The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals > Prince Harry and Prince William

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #501  
Old 09-16-2016, 06:52 PM
Countessmeout's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: alberta, Canada
Posts: 3,406
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
The only factor that I could think of that would prevent being in the line of succession in this case would be the argument that the blood circulating through the unborn child was that of the surrogate. The child would not have the "blood royal".

I, though, don't think anything along these lines will ever come to pass.

ETA: not exactly sure about the blood. Did some searching and its only the nutrients from the surrogate that affect the fetus through the placenta. Its a complex matter it seems and it is call epigenetics
Um, no. The blood circulating through the baby is the baby's blood. There is no sharing of blood between mother and unborn baby. The blood and genetics come from the cells which created the baby, the parents. That is how women with AIDS can have babies without. The virus usually passes to their child either in delivery when the baby comes in contact or nursing.

Researchers believe a small amount of a surrogate dna may attach but so minimalistic in the trillions of cells, it would never be detected.


The issue would be with the public. There would always be rumours that the child is not Harry of his wife's baby in full. They could publish dna tests and theories would still spread.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #502  
Old 09-16-2016, 06:59 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
The only factor that I could think of that would prevent being in the line of succession in this case would be the argument that the blood circulating through the unborn child was that of the surrogate. The child would not have the "blood royal".

I, though, don't think anything along these lines will ever come to pass.
Not that, but Im sure the child would have to be seen as born from the mother, who is the legal wife of the Prince. A surrogate carrying a baby is going tot give birth but she's not the legal wife. And an adopted child would not be In the line of succession either.
I can't see this happening anyway. Maybe in another 20 or 50 years, it might be considered Ok and they'd legislate for it. But there's no need for Harry to produce heirs.. so I can't see that they'd make any changes in the law unless it was the only way of producing an heier. There are LOADS of heirs, so that's not likely to be the case.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #503  
Old 09-16-2016, 07:05 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: bedford, United States
Posts: 1,365
The kid would have Harry's Royal Genes and that of his lawful wife. The child would be genetically and legally legit.
Reply With Quote
  #504  
Old 09-16-2016, 07:16 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 6,632
Its an interesting scenario to ponder over but as the chances of something like this actually happening is slim to none, I think we're just splitting heirs here.
__________________
“When I was 5 years old, my mother always told me that happiness was the key to life. When I went to school, they asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up. I wrote down ‘happy’. They told me I didn’t understand the assignment, and I told them they didn’t understand life.”
― John Lennon
Reply With Quote
  #505  
Old 09-16-2016, 07:25 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: bedford, United States
Posts: 1,365
Yes. Realistically They either have a child the fun old fashioned way or be Childless. Any bride of Harry's has to be fine with this.
Reply With Quote
  #506  
Old 09-16-2016, 07:26 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,124
Good one! (that's if harry and William HAVE any hair left in a few years).
I think it just would not happen.. it would lead ot all sorts of questions.. and really I don't think that Harry is that bothered about marriage and kids. he may say he would like botht but I just don't see him getting very worked up about it.
If he married and could not have them, I certainly feel he would be sad but he'd hardly divorce over it.
Reply With Quote
  #507  
Old 09-16-2016, 07:48 PM
Countessmeout's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: alberta, Canada
Posts: 3,406
Why would she have to be fine with it? As said there are plenty of heirs. If someone would contest the child right to be heir then fine. Royals have children just like any other couple, because they want them. Of Charles would be the only sibling to have them. If Harry and his wife have trouble conceiving, which is a very common issue, why shouldn't they have help? They should be able to have kids if they want. Not is he the heir, and the old fashioned Henry viii mentality he should divorce her and find a rife who can have kids
Reply With Quote
  #508  
Old 09-16-2016, 08:08 PM
Skippyboo's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 3,327
Found this on a uk website,

Birth mother is legal mother regardless of source of genetic material and if married, her husband is legal father. Parental orders are needed to reassign parents

Source: https://www.surrogacyuk.org/intended...tions-answered

So technically, it probably violates succession rules.

With his wealth, Harry and theoretical wife if they were having conception problems could look to drug therapy and IVF as options before surrogacy.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
Reply With Quote
  #509  
Old 09-16-2016, 10:26 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,188
Don't direct heirs to the throne have to be born both 'of the blood royal' (in one parent) and 'of the body' (in other words born in the normal way from the wife's womb)?

If some terrible disaster (God forbid) wiped out King William and his heirs, Harry would become the next King of course, but any adopted children or surrogates born in the marriage wouldn't be eligible under today's rules, as I understand it.

It's an extremely unlikely scenario anyway, but if a surrogate had been born during the marriage as an eldest child, using Harry's sperm and his wife's eggs, then the laws regarding Royal births and succession would have to be changed, I guess.
Reply With Quote
  #510  
Old 09-16-2016, 10:57 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 1,783
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
Don't direct heirs to the throne have to be born both 'of the blood royal' (in one parent) and 'of the body' (in other words born in the normal way from the wife's womb)?

If some terrible disaster (God forbid) wiped out King William and his heirs, Harry would become the next King of course, but any adopted children or surrogates born in the marriage wouldn't be eligible under today's rules, as I understand it.

It's an extremely unlikely scenario anyway, but if a surrogate had been born during the marriage as an eldest child, using Harry's sperm and his wife's eggs, then the laws regarding Royal births and succession would have to be changed, I guess.
I guess it all boils down to the exact meaning of "heirs of her body" (the actual language of the Act of Settlement).
Reply With Quote
  #511  
Old 09-16-2016, 11:10 PM
Skippyboo's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 3,327
Why would they change it just for Harry's kids. There are mess of people in line after Harry.

If they were concerned about children born out of wedlock and then parents marry or children born via surrogacy, they could have addressed those issues when they wrote the succession to the crown act.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
Reply With Quote
  #512  
Old 09-16-2016, 11:16 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,188
This is a situation so unlikely that it is in outer space somewhere! However, laws in Britain often limp behind advances in technology and in community expectations, sometimes by decades. Look at laws governing male homosexual relationships, on-line bullying, on-line fraud etc etc. Nor, sometimes, do they encompass every possible scenario.
Reply With Quote
  #513  
Old 09-16-2016, 11:23 PM
Skippyboo's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 3,327
UK law is the birth mother is the legal mother of baby even if no genetic relationship. So the genetic parents have to basically adopt their biological child back. That's what should be changed if the birth parents have no genetic ties to the baby.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
Reply With Quote
  #514  
Old 09-16-2016, 11:31 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,938
This has been discussed on the Gay Royalty thread.

Basically, British law recognizes the birth mother of a child born via a surrogacy as the legal mother - the surrogate has to give up her rights, and the parents have to adopt the child.

From a succession standpoint, this means that a child born via a surrogate is technically either an adopted child or an illegitimate one. If "adopted" then the child could hold courtesy titles, but if "illegitimate" then the child isn't even able to do that. I suspect that this would be changed if a royal were to actually have a child via a surrogate, although in all likelihood it will come about through a change in attitude among the peerage first, before being adapted for the RF.

But, regardless of succession rights and titles... why on earth would that prevent Harry and a wife from seeking a surrogate if they needed/wanted one? As has been said "there are loads of heirs" so why should his children being (or not being) in the line of succession be a factor to consider if Harry and his wife are unable to conceive through natural means?
Reply With Quote
  #515  
Old 09-16-2016, 11:41 PM
Skippyboo's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 3,327
There is nothing to stop them. There is also nothing to stop single Harry from adopting children or having them out of wedlock if he didn't care of their succession rights. A wife isn't a requirement for kids.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
Reply With Quote
  #516  
Old 09-17-2016, 03:09 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,124
I should say that Harry would prefer his children to be in line for the throne even if they aren't that likely to get there. And Im sure he would wish (and the RF would wish) for his children to be legitimate.
I'm very sure he would not just wish to have children by some woman he wasn't close to, and married to.
If he marries and can't have children, he could adopt, but its not IMO an ideal situation. His children would inevitalby be public figures so they would lose a lot of privacy, and not have the usual privileges of royalty to compensate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippyboo View Post
Found this on a uk website,

Birth mother is legal mother regardless of source of genetic material and if married, her husband is legal father. Parental orders are needed to reassign parents

So technically, it probably violates succession rules.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
well yes that's what I said. If the child is born to a surrogate mother she'd be the mother and so, the child would not be considered royal. It would have to be born to Harry's wife.
I don't see Harry going for such difficult options anyway if he couldn't have children "normaly".
Reply With Quote
  #517  
Old 09-17-2016, 10:25 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 264
Quote:
Lord Jopling: [...] The noble and learned Lord, Lord Wallace of Tankerness, who was speaking for the Government, was not able to answer the question there and then, but he kindly wrote to me again back in March of this year. I wish to quote part of his letter. He said that,

“the child of a surrogate mother cannot succeed to a peerage and the Government is of the view that if succession to the peerage is excluded then a fortiori succession to the Crown must be excluded as well, even though the Crown is not expressly mentioned”.

He went on to say:

“We believe that the law is currently sufficiently clear in this area, but should the issue arise in the future, and the Government of the day disagree, it could, of course, amend the legislation in line with the medical practice of the time. Given the pace of medical advancement in this area this seems eminently sensible”.
Lords Hansard text for*06 Dec 2013 (pt 0002)
Reply With Quote
  #518  
Old 09-18-2016, 02:55 AM
SLV's Avatar
SLV SLV is online now
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
Posts: 966
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post
Interesting, thank you.
Reply With Quote
  #519  
Old 09-22-2016, 07:00 AM
JessRulz's Avatar
Administrator
Blog Editor
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 6,771
The most recent discussion about Harry's sexuality stemming from a highly dubious article have been deleted.

Please remember our rules on speculation, which this article definitely did not comply with:


Quote:
Whenever possible, opinions should be based on factual information obtained from reputable sources and should be backed up by references to those sources. The moderators reserve the right to delete posts containing the more fanciful types of gossip and speculation, whether they originate in gossip magazines and websites or are simply fabricated.
Quote:
I received a message from a moderator saying that my post had been removed because it contained speculation. We don't know the royals and we get all our information second hand, so isn't it all speculation?

Our rule about speculation is intended to prevent tabloid-type flights of fancy which often slip into outright fantasy and sometimes even libel. While we realise that much of the information posted in the threads is based on reports in the media which we can't verify, we expect posters to base their statements on published reports rather than on wishful thinking or unsubstantiated hearsay. The forum moderators have the final say about whether posts are unacceptably speculative. Disagreements with moderator decisions must take place via private message, not by arguing in the threads and certainly not by reposting deleted material.
Questions are to be directed to the moderating team.
__________________
**TRF Rules and FAQ**
Reply With Quote
  #520  
Old 09-26-2016, 09:06 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,188
Ingrid Seward speaks about social media and its effects on Cressida Bonas, people in the street making remarks about her as she passed, etc. This is going to be the same for every girl Harry dates. Hide of rhinoceros required!

Cressida Bonas split up from Prince Harry 'because she could not take public scrutiny' | Daily Mail Online
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 7 (0 members and 7 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
Prince Harry: Relationship Suggestions and Musings 2015 JessRulz Prince Harry and Prince William 1114 01-04-2016 06:52 AM




Popular Tags
ascot 2016 best gown best gown september 2016 best hat best outfit best outfit october 2016 camillas outfits catherine middleton style coup d'etat crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mary fashion crown princess mette-marit current events duchess of cambridge e-mail fashion poll grand duke jean greece kate middleton king abdullah ii king felipe king felipe vi king willem-alexander martha louise member introduction monarchy multiple births new zealand nobel gala norway november 2016 october 2016 opening of parliament picture of the week prince bernhard prince charles princess madeleine princess marie princess mary princess mary daytime fashion princess mary fashion princess mary hats princess victoria princess victoria fashion queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen letizia style queen mathilde queen mathildes outfits queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania royal fashion september 2016 state visit state visit to denmark succession sweden the duchess of cambridge the duchess of cambridge casual wear the duchess of cambridge daytime fashion the duchess of cambridge fashion the duchess of cambridge hats


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:07 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2016
Jelsoft Enterprises