Proposal for Equal Primogeniture Succession

[Archduchess Zelia]

If the laws are being changed so that females can inherit the throne despite having younger brothers, I presume it in all cases would be the eldest twin, the firstborn of the two, who inherits the throne.

[NGalitzine]

First one out of the womb gets the crown. Even in C sections one baby gets out before the other.

[Muhler]

Originally Posted by NGalitzine

First one out of the womb gets the crown. Even in C sections one baby gets out before the other.

The ultimate "what if" must be: What if they are siamese twins?

[fandesacs2003]

Originally Posted by Muhler

The ultimate "what if" must be: What if they are siamese twins?

Nice. You made me laugh!!

[Lumutqueen]

Originally Posted by NGalitzine

First one out of the womb gets the crown. Even in C sections one baby gets out before the other.

Well, first one out gets the crown if the new law is in place. If a girl comes out first and a boy next, the boy is King.

[An Ard Ri]

Hello and welcome Irishtom

This link might help you!

Line of succession to the British throne - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Blue_]

Originally Posted by Lumutqueen

Well, first one out gets the crown if the new law is in place. If a girl comes out first and a boy next, the boy is King.

Why would the boy be king and not the girl if she's born first?

[NGalitzine]

Originally Posted by Blue_

Why would the boy be king and not the girl if she's born first?

If for some reason the proposed succession law changes don't pass in all the 16 realms then the current rules, males before females, remain in place.

[Artemisia]

Originally Posted by Blue_

Why would the boy be king and not the girl if she's born first?

Because, as of now, Britain still employs Male Primogeniture, meaning women can ascend to the Throne but only in absence of brothers (elder or younger). For instance, if George VI had a son, then the present Queen would have never become Monarch.

If the proposed changes are accepted then the first-born child, regardless of gender, will be the Heir or Heiress. The changes could also be adopted retroactively (the Swedish scenario), meaning that if William and Kate have twins and the first-born is a girl and the younger twin - a boy, the girl may still become Heiress at some point.


Before the 1991 reform, Belgium had similar laws (or rather, Belgium had Agnatic Primogeniture, meaning women couldn't ascend to the Throne); after the changes, Princess Astrid and her descendants placed higher than Prince Laurent, whereas before Astrid had no succession rights at all.

[Blue_]

Okay! Thank you very much!
It isn't clear in newspapers then, they said that even if it's a girl she will be Queen of Britain.

[Iluvbertie]

The 16 realms have agreed that the first born will be the monarch but...at the moment none of those realms have past the necessary legislation as it is still being worked on by the committee in NZ.

Unless something dreadful happens like Charles, William and The Queen all die before the legislation is actually past it is safe to say that the first born will inherit as they will have decades to get the new law past - just an agreement is enough to go on with at the moment.

[Iluvbertie]

Originally Posted by Irishtom

Thanks for your answer. I dont know why I was left to believe that If Charles was to die that Andrew would become next in line to the queen as he would be her oldest son at the time of her death. I was also lead to believe that William would only become King after Charles filled the roll.

If I can add an historical precedence:

George II had a three sons and numerous daughters. His eldest son was Frederick, Prince of Wales (in the position Charles is now), with two younger brothers George William, and William. Frederick also was father with 9 children of his own - the eldest being George in the position William is now. When Frederick died it was this George who became heir apparent to the throne and was created Prince of Wales by his grandfather and eventually reigned as George III.

The line of succession is set and only births and deaths change it. As of now the line of succession is:

1. Charles
2. William
3. Harry
4. Andrew
5. Beatrice
6. Eugenie

When the child is born everyone from Harry down will move down one.

[Spheno]

I don't like what Cameron is so categorical in his statements. It is possible PM will point at princess X as heiress, but the law will say "prince Y is heir". Nonsense

[Iluvbertie]

Archaic and sexist law overshadows pending arrival of a new royal

I don't know if anyone else has read this but it does show why this law is taking so long - the smaller nations have more pressing issues and the problem with Australia being that the states also have to pass the laws so it is simply a lot of countries having to pass it.

An interesting read.

[Duke-of-Earl]

Statute of Westminster 1931 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Some additional reading for people not familiar with the issue

[Iluvbertie]

Originally Posted by Dman

Consent given for change to royal succession rules:
All Commonwealth realms have agreed to press ahead with a bill ending discrimination against women in the succession to the British throne-
BBC News - Consent given for change to royal succession rules

This was agree to in October 2011.

Since then there has been a committee working on the wording so it meets the needs of all 16 realms and yet after over a year they still can't come up with the wording that will work in all 16 nations.

It is possible that it could pass in say Britain and Australia next year and not pass in Canada meaning that a first born girl would be ahead of her younger brother to be the monarch of Canada so that at the time of accession Canada would have their own separate monarch.

[samitude]

If this law does get passed does that mean that Princess Anne will immediately jump to number five? Will it be like this?

1) Charles
2) William
3) Baby
4) Harry
5) Anne
6) Peter
7) Savannah
8) Isla
9) Zara
10)Andrew

[Queen Penelope]

The law won't be retroactive. The line won't change as far as Charles, Anne, Andrew and Edward and their children are concerned. It will be a going-forward thing, so any kids from when the law is passed on will be affected.

[Iluvbertie]

The stated date for the law to become effective was 2011 so even a son for Peter and Autumn (should they have a third child will be behind his two older sisters).

There is no intention to move Anne, Peter, Savannah, Isla and Zara ahead of Andrew and his children or Edward and his children, nor to put Louise ahead of James.

The new law will be like this:

Charles
William
William's children in birth order
Harry
Harry's children in birth order
Andrew
Beatrice
Beatrice's children in birth order
Eugenie
Eugenie's children in birth order
Edward
James
James' children in birth order
Louise
Louise's children in birth order
Anne
Peter
Savannah
Isla
Any further children of Peter in birth order
Zara
Zara's children in birth order.

[samitude]

Oh, I see now. Thank you for explaining this. I edited my original post to correct Peter's second daughter's name. I had her down as Sienna and I see that her name is Isla. I knew it was a celebrity name and I couldn't think of what it was.