The Duke & Duchess of Cambridge are expecting their third child: September 2017


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
The palace said she has HG, she is not just suffering from the usual morning sickness.
 
I had a sister in law who had HG with her 3 pregnancies she was worse with each one the last one she spent 3 months in hospital. I really feel for Kate so hard to do anything if your constantly sick
 
It would be a great cause for her to take up.

During the video where she, William, and Harry had a conversation, she mentioned difficulties after the birth of George when she went back to Wales with William
 
Last edited by a moderator:
THE Duchess of Cambridge has been trying a number of remedies, even ginger, in a desperate effort to combat her morning sickness, Prince William has revealed.

Kate, who is expecting her third child, is again suffering from hyperemesis gravidarum which plagued her during the early stages of her pregnancies when she was carrying Prince George and Princess Charlotte.

When an elderly mother-of-three revealed to William she had a similar illness when pregnant with her sons, he confessed his wife had tried ginger, a well-known remedy for upset stomachs.

The Duke met Iris Orrell, 98, when he attended a presentation ceremony and reception celebrating the Metropolitan and City Police Orphans Fund, which he supports as patron.
Read more: https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...pregnant-latest-royal-baby-prince-william/amp
 
I do find it strange to be having a third when Charles reportedly, with William's agreement, wants a smaller royal family when the main reason it is so large now is that George V and Elizabeth II each had so many kids. Having a third means a larger family in the future rather than it getting smaller - although they could just limit 'duties' to the monarch and spouse and heir and spouse and tell the others 'get real jobs and stick at them until you retire' and that would give the BRF the smaller look that Charles believes the people want.

Is the point of having a 'smaller royal family' not mainly having fewer 'active senior royals'? The main reason there are currently so many of them is because of the involvement of the cousins of the Queen (and her longevity) - partly due to her own insistence that not only the Dukes, but also the females in the family stay involved (I think that was the right decision, but it did increase the number of active members to more than it previously was). Had she reduced the workload to only the male line or only the children of the monarch there would be far fewer working royals. Furthermore, I don't think two or three children makes that much of a difference (and I am glad that William and Catherine do not limit their family size just because of a perceived issue with the 'large' royal family - they should feel free to have even more if they would like to and are able to have them).

The easiest way to visibly reduce the royal family would be to limit the HRH treatment to only the direct-line (so not including the male-line grandchildren; and with Edward's children not being given that treatment there is a precedence) - and only expect royal duty of the RH. If these measures had been in place the number of 'active' royal family members would have been much smaller over the years. However, that is probably something to be discussed elsewhere...
 
Is the point of having a 'smaller royal family' not mainly having fewer 'active senior royals'? The main reason there are currently so many of them is because of the involvement of the cousins of the Queen (and her longevity) - partly due to her own insistence that not only the Dukes, but also the females in the family stay involved (I think that was the right decision, but it did increase the number of active members to more than it previously was). Had she reduced the workload to only the male line or only the children of the monarch there would be far fewer working royals. Furthermore, I don't think two or three children makes that much of a difference (and I am glad that William and Catherine do not limit their family size just because of a perceived issue with the 'large' royal family - they should feel free to have even more if they would like to and are able to have them).

The easiest way to visibly reduce the royal family would be to limit the HRH treatment to only the direct-line (so not including the male-line grandchildren; and with Edward's children not being given that treatment there is a precedence) - and only expect royal duty of the RH. If these measures had been in place the number of 'active' royal family members would have been much smaller over the years. However, that is probably something to be discussed elsewhere...

The Queen needed her cousins to be working Royals before her children were old enough to take on duties. Just the Queen, Philip, her mother and sister were not enough working Royals. And Richard gave up his career as an architect to become a working Royal--it would be poor form to kick the cousins to the curb after they sacrificed for the Royal Family. So they continued to work, and the working family grew. Limiting to male line is pretty regressive.
 
The Queen needed her cousins to be working Royals before her children were old enough to take on duties. Just the Queen, Philip, her mother and sister were not enough working Royals. And Richard gave up his career as an architect to become a working Royal--it would be poor form to kick the cousins to the curb after they sacrificed for the Royal Family. So they continued to work, and the working family grew. Limiting to male line is pretty regressive.
Luckily I never said anything like that ? - quite the opposite.

To avoid going off-topic here, you can find a longer response in the 'The Monarchy after Elizabeth II'-topic.
 
It would be a great cause for her to take up. Maybe dealing with issues of HG and possible post pardum would be a good draw in for Kate. Having an actual connection to HG would make it so much more meaningful having her talking to people and supporting it.

The hospital drip became my sister's BF during the most part of her second pregnancy, the first being quite routine.

Kate very well could, but distressing as it is, HG is a relatively transitory (I know it doesn't seem so at the time!) medical condition, so I'm not sure what more she could say other than "I had it and I want to forget it ... try the ginger biscuits / avocado etc.!" As it is, I'm sure the majority of people never heard of the condition until Kate was expecting George, so in a way she has brought it into the public domain simply by having it and making that fact public knowledge.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've deleted and edited a number of posts. This thread isn't about Kate's various charities, or how involved she is with them. Let's stay on-topic.
 
Last edited:
I doubt that Edward and Sophie would have had a third if the first hadn't ended the way it did for the simple reason that Sophie nearly died having Louise.

As for Charles and Diana - Charles only ever wanted two. It was Diana who wanted three and after Charles had the second he was gone so he would never have had a third anyway.

I do find it strange to be having a third when Charles reportedly, with William's agreement, wants a smaller royal family when the main reason it is so large now is that George V and Elizabeth II each had so many kids. Having a third means a larger family in the future rather than it getting smaller - although they could just limit 'duties' to the monarch and spouse and heir and spouse and tell the others 'get real jobs and stick at them until you retire' and that would give the BRF the smaller look that Charles believes the people want.

Same here :ermm:
 
Does anyone really think that Charles would dictate to William and Catherine how many children they can have?

This is one of the daftest things I've read.
 
This is the first time I've heard that said (the above post by Bertie)....and I don't think it's true either.


LaRae
 
Does anyone really think that Charles would dictate to William and Catherine how many children they can have?

This is one of the daftest things I've read.

Agree entirely. There's a difference between streamlining the number of family members working as full-time royals and dictating to your children how many kids they get to have. A world of difference.
 
Has Charles actually ever stated that he wants to streamline the monarchy or is that a case of "sources say" and then the speculations became facts?
 
It's all sources say as far as I know.


LaRae
 
Actually, there's an argument to be made that if Elizabeth and Bertie had had one or two more kids, there'd be a smaller working RF right now.

One of the reasons the Gloucesters and various and sundry Kents are working members of the RF now is that when the King died, Elizabeth had only herself, her mother, her husband and her sister to do the work.

If she'd had a sibling more or two, those siblings would have been drafted and would by now likely be either retired or shuffled off this mortal coil, leaving HM, her kids, and W/K/H.
 
Actually, there's an argument to be made that if Elizabeth and Bertie had had one or two more kids, there'd be a smaller working RF right now.

One of the reasons the Gloucesters and various and sundry Kents are working members of the RF now is that when the King died, Elizabeth had only herself, her mother, her husband and her sister to do the work.

If she'd had a sibling more or two, those siblings would have been drafted and would by now likely be either retired or shuffled off this mortal coil, leaving HM, her kids, and W/K/H.

Good points hel. Had Bertie and Elizabeth had a larger family then it would have changed the line up of who is considered part of the working BRF. Imagine if one had been a boy and we'd be viewing HRH Princess Elizabeth of to the side of the balcony while her younger brother would be waving to the crowd.
 
Has Charles actually ever stated that he wants to streamline the monarchy or is that a case of "sources say" and then the speculations became facts?

Quick reply as it is off topic but no he hasn't.

Some time ago (ie 20 years or so) a spokesperson for PoW mentioned it in passing and it was taken up by the UK media as the "holy Grail" of future monarchy. This tale was added to by the limited number of people on the balcony at the Queens last Jubilee.

There's a thread about it - I think its "Monarchy under Charles". I'd try and do a link but I'm rubbish at that sort of thing.

Mods - just helping someone, please don't tell us off!
 
This is the first time I've heard that said (the above post by Bertie)....and I don't think it's true either.


LaRae

I think the large number of working royals is due to the fortunate longevity of members of the royal family. Many family do not have so many older members alive, much less still vital and active. George will need siblings to help out--most all the folks working now will be gone.
 
Quick reply as it is off topic but no he hasn't.

Some time ago (ie 20 years or so) a spokesperson for PoW mentioned it in passing and it was taken up by the UK media as the "holy Grail" of future monarchy. This tale was added to by the limited number of people on the balcony at the Queens last Jubilee.

There's a thread about it - I think its "Monarchy under Charles". I'd try and do a link but I'm rubbish at that sort of thing.

Mods - just helping someone, please don't tell us off!


Monarchy after Elizabeth: http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f23/the-monarchy-after-elizabeth-ii-11874.html

Monarchy under Charles: http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f23/the-monarchy-under-charles-16252.html
 
I hope this passes quickly!


LaRae
 
I really think Catherine’s experiences with HG (for the third time) could allow her to be a voice for those women who once suffered or who are currently suffering from hyperemesis gravidarum. It’s not an illness that’s widely known and I think all of this presents her with an opportunity to help shine a light on the seriousness of this morning sickness.
 
Last edited:
Yes I wonder if she will get involved with a pregnancy group etc.


LaRae
 
I really think Catherine’s experiences with HG (for the third time) could allow her to be a voice for those women who once suffered or who are currently suffering from hyperemesis gravidarum. It’s not an illness that’s widely known and I think all of this presents her with an opportunity to help shine a light on the seriousness of this morning sickness.

There is at least one charity in the UK for it. I am sure they could only benefit from some support from Kate. Could really bring some attention to the cause. The fact some people think its not a huge issue or one very few people have, tells that its something that needs speaking about.
 
April it is!
 
Did you see an announcement muriel?


LaRae
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom