana reads like it is anti-Di. I am getting sOOO tired of all these books.:wacko:

Oh really? It sounded more like anti-Tony Blair. :ohmy:
 
It didn't sound anti-Tony Blair to me. Which sentence makes it sound anti-Tony Blair Ysbel
 
Ah this quote:

According to Hodgson, Blair met Diana at Chequers shortly after his victory at the polls and was considering her wish to become a 'roving ambassador' for the UK.
Said Hodgson: "But, as with so many of Blair's easy promises, nothing ever happened.

makes him sound like a lying politician.
 
ysbel said:
Thanks for sharing Skydragon.

Books like these make me mad and want to get on my soapbox because I just can't stand how people can just bandy around words like schizophrenia about a person when its a very serious and debilitating disease. I've known families with members that suffered from severe mental illness and these illnesses are far different than most people think just by reading a newspaper or sensational book.

This author must not know anything about schizophrenia. People can't function with it and it is mostly incurable, getting progressively worse with time. I find it almost impossible for a public person such as Diana to have schizophrenia with no one figuring out till now.

Plus there is a genetic component to schizophrenia and no one else in Diana's family has exhibited anything like it. On the contrary, the two illnesses we know she did suffer from, the eating disorder and the tendency to self-harm, were both exhibited by other members of her family and they too have a genetic component. With that family history, it is fair to say that she may have exhibited the eating disorder and the tendency to self-harm even if she had never married Charles.

But schizophrenia? No.
I completely agree with your sentiments. Moreover I find it incredibly disgusting as the lady is dead and cannot defend herself.

Her sons will never speak out imo, due to protocol. So these sensationalised books are allowed to fester in the public realm.
 
The princes have spoken out before, so they might have something to say. They have tended to reserve their comments for when someone close to their mother betrayed her by blabbing, so they might not say anything this time. I think most of us know how they feel about this, though, but it doesn't stop people cranking out the books because they know there's still a market. I wouldn't expect things to improve for a while yet, considering the 10th anniversary of her death is coming up this year. There'll be a lot of greedy people jumping on that particular bandwagon.
 
Little_star said:
Her sons will never speak out imo, due to protocol. So these sensationalised books are allowed to fester in the public realm.
In all fairness, what good has speaking out ever done them? It merely draws more attention to and sells more copies of any book they protest against. Protocol has nothing to do with it...William and Harry have learned to pick their battles, and squelching sensationalised books isn't a battle they can ever win.
 
Brown launches Diana Award as charity
By Andrew Pierce

Brown launches Diana Award as charity | Uk News | News | Telegraph

A charity set up in memory of Diana, Princess of Wales was relaunched today by Gordon Brown with the blessing of the House of Windsor and the Spencer family.

The awards are part of Princess Diana's legacy
The renamed Diana Award will operate as an independent charity for the first time and aim to raise £1 million a year to further the work of the Princess with young children.
It will help to fund a national anti-bullying campaign in Britain’s schools and will honour children aged between 12 and 18 who inspire the lives of others in their classrooms and community.
 
Well that's wonderful news and a great honor for those kids who will recieve a Diana award. She would have been thrilled to have an award in her name dedicated to children.
 
wondefull news!!!!!! it's a great idea, a award for the young people with diana name, again, great news
 
Gibraltar Post produce new commemorative issue
Gibraltar Post issue a new set of stamps on 31 March commemorating the life of Princess Diana.

Gibbons Stamp Monthly- Gibbons Stamp Monthly, Stamp Collecting, Stanley Gibbons, Latest Stamp News, Philatelic Magazine

The lavish new issue consists of a set of four stamps, a miniature sheet, four sheetlets and a Limited Edition Booklet of 1,500 copies.

The 20-page booklet includes the stamps, miniature sheet and sheetlets as well as a fully illustrated biography.
Copyright by Gibraltor Post
 
Last edited:
the stamps are great, is nice to see another set for diana, the last one was for the first death0's anniversary, I am right?
 
corazon said:
the stamps are great, is nice to see another set for diana, the last one was for the first death0's anniversary, I am right?

I think you are Corazon. These stamps are alot nicer than the first set.
 
Last edited:
That was an interesting article. To be honest I rarely saw a bad photo of Princess Diana.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom