The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #41  
Old 09-13-2005, 07:28 AM
Iain's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 306
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duchess
I just read the thread that had some postings about the possibility of an illegimate child for Margaret and Townsend.
There was an article in one of the British papers a few months ago about a man who is supposed to be Margaret's son.
.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 09-13-2005, 07:38 AM
Warren's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 15,423
Margaret's baby shock!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iain
There was an article in one of the British papers a few months ago about a man who is supposed to be Margaret's son.
Discussed at greater length through the last two pages of the Princess Margaret thread, here...

Princess Margaret (1930-2002) part 1: to May 2007

.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 09-13-2005, 10:12 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 108
Les efants de la duchesse de windsor

"There's also a website for the man that says he's the child of the Duke and Duchess of Windsor (I'll see if I can find it) that shows resemblances of people with the same kinds of claims."

This woman lives near to me, I am not sure about it. It looks odd to me as well. Very odd. WE3... highly doubtful.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 07-29-2006, 05:27 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Irvine, United States
Posts: 30
Questions of Royalty and Legitimacy

This is purely a hypothetical question:

What would have happened if Diana found out that she was pregnant after the divorce?
Either conceived with Charles prior or after the divorce)

Would the baby be considered a royal and 4th in-line to the throne?

Thanks!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 07-29-2006, 05:31 PM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,843
Well, status is decided on birth and not on conception so if the baby was born after the divorce, the parents wouldn't be married therefore the baby would be legally a bastard and wouldn't get Royal status automatically. But in that situation, I imagine the Queen would have given the baby Royal status and a nice title, the baby would still be illegitimate though and wouldn't be in line for the throne.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 07-29-2006, 05:49 PM
Toledo's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Spain, residing in the USA, United States
Posts: 1,522
I doubt the Queen would have allowed Charles and Diana to get a divorce if she was expecting his child during the process of the divorce. She is after all the one with the final say in that family. So, the baby would have been born legitimized. But, in the hypotetical situation that the divorce was unstopable and the child was born later, I side with Beatrixfan, an illegitimate child would be excluded from the throne line.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 07-29-2006, 05:49 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,736
The baby would still have been a royal prince/princess and in line for the succession provided The Queen agreed to acknowledge the child as royal.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 07-29-2006, 05:52 PM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,843
British law clearly states that a child must be born in wed lock to be considered legitimate, whether Royal or Common. So, if Charles and Diana were divorced, their baby would be born out of wedlock and thus illegitimate and the only thing that would legitimise the child is the marriage of the parents which in this situation didn't and wouldn't have happened. The title would have been given by the Queen in the same way she gave titles to William and Harry but as an illegitimate child, the baby wouldn't be in Royal succession.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 07-29-2006, 06:00 PM
Toledo's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Spain, residing in the USA, United States
Posts: 1,522
Now, let's spice this up. If the child is born after the divorce but, like in this hypotetical case, conceived within the matrimony, what would the status be? Would the royal child's status within the family go by birth or by conception?

This brings up the recent celebrity case of actor Charlie Sheen, whose wife filed for divorce while being pregnant. So, things like this do happen.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 07-29-2006, 06:04 PM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,843
Well, British law goes on the status of the parents at birth, hence why, if you get pregnant, marrying before the baby's birth will make the baby legitimate. If you don't and the baby is born out of wedlock, it's illegitimate, no matter what the status was at conception. In Britain, it's always done by birth.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 07-29-2006, 06:05 PM
Toledo's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Spain, residing in the USA, United States
Posts: 1,522
You win.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 07-29-2006, 06:21 PM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,897
If the state of the Wales marriage was as bad as they said it was, the chances are that if Diana was pregnant at the time of the divorce, Charles wouldn't have been the father.

If she'd become pregnant while married but Charles had insisted that there was no way the child was his, and a genetic test showed as much, the child would also not be in the line of succession.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 07-29-2006, 06:27 PM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,843
Indeed Elspeth. I think that such an event would cause such a scandal that succession would have to be reviewed and we'd get into the whole Catholic debate and there would be questions raised about the very nature of the Monarchy and that would be dangerous.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 07-29-2006, 07:59 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,736
For all practical purposes, Charles and Diana were divorced after their separation was announced, so it's highly unlikely this would ever have come to pass. They were living totally apart for some time.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 07-29-2006, 08:03 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,736
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeatrixFan
The title would have been given by the Queen in the same way she gave titles to William and Harry but as an illegitimate child, the baby wouldn't be in Royal succession.
The Queen didn't "give" William or Harry any titles. Under the 1917 Letters Patent of George V, they are automatically princes of the UK with the rank of HRH as male-line grandchildren of the Sovereign.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 07-29-2006, 08:09 PM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,843
Indeed but without the Sovereign they can't have those titles. In an illegitimate case, the child wouldn't have any titles automatically.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 07-29-2006, 10:58 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Irvine, United States
Posts: 30
Thanks for the very informative replies! :)

A couple of follow-up question:

(1) did Diana(or other wifes or royals) have to be examine
by a doctor prior to getting a divorce, so as to make
she wasn't carrying a royal baby?

(2) have there been any illegitimate children in the British
royal family in the last 100 to 200 years? If so, how
are/were they treated?


Thanks!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 07-30-2006, 04:58 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,523
With regard to Question 1 - no idea

With regard to Question 2 - the Queen's cousins - the Harewood's (descedents of George V's daughter) have illegitimate children in there somewhere. They have no titles or entitlement to any titles by inheritance and are NOT in the line of succession.

George III's sons had many illegitimate children who were acknowledged by their fathers during the lifetime of the fathers but not much acknowledgement afterwards - I have heard no reference to Victoria for instance acknowledging her haf-siblings through her father but she did spend time with her half-brother and half-sister through her mother (they were born in wedlock).
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 03-03-2009, 06:05 PM
Kotroman's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: -, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Posts: 464
Aren't people recquired to spend a specific amount of time seperated before divorce can be done? I believe it is a year or so (perhaps it is just in my country). I think the purpose of this seperation time during which spouses are still legally married is exactly the legitimacy of an unplanned child.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 03-03-2009, 06:51 PM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kotroman View Post
Aren't people recquired to spend a specific amount of time seperated before divorce can be done? I believe it is a year or so (perhaps it is just in my country). I think the purpose of this seperation time during which spouses are still legally married is exactly the legitimacy of an unplanned child.
You must have been married for a minimum of one year before you can start proceedings. If it is not being contested and allowing for paperwork backwards and forwards to the people concerned and the court, a degree nisi can be granted within 2 to 3 months. After the degree nisi is granted, by law the petitioner must wait six weeks and one day before applying for a decree absolute. It is possible to apply for a divorce after 2 years separation if the partner cannot be contacted for any reason, it is also possible to drag it out to 5 years. Therefore I don't believe it has anything to do with a possible pregnancy.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
british monarchs, british royal family, illegitimate children, mistresses, styles and titles


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
Historical Scandalous Royal Affairs and Mistresses Monalisa Royalty Past, Present, and Future 167 05-15-2012 07:34 PM
Theoretical Discussion: What if Victoria would get pregnant out of wedlock? Lena Crown Princess Victoria, Prince Daniel and Family 22 05-21-2005 05:58 PM
Does Juan Carlos have children out of wedlock? Queen Astrid King Juan Carlos and Queen Sofia 2 11-09-2004 05:14 PM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
abdication birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria duchess of cambridge dutch royal history fashion genealogy grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri infanta leonor infanta sofia jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg nobility olympic games ottoman pom pregnancy president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince maurits prince pieter-christiaan princess anita princess astrid princess beatrix princess charlene princess claire princess laurentien princess mabel princess madeleine princess marilene princess mary princess mary fashion princess of asturias queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden the hague wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:31 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]