Delphine Boël, daughter of King Albert II


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Another thing is, that *Delphine had Albert during her formative years while Philippe and Astrid and Laurent didn't.* I imagine that engenders resentment; then go figure, Delphine wants to drag them into this mess. I don't see how Delphine can possibly think they would want her around now.

I'm confused there. Delphine had Albert during her formative years? Shouldn't that be the other way around?
 
But this man has two families. Though the members of his legitimate family are under no obligation to welcome her, she and her children are part of his family whether he likes it or not. And I think he is behaving very shabbily about the matter. He sounds spineless to me, and not a man I could respect.
Yes, I agree that King Albert has to conclude the saga with Ms. Boel. At the same time, Ms. Boel's actions can be viewed as desperation. If one is publicly rejected, one should find strength to move on with his/her life in my very personal opinion.
 
Last edited:
But this man has two families. Though the members of his legitimate family are under no obligation to welcome her, she and her children are part of his family whether he likes it or not. And I think he is behaving very shabbily about the matter. He sounds spineless to me, and not a man I could respect.

I disagree.

Albert doesn't have two families. His actions have indicated that he has one family, his wife, his children through that marriage, and their children. He does not consider Delphine to be his family and is under no obligation to do so.

Delphine herself has one family - her mother, step-father (possibly), partner, and children. Her actions have indicated that she is interested in having two families or at least furthering a relationship with her biological father and his family, but being related by blood does not mean that they're necessarily family. He doesn't consider her to be a part of his family, therefore she isn't.

That said, his actions do leave him in this morally questionable spot - as you put he's coming off as spineless and not someone to be respected. That he doesn't consider her his family is his right, and he should not be forced to do so. She has rights as his biological daughter (if she is in fact his; I believe a paternity test has yet to be conducted), and she deserves to get what she is legally entitled to. However, love and family are not things that children are legally entitled to from their parents.
 
Yes, I agree that King Albert has to conclude the saga with Ms. Boel. At the same time, Ms. Boel's actions can be viewed as desperation. If one is publicly rejected, one has to move on with his/her life in my very personal opinion.

The question is, however, at what point should she move on.

There are a couple ways her actions could be seen. Is she just trying to he recognized as his daughter and get the legal position that she is entitled to as such? Or is she trying to force him to accept her into his family?

If she's doing the first, I think she hasn't hit the moving on point, and the abdication can actually help her. The courts can force him to recognize her as his daughter and give her legal rights.

If she's doing the latter, however, she needs to move on. He's made his position clear an while the courts can give her a legal position, they cannot order him to love her or invite her to Christmas dinner and what not.
 
Legla rights like what?

Title?
Money?
Position in the succession.

I don't know how old Delphine is, but a place in the succession would drive one of the people in the succession insane because none of them would want to be bumped down. As for love, well, she should be looking for love in better places.

She already lost the inheritance from her stepfather who raised her.
 
Legla rights like what?

Title?
Money?
Position in the succession.

I don't know how old Delphine is, but a place in the succession would drive one of the people in the succession insane because none of them would want to be bumped down. As for love, well, she should be looking for love in better places.

She already lost the inheritance from her stepfather who raised her.

Delphine wouldn't be eligible for a place in the succession because of her illegitimacy.

If she was then the people born after her would have to suck it up. The people being bumped down have no choice in the matter. Look at Prince Harry - he's about to be bumped in the succession because of the birth of William's child. Albert's legitimate children are all older than Delphine so were she eligible for inclusion in the succession it would automatically be farther down the list.

As an illegitimate child, Delphine isn't likely to be eligible for titles either. She is, however, by law entitled to inheritance on Albert's death (if she is in fact his child). Having, or not having, an inheritance from someone else doesn't change that.
 
We have no definite proof that this woman is the King's daughter. Only a DNA test can prove it.

I hope she's not. Her mother shared her bed with the King, but she could have shared the bed with other men too.
 
Albert doesn't have two families. His actions have indicated that he has one family, his wife, his children through that marriage, and their children. He does not consider Delphine to be his family and is under no obligation to do so.

We'll just have to disagree then. As far as I'm concerned, when a man has a long term affair with a woman and the relationship produces a child, that child is his family whether he likes it or not.
 
I hope she's not. Her mother shared her bed with the King, but she could have shared the bed with other men too.

Woaah. That's a bit harsh - what would that achieve?

Albert will still be a man who had an affair with another woman. Delphine will still be an illegitimately born woman without a father. And her mother would be dragged from a woman who had an affair with a man to a woman who carried on with multiple men and can't identify the father of her child.

Personally, I don't think it would change my opinion about Albert or how he's handled this situation. If anything it would just make me feel worse for Delphine.
 
I hope she's not. Her mother shared her bed with the King, but she could have shared the bed with other men too.

Wow! I see that male chauvinist piggery is still alive and well in 2013.
 
Doesn't say much for the character of a man who has nothing to do with his child while they are growing up.

LaRae
 
Wow! I see that male chauvinist piggery is still alive and well in 2013.

No kidding...nary a mention of the fact that the king was an adulterer and most certainly slept in more than one woman's bed.

I'm not a feminist by any means ...but a spade is a spade.


LaRae
 
Woaah. That's a bit harsh - what would that achieve?

Albert will still be a man who had an affair with another woman. Delphine will still be an illegitimately born woman without a father. And her mother would be dragged from a woman who had an affair with a man to a woman who carried on with multiple men and can't identify the father of her child.

Personally, I don't think it would change my opinion about Albert or how he's handled this situation. If anything it would just make me feel worse for Delphine.

Harsh, but not impossible. Delphine's mother isn't someone with a high level of moral values, as she had an affair.

But I'm not trying to defend the King. I'm just saying that there's no proof that Delphine is His Majesty's daughter.
 
The king evidently thinks she is his daughter since, as I understand it, he paid support for her growing up. I would imagine if he had doubts he would of requested DNA.


LaRae
 
Oh and another thing if you want to talk about the level of moral values....the woman was wrong to have an affair but the greater wrong is on the part of the king as he is the one who broke his marriage vows.


LaRae
 
Oh and another thing if you want to talk about the level of moral values....the woman was wrong to have an affair but the greater wrong is on the part of the king as he is the one who broke his marriage vows.


LaRae

Do you read my post entirely? I said I wasn't trying to defend the King. And Delphine's mother also broke her marriage vows.
 
Harsh, but not impossible. Delphine's mother isn't someone with a high level of moral values, as she had an affair.

But I'm not trying to defend the King. I'm just saying that there's no proof that Delphine is His Majesty's daughter.

There is no DNA evidence yet, I agree. Anyone saying that Delphine is his daughter is making an assumption about it. I've knowingly made such an assumption for the purpose of some of my argument here because adding the whole "she might not be his daughter" makes the argument unnecessarily confusing.

That said, to say that you hope she's not his daughter really does scream of chauvinism. It comes off like you're trying to absolve Albert of his sins by pinning the blame on the woman here - it's basically "well she slept with one man while unmarried so who knows how many other men she slept with."

Delphine's mother seems to support the idea that Delphine is the daughter of Albert. While it appears to be fact that she had an adulterous affair with Albert while they were both married (her to the man who have his surname to Delphine), unless DNA proves it we can't say for certain that Albert is the father.

However, Delphine's mother seem to indicate that either she firmly believes that Albert is the father or else that she is willing to try to take Albert for a ride here. Given as Delphine is trying to get DNA tests done, I'm inclined to believe it's because they firmly believe that Albert is the father.
 
I think it would be funny is she turned out to be the biological doughter of her legal father, the man she has publically rejected.
 
Oh and another thing if you want to talk about the level of moral values....the woman was wrong to have an affair but the greater wrong is on the part of the king as he is the one who broke his marriage vows.


LaRae

The Baroness was still married to Rene Boel, Delphines legal father, during the time she had her affair with Albert. She and Boel did not divorce until 10 yrs after Delphine was born.
 
The Baroness was still married to Rene Boel, Delphines legal father, during the time she had her affair with Albert. She and Boel did not divorce until 10 yrs after Delphine was born.

I'm speaking to the king's marriage. He committed the greater wrong. He broke his vows in his marriage.

LaRae
 
I'm speaking to the king's marriage. He committed the greater wrong. He broke his vows in his marriage.

LaRae

Which makes it seem as if you believe it was OK for the Baroness to break her marriage vows.
 
I'm not going to cast stones at someone merely because they have an affair. That sort of "morality" doesn't interest me. I will, however, hurl some really large ones at a man who decides, after apparently acknowledging his paternity of the child of the woman with whom he had an affair for many years, not a one night stand, and having a relationship with the child, to then suddenly turns his back on that child because of some deal he's made to go back to his wife. Very poor form, in my opinion.
 
I'm not going to cast stones at someone merely because they have an affair. I will, however, hurl some really large ones at a man who decides, after apparently acknowledging his paternity of the child of the woman with whom he had an affair for many years, not a one night stand, and having a relationship with the child, and then suddenly turns his back on that child because of some deal he's made to go back to his wife. Very poor form, in my opinion.

Just a question, because I can't find it on Wikipedia and I don't want to google it on my phone, but is there a source confirming that he has acknowledged Delphine in the past? And I mean a source other than Delphine saying as much?
 
Just a question, because I can't find it on Wikipedia and I don't want to google it on my phone, but is there a source confirming that he has acknowledged Delphine in the past? And I mean a source other than Delphine saying as much?

My only source is previous comments in this thread, so I am assuming it is correct. It just has the ring of truth to me.
 
Which makes it seem as if you believe it was OK for the Baroness to break her marriage vows.

If you use logic you would find I believe the inverse is true as well.

LaRae
 
The question is, however, at what point should she move on.

There are a couple ways her actions could be seen. Is she just trying to he recognized as his daughter and get the legal position that she is entitled to as such? Or is she trying to force him to accept her into his family?

If she's doing the first, I think she hasn't hit the moving on point, and the abdication can actually help her. The courts can force him to recognize her as his daughter and give her legal rights.

If she's doing the latter, however, she needs to move on. He's made his position clear an while the courts can give her a legal position, they cannot order him to love her or invite her to Christmas dinner and what not.
Ms. Boel should have moved on with her life after the first publicity tour. Hopefully she could do so after the civil court resolves her situation.
It is impossible for me to determine what exactly Ms. Boel wishes to achieve.
 
Last edited:
I'm speaking to the king's marriage. He committed the greater wrong. He broke his vows in his marriage.

LaRae

If you use logic you would find I believe the inverse is true as well.

LaRae

Except you've said that Albert committed a greater wrong, implying that his marriage vows were somehow more important than the Baronesses.
 
My only source is previous comments in this thread, so I am assuming it is correct. It just has the ring of truth to me.

Okay. I'm not sure if I believe it entirely or not yet. Some of how this has been handled feels, to me, like Delphine is intentionally trying to cast Albert in a bad light, while some feels like Albert is trying to cover it up.

According to Delphine's Wikipedia page, Albert made a comment in his 1999 Christmas speech that is interpreted as an admittance to the affair, but it sounds like he has never publicly fully said as much. Delphine has said that Albert has told her she is not his daughter. She has also alleged that Albert and the Baroness were going to get married at one point (divorcing their spouses), but didn't, and maintained in contact until she was a teenager. She's also said that she didn't know he was her father until she was 18.

To me, it almost sounds like Albert did have the affair and is likely her father (him or Boel), but everything else seems like a bit of fabrication on the part of Delphine in order to cast Albert in a negative light (useful if she's suing him).
 
We have no definite proof that this woman is the King's daughter. Only a DNA test can prove it.

I hope she's not. Her mother shared her bed with the King, but she could have shared the bed with other men too.
WOW!!!
Anyway, it is common knowledge that all of the three lived together as a family for couple of years. Also, have you seen a picture of her?
 
WOW!!!
Anyway, it is common knowledge that all of the three lived together as a family for couple of years. Also, have you seen a picture of her?

When did they live together?

Do you have a source?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom