Duchess of Cambridge: What Now for Catherine? Future Duties, Roles, Responsibilities


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
And to Albert and Paola too! :lol:

I think as people live longer it will be considered by all the monarchies.
True. Bea likely pointed out to her friends that the hairstylists there can replicate her signature style along with Fabiola's, Sofia's etc..I'm sure that they can do QEII's as well. :D
 
I would like to point out that it is possible to be a working mom, why are some acting like it Kate does more royal duties George will suffer? It's not like she is a surgeon or a high powered attorney. Cut a ribbon give a speech one week a month and that's all.

Well stated. William's own mother by most accounts was an extraordinarily nurturing and devoted parent. Her sons were deeply bonded to her from infancy up to her premature death. And I think no one will argue that her workload was considerably heavier than Kate's...even with two young children vs. Kate's one.
 
Diana was married to the heir, was the Princess of Wales....Catherine is not.


LaRae
 
Well stated. William's own mother by most accounts was an extraordinarily nurturing and devoted parent. Her sons were deeply bonded to her from infancy up to her premature death. And I think no one will argue that her workload was considerably heavier than Kate's...even with two young children vs. Kate's one.

Actually in the beginning, Diana didn't have a lot of engagements. She didn't up her engagements until 1986 or 87 - when her kids were no longer babies. From 1981-1985 she did less than 80 engagements a year (the exception was 1983 when she did 110). I can't find info on 1986, but in 1987 she did 266 engagements and stayed in that range in '88. Between 1989-1993 her engagements were in the 300 range, then she went back down to the double digits in 1994.

There was an old People article that stated after William was born, Diana scheduled her engagements around him. She wanted to make sure that she could tuck him in at night.
 
Last edited:
^^^I like that she was given the time to be a nurturing mother when her boys were very young.
 
I like that too. I also notice that after the boys got a bit older, she gradually upped her duties. She wasn't just forced into 300+ engagements.
 
Diana was married to the heir, was the Princess of Wales....Catherine is not.


LaRae

My point exactly. She was much busier than Kate. She managed both sets of duties with aplomb...even when her boys were babies.
 
My point..it's not her job, she doesn't need to do it.


LaRae
 
I guess we will disagree on that Pranter. As a future queen of England and after three years of marriage into the BRF it is indeed her job and she does need to do it.

England is not Monaco, Lichtenstein or Luxembourg. It's a country with a considerable laundry list of social problems....unemployment, homelessness, and addiction among them. She is in an enviable position to make a difference. If she is to simply devote herself to her home and personal life why bother to take on any patronages at all at this point?
 
Last edited:
Diana wasn't much busier that Kate during the first few years of William and Harry's life. She did less less than 80 engagements. Basically around the same number of engagements that Kate has done.
 
In the third year of her marriage to Prince Charles? Really? What specific year are we discussing?

Less than three months after William's birth , and only a little over a year after her wedding, she was sent alone to represent HM at the funeral of Princess Grace of Monaco btw.
 
Last edited:
I have always defended Kate when it comes to working, but I admit it's getting harder to do so. Not so much for William, to me it looks like he has been working or working toward something since St Andrews.

I agree , I am a fan so I tend to be a little more biased but , think about it she doesnt have to do the cooking and cleaning , George has a full time nanny , so what does she do all day ? Watch tv ? Lol . I would be bored out of my mind if I was as idle as she was and I'm quite a lazy person myself :flowers:
 
Actually in the beginning, Diana didn't have a lot of engagements. She didn't up her engagements until 1986 or 87 - when her kids were no longer babies. From 1981-1985 she did less than 80 engagements a year (the exception was 1983 when she did 110). I can't find info on 1986, but in 1987 she did 266 engagements and stayed in that range in '88. Between 1989-1993 her engagements were in the 300 range, then she went back down to the double digits in 1994.

There was an old People article that stated after William was born, Diana scheduled her engagements around him. She wanted to make sure that she could tuck him in at night.

Diana wasn't much busier that Kate during the first few years of William and Harry's life. She did less less than 80 engagements. Basically around the same number of engagements that Kate has done.

Important facts. Important perspective. I find facts are more enlightening than impressions. Impressions have driven many a political career, not so? :flowers:

I agree, I am a fan so I tend to be a little more biased but, think about it, she doesnt have to do the cooking and cleaning, George has a full time nanny, so what does she do all day ? Watch tv? Lol I would be bored out of my mind if I was as idle as she was and I'm quite a lazy person myself :flowers:

As am I. :cool:

I am fortunate in that my career gives me enormous latitude and I have a husband who makes it possible for me to be an at-home mom even without my own work.

There is plenty to fill a day when I am on hiatus. I have no problem being indolent. :flowers:
 
Last edited:
Is this counting the tours diana did in her early years as a royal ?

I find kate is older , she is 32 not 20 yrs so it seems odd that her timetable with so much help is mostly empty .
 
Last edited:
This is not a Diana thread and there is no competition going on.

Move on
 
Very true. You are right. Thanks.

I only mentioned her at all as proof that it is indeed possible to be a good mother to young children and carry out a full schedule of duties...especially when you have a considerable amount of help with your responsibilities at home.
 
Last edited:
Exactly people are bound to wonder what someone with the resources she has is rarely seen out and about .
 
In the third year of her marriage to Prince Charles? Really? What specific year are we discussing?

Less than three months after William's birth , and only a little over a year after her wedding, she was sent alone to represent HM at the funeral of Princess Grace of Monaco btw.

I was discussing from the beginning of her marriage until after Harry had turned 2 or 3.

Yeah, those numbers included her overseas tour.

This is not a Diana thread and there is no competition going on.

Move on

You're right. Sorry about that.
 
It's a fact not an excuse. It's as true now as it was then...it isn't going to change until the PoW becomes King.



LaRae
 
That excuse worked 3 years ago, now it's getting old.


It is not an excuse , it is a fact. They are in diferent roles. They really should not be compared, but if you feel the need to compare them ,do so when Catherine is the Princess of Wales . Diana is on the same level as Camilla. Catherine is doing fine, and doing what she is suppose to do.
 
Last edited:
I was discussing from the beginning of her marriage until after Harry had turned 2 or 3.

Yeah, those numbers included her overseas tour.



You're right. Sorry about that.

In many ways it is a competition. If people are saying Kate doesn't do enough well who is she being compared to?

There is no precedent for her position so what yardstick is used to say she doesn't do enough?

I think she should adopt Camilla's role. Do less than half the engagements of your husband and play a background and supporting role.
 
At the pace Catherine the heir to the heirs wife , is going , I think Harrys wife will have the privilege of barely working , since she certainly wont be allowed to do more than her seniors .

Royals even if they work 5 days a week , they cant be compared to the average individual , their job involves maximum 5 hrs and a lot of VIP treatment to and from the work place , whether its an inaugural event or a charity visit their job isnt really that hard and the wives get a lot of free time with a lot of privileges . I think people are also a bit angry about the amount spent on KP and how they're going to move to Norfolk after all that expenditure renovating theie London town/palace house , while kate pre marriage had the misfortune of being called waity katie , all this opinion of them being lazy is a result if many factors
 
Last edited:
Exactly people are bound to wonder what someone with the resources she has is rarely seen out and about .

It does not mean she is not out and about. All it means we do not get pictures. You notice we do not get pictures of her shopping anymore. I dont think she has stopped I think they have gotten smarter about it. Catherine does not seem the type to make waves, I think she is doing exactly what the firm wants her to do.
 
It's a fact not an excuse. It's as true now as it was then...it isn't going to change until the PoW becomes King.



LaRae

It is an excuse, you don't have to be Princess of Wales to do royal duties, doingmore royal duties would not make her neglect George. William has a full time job, or soon will, and there are no worries about him not spending time with George. Kate doesn't have to be full time, but she does need to Con tribute more than she does, whether she is POW or not.

Annette I see your point with the pictures remark and I used to believe it more, but after 3 yrs I admit it's harder to swallow. I suspect all royals have things they do behind through scenes but they still are seen working in public at the same time.
 
Last edited:
I think what everyone was referring to was that Catherine is being compared to Diana, when in fact they aren't analogous situations.

If you think Catherine should be doing more, that's fine and your opinion. But don't compare her to Diana or Camilla (or, in my opinion, Sophie either) - these aren't equal situations.

Also, in response to people's anger about the renovations at KP, I just have to say that shocks me. At some point, these renovations had to be done as the property was in a terrible state. So, whether it was the Cambridges, Harry or the Queen's cousin Pete, the renovations were going to be done.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think that those that believe that Kate should be doing more than she is and actually see her doing them forget that its not up to Kate to pick and choose how much or how little she does. Each and every event, appearance or photo-op in the capacity of representing the Firm goes through channels and then is rubber stamped by the Queen herself. I suppose that Kate could take a page out of someone else's book and decide "Hmmm.. they want to see more of me. Who in the media can I attach to and let them know where I'm going so the public sees me working and more stories are written about me?" Nope.. bad bad idea.

It gets me too to still see in print that 4.5 million were spent on W&C's Apt 1A renovations. Lets put it this way. If the taxpayer had put that 4.5 million exclusively into the renovation and furnishing of a lavish, posh apartment, it would have been a big waste of money and moans and groans from all when the entire structure of KP eventually crumbled into dust. They then would be aghast at how little care was given to one of their primary historic properties.
Go figure.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
AFAIK the State Apts. at KP required nearly 12 million for renovation so they could be reopened to the public.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom