Delphine Boël, daughter of King Albert II

[leidi]

And the other way around? Would half of Paola's inheritance go to Albert and in that way indirectly end up with Delphine? Because it might indeed get messy and the amounts might vary significantly based on who passes first.

What was it like before the change?

They had a pre-nup, meaning each one would only get what they brought to the marriage, now all their assets are shared.

And yes, it is going to get messy when either one dies (but that's really their fault, not Delphine's or any other of Albert's children).

 

[Tatiana Maria]

All the newspapers sites here in Belgium, state that it is official. That the ADN has demonstrated she is King Albert's daughter. Not really a surprise !

Yes, the DNA testing result has demonstated that she is King Albert's biological daughter, but becoming his official daughter will require a ruling from the court of appeal.


From a Belgian news article posted earlier:

Reste à la Cour d'appel à entériner ces résultats et à se prononcer sur la recevabilité de la demande de reconnaissance de paternité, déposée par Delphine Boël il y a longtemps déjà...​

https://www.rtbf.be/info/belgique/d...que-de-delphine-selon-le-test-adn?id=10418022

 

[Mbruno]

They had a pre-nup, meaning each one would only get what they brought to the marriage, now all their assets are shared.

And yes, it is going to get messy when either one dies (but that's really their fault, not Delphine's or any other of Albert's children).

If all of their assets that were obtained after they got married are shared, does that mean that items of historic value such as Queen Élisabeth's art deco diamond bandeau tiara are co-owned by Albert and Paola ? I guess they could transfer those pieces to King Philippe or Princess Astrid in life, but then, under a Napoleonic system, my understanding is that Delphine would have to be compensated accordingly, is that right ?

Yes, the DNA testing result has demonstated that she is King Albert's biological daughter, but becoming his official daughter will require a ruling from the court of appeal.

That is just a matter of time now. I don't see how the Court of Appeal could rule against it , especially after Albert's lawyer said he would not contest the legal paternity case.

Albert seemed to be stubborn about this before so I wonder what made him have a change of heart. I'm glad for Delphine and her mother that he's officially declared and settled this.

I suppose the obvious answer to this question is that the DNA test came positive and he saw no point in denying the paternity anymore. The test result would become public eventually and it would be embarassing for him.


Unfortunately I don't think the matter is settled though. Once Delphine becomes Albert's legal daughter, the bigger issues of her share of his inheritance and of her legal / constitutional position in the Royal Family and the line of succession will have to dealt with.



This is actually huge for the Belgian royal family and, because of the underlying constitutional questions, the government will have to get involved too.

 

[SLV]

They had a pre-nup, meaning each one would only get what they brought to the marriage, now all their assets are shared.

And yes, it is going to get messy when either one dies (but that's really their fault, not Delphine's or any other of Albert's children).

Actually, that kind of testament is quite normal here in The Netherlands. And rather un-messy.

 

[camelot23ca]

Albert seemed to be stubborn about this before so I wonder what made him have a change of heart. I'm glad for Delphine and her mother that he's officially declared and settled this.

If the reports above of various family members being gifted properties are true, it makes me think that Albert may stalled just long enough to pass on as much wealth as possible to his “real” family - getting wills sorted out, properties transferred, school tuitions paid, etc - and Delphine can now come to claim her quarter of whatever is left.

Or maybe they’ve come to an agreement where she gets a larger settlement now in exchange for no further public statements or fighting for titles.

I’ve never had any sympathy for Albert but I’m not as sympathetic to Delphine as I once was, either.

 

[Somebody]

I suppose the obvious answer to this question is that the DNA test came positive and he saw no point in denying the paternity anymore. The test result would become public eventually and it would be embarassing for him.

Unfortunately I don't think the matter is settled though. Once Delphine becomes Albert's legal daughter, the bigger issues of her share of his inheritance and of her legal / constitutional position in the Royal Family and the line of succession will have to dealt with.

This is actually huge for the Belgian royal family and, because of the underlying constitutional questions, the government will have to get involved too.

I believe it is constitutionally rather straight forward: she was not born out of an approved marriage, so she is not in line to the throne. Even Albert's half-brother and half-sisters were not, while their parents were married, so she has even less of a case.

 

[Somebody]

Actually, that kind of testament is quite normal here in The Netherlands. And rather un-messy.

If the parents only have shared children and nobody marries twice, it's rather straight-forward but in case either an 'additional' child is somewhere in the mix or the surviving parent marries a second time, things can get messy.

 

[Mbruno]

I believe it is constitutionally rather straight forward: she was not born out of an approved marriage, so she is not in line to the throne. Even Albert's half-brother and half-sisters were not, while their parents were married, so she has even less of a case.

Yes, but Tatiana Maria said Belgian civil law no longer distinguishes between legitimate and illegitimate children. So there is an issue as to whether legal recognition of Albert's paternity "legitimizes" Delphine for the purposes of succession to the throne.


There is also a separate issue of whether she is entitled to become a Princess of Belgium and an HRH under the 2015 royal decree of King Philippe or not. I don't think there is a definite answer to that question yet.


Tatiana Maria mentioned that she might seek to use Albert's name legally. But Albert doesn't have a family name, so if she wants to "use his legal name", the only interpretation to me is that she will try to become legally HRH Princess Delphine Michèle Anne Marie Ghislaine, Princess of Belgium , like Astrid or Laurent.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

I believe it is constitutionally rather straight forward: she was not born out of an approved marriage, so she is not in line to the throne. Even Albert's half-brother and half-sisters were not, while their parents were married, so she has even less of a case.

Moved my response here:
http://www.theroyalforums.com/forum...-constitutional-issues-28900.html#post2288855

Tatiana Maria mentioned that she might seek to use Albert's name legally. But Albert doesn't have a family name, so if she wants to "use his legal name", the only interpretation to me is that she will try to become legally HRH Princess Delphine Michèle Anne Marie Ghislaine, Princess of Belgium , like Astrid or Laurent.

But the stated interpretation of Philippe, Albert and Delphine (through their lawyers) is that his surname is "of Saxe-Coburg". Surely it is their interpretation which matters the most?

ETA: Note that if Albert did not have a family name, the second stated justification in the 2015 decree would be invalidated.

 

[Mbruno]

I will restate that I do not think Delphine will seek or be given a position in the order of succession, but the constitution is not as straightforward as that. There is no explicitly stated rule that heirs must be born out of an approved marriage.

The official interpretation provided by the government in 1991 was that Albert's half-siblings were not in line because their parents were not married, constitutionally, in spite of being civilly married.

Incidentally, King Albert's half-sisters were never in the line of succession to begin with since cognatic succession only applies to Albert's descendants under the constitution.



So the only half-sibling who was excluded was Prince Alexandre and , in his case, the official interpretation was indeed that he was excluded for marrying without consent.


There is no legal question, I believe, that Leopold's children from his second marriage are "legitimate".

But the stated interpretation of Philippe, Albert and Delphine (through their lawyers) is that his surname is "of Saxe-Coburg". Surely it is their interpretation which matters the most?

ETA: Note that if Albert did not have a family name, the second stated justification in the 2015 decree would be invalidated.

When did Delphine's lawyers state that Albert's last name is "of Saxe-Coburg" ? When they filed the court case ?



Why do you mean by the second stated justfication? THe text of the decree says : "à la suite de leur prénom et, pour autant qu'ils les portent, de leur nom de famille". I think the qualification "pour autant qu'ils les portent" means that the reference to the family name only applies if a family name is used, which doesn't happen in any official document where Albert was cited as prince or king.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Incidentally, King Albert's half-sisters were never in the line of succession to begin with since cognatic succession only applies to Albert's descendants under the constitution.

So the only half-sibling who was excluded was Prince Alexandre and , in his case, the official interpretation was indeed that he was excluded for marrying without consent.

There is no legal question, I believe, that Leopold's children from his second marriage are "legitimate".

The official interpretation was that he (and of course his sisters) were excluded from birth as they were constitutionally not legitimate notwithstanding that they were legitimate in civil law. As such, Prince Alexandre did not require consent to marry as he had no succession rights to lose, per the official interpretation.

Please refer to my response to Somebody, which I have updated with a link to the official interpretation provided by the Prime Minister: http://www.theroyalforums.com/forum...-constitutional-issues-28900.html#post2288855

When did Delphine's lawyers state that Albert's last name is "of Saxe-Coburg" ? When they filed the court case ?



By second stated justification, do you mean "à la suite de leur prénom et, pour autant qu'ils les portent, de leur nom de famille"? I think the qualification "pour autant qu'ils les portent" means that the reference to the family name only applies if a family name is used, which doesn't happen in any official document where Albert was cited as prince or king.

Sorry, I will probably need more time to fully reply to your questions, but I will return to them (most likely in the titles thread).

However, I was referring to "Considérant qu'aux fins de l'application de la loi du 8 mai 2014 modifiant le Code civil en vue d'instaurer l'égalité de l'homme et de la femme dans le mode de transmission du nom à l'enfant et à l'adopté, et de la loi du 8 août 1983 organisant un registre national des personnes physiques, et aux fins de la participation à la vie économique de membres de la Famille Royale, il convient d'éviter le plus possible la confusion entre le nom de famille et les titres".

 

[Marengo]

In the newspaper De Morgen Alain Berenboom - the lawyer of King Albert II - defends the King. While the newspaper claims that many thought this un-dignifying spectacle should have been settled much earlier, the lawyer claims that this was impossible. He claims that even if the King wanted to it was not possible to recognize Delphine because until December her legal father was Jacques Boël. The DNA results were released yesterday, after which the King recognized immediately that Delphine is his daughter.

The newspaper concludes that the lawyer's line of reasoning is exemplary for what happened in the last six years. The King tried to hide himself in Legal ditches. They blame the King himself that this matter had to become a public spectacle: for 33 years the two had contact out of the public eye, Delphine understood the difficulty of the King's position.

This all changed when Mario Danneels mentioned her existence in a biography of Queen Paola in 1999. The king broke off contact in a now infamous telephone call. For years she tried to restore contact but every time she bumped her head against a wall.

Danneels adds that claims that Jacques Boël functioned as a father-figure while Albert did not are "nonsense". "Jacques Boël was an absent father while Albert was practically living with Sybille Selys de Longchamps. The three of them even went on vacation together.

The newspaper claims that legal experts disagree if Delphine can claim the title of Princess. Her lawyer says that she will not, as that was never the intention. She just wants to get rid of the name Boël. The newspaper says she can use the surname 'van België" but sources claim she will chose "van Saksen-Coburg". "The entire process was a search for identity. There is nothing that gives more identity than a last name".

https://www.demorgen.be/nieuws/koni...or-de-familienaam-van-saksen-coburg~b7df8316/

 

[Countessmeout]

Yes, but Tatiana Maria said Belgian civil law no longer distinguishes between legitimate and illegitimate children. So there is an issue as to whether legal recognition of Albert's paternity "legitimizes" Delphine for the purposes of succession to the throne.


There is also a separate issue of whether she is entitled to become a Princess of Belgium and an HRH under the 2015 royal decree of King Philippe or not. I don't think there is a definite answer to that question yet.


Tatiana Maria mentioned that she might seek to use Albert's name legally. But Albert doesn't have a family name, so if she wants to "use his legal name", the only interpretation to me is that she will try to become legally HRH Princess Delphine Michèle Anne Marie Ghislaine, Princess of Belgium , like Astrid or Laurent.

Does succession really matter?? She is the youngest sibling, being five years younger then her youngest half brother. She would be 17th in line to the throne and with every grandchild that comes will fall further. Bar an accident like King Ralph, really not an issue.

But civil laws, and laws to titles are not normally considered the same. Why titles to a throne or aristocratic title can be male only. In UK civil law changed surrounding adoptive children. But that doesn't change the rules for inheriting titles and estates other then allowing them to use courtesy titles.

The fact she was not only born out of wedlock but adulterous, I doubt she will be put in succession. Possibly allowed his last name or even title but not HRH.

Only real question is about the money. I think Albert likely did all he could legally behind the scenes to keep as much money as he could from her. Possibly a tryst under the crown. To limit what Delphine gets.

Maybe a pay out settlement to end it now.

 

[Denville]

Today's declaration was not official, only a communiqué released to the media. See the reports shared by Marengo earlier in the thread: http://www.theroyalforums.com/forum...er-of-king-albert-ii-6319-67.html#post2288648

His attorneys have made comments indicating that he will no longer contest the official court proceedings (Somebody translated them here http://www.theroyalforums.com/forum...er-of-king-albert-ii-6319-69.html#post2288744) if Delphine presses forward with her legal case, but that hasn't yet occurred.

Why has Delphine's legal father who raised her, broken up with her? Is it because she has gone after this recognition from King Albert?

 

[Mbruno]

Why has Delphine's legal father who raised her, broken up with her? Is it because she has gone after this recognition from King Albert?

Her mother divorced her former legal father a long tiime ago when Delphine was still just 9 years old or so. And then she and her mother went on to live in England. They haven’t had a close relationship with Jacques Boël since then.

Having said that, it was Delphine who broke up with Jacques Boël having the courts declare that she is not legally his daughter, not the other way around.

I guess we have to take her lawyer’s words that she won’t be seeking any titles or a place in the Royal Family , but I am still skeptical ( US spelling).

If she manages to be called “ of Saxe-Coburg” only, she will already be profiting from being recognized as a member of a prominent European family which, up to Elizabeth II, includes the British monarchs and, in the past, also included the Portuguese and Bulgarian monarchs.

I don’t know if “ of Saxe-Coburg” will fly though as neither Albert nor his children ever used that name legally in any document. There is a claim ( not confirmed by any document either) that they started using “ prince of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha” ,in their legal names, following their dynastic titles and the title of Prince of Belgium, in accordance with the 2015 decree, but, even in that case, “ Prince of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha”, which is regulated by the Saxe-Coburg-Gotha house laws, does not descend to illegitimate children, does it ?

 

[Denville]

Her mother divorced her former legal father a long tiime ago when Delphine was still just 9 years old or so. And then she and her mother went on to live in England. They haven’t had a close relationship with Jacques Boël since then.

Having said that, it was Delphine who broke up with Jacques Boël having the courts declare that she is not legally his daughter, not the other way around.

I guess we have to take her lawyer’s words that she won’t be seeking any titles or a place in the Royal Family , but I am still skeptical ( US spelling).

If she manages to be called “ of Saxe-Coburg” only, she will already be profiting from being recognized as a member of a prominent European family which, up to Elizabeth II, includes the British monarchs and, in the past, also included the Portuguese and Bulgarian monarchs..

I don’t know if “ of Saxe-Coburg” will fly though as neither Albert nor his children ever used that name legally in any document. There is a claim ( not confirmed by any document either) that they started using “ prince of Saxe-Cioburg-Gotha” ,in their legal names, following their dynastic titles and the title of Prince of Belgium, in accordance with the 2015 decree, but, even in that case, “ Prince of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha”, which is regulated by the Saxe-Coburg-Giotha house laws, does not descend to illegitimate children, does it ?

I can't imagine that she expects to be considered Royal or to have a title. Generally speaking, illegitimate descent means that one is out of the royal succession. Its not fair but that's the way it is..
I don't know much abuot this case but I was not sure if her legal father had remained close to her but their relationship failed when she began to seek recognition from her biological father.. (who certainly hasn't behaved well..).

 

[Pranter]

Here (at least in my state in the U.S.) if there is no will all biological and adopted children inherit equally. It's up to the executor (if below 40 K in total it can be whoever files the paperwork with the court, if the estate is over 40 K it goes into probate and the court is the executor or whomever they assign) to make sure all heirs are found/notified and assets/monies distributed equally..along with all debts being paid first.

If there is a will, and you want to specifically dis-inherit a child you have to state it so in the will and leave a nominal amount of money is recommended (100.00 or whatever). Of course they can challenge the will but unless you are talking huge assets the atty's will get most of it during court battles.

So I'm wondering is it possible in Belgium for Delphine's father to do something similar? Dis-inherit her?


LaRae

 

[Tatiana Maria]

I don’t know if “ of Saxe-Coburg” will fly though as neither Albert nor his children ever used that name legally in any document. There is a claim ( not confirmed by any document either) that they started using “ prince of Saxe-Cioburg-Gotha” ,in their legal names, following their dynastic titles and the title of Prince of Belgium, in accordance with the 2015 decree, but, even in that case, “ Prince of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha”, which is regulated by the Saxe-Coburg-Giotha house laws, does not descend to illegitimate children, does it ?

The claim to the titles was confirmed by a communiqué from the Palace itself in 2017. It is true that it has not been used in any public legal document.

Here is the quote from the Palace communiqué, which I posted in the thread on titles and styles:

As stated in the last source below, the Court styled the male-line descendants of King Leopold I as Princesses and Princes of Belgium, Duchesses and Dukes of Saxony, Princesses and Princes of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha in their communication to the 2017 edition of the publication Le Carnet Mondain.

Surprise, en effet, en découvrant « Le carnet mondain » dans sa version 2017. Tous les membres de la famille royale issus de la descendance de Léopold Ier (donc pas les épouses de rois, Mathilde et Paola, ou les conjoints de princes, Lorenz et Claire), à l’exception des enfants/petit-enfant d’Astrid et Lorenz, portent désormais aussi les titres de « Duc de Saxe, Prince de Saxe-Cobourg-Gotha » ou « Duchesse de Saxe, princesse de Saxe-Cobourg-Gotha ».

[...]

[...] comme le précise le volumineux ouvrage mondain, que « les informations concernant la famille royale de belgique sont reproduites tellse qu'elles nous sont communiquées par le Palais »."

[...]

Qu’en dit le Palais royal, justement ? [...] « L’arrêté royal de 2015 a confirmé que les membres de la famille royale portent les titres auxquels ils ont droit de part leur ascendance. C’est le cas », se borne-t-il à répondre.​

Translation

Surprising indeed on finding "Le carnet mondain" in its 2017 edition. All of the members of the royal family born in descent from Leopold I (thus not the wives of the kings, Mathilde and Paola, or the spouses of the princes, Lorenz and Claire), with the exception of the children/grandchild of Astrid and Lorenz, henceforth carry as well the titles of "Duke of Saxony, Prince of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha" or "Duchess of Saxony, Princess of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha".

[...]

[...] the bulky work specifies that "the information concerning the royal family of Belgium is reproduced from that which was communicated to us by the Palace"."

[...]

What does the Royal Palace have to say for it? [...] "The Royal Decree of 2015 confirmed that the members of the royal family bear the titles to which their ancestry gives them the right. This is the case," is its limited response.
​

Again, I will return to this in the thread Titles of the Belgian Royal Family.

But if you read the Royal Decree of November 12, 2015, the Civil Code, the statements from the Palace in 2015, and the commentary from legal experts in 2015, it is clear that the Royal Decree would likely be unenforceable (and the name on Princess Anna Astrid's birth certificate in 2016 would likely be incorrect) unless the Saxe-Coburg titles and surname are valid. And if it is not clear, I will be happy to explain in the thread Titles of the Belgian Royal Family in due course.

 

[Addapalla]

So I'm wondering is it possible in Belgium for Delphine's father to do something similar? Dis-inherit her?

Why bother? Albert has had years to shield his & Paola's kid's inheritance, hide and move money about, etc. My guess is they - or at least their attorneys and accountants - have been preparing for this eventuality for some time.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

In the newspaper De Morgen Alain Berenboom - the lawyer of King Albert II - defends the King. While the newspaper claims that many thought this un-dignifying spectacle should have been settled much earlier, the lawyer claims that this was impossible. He claims that even if the King wanted to it was not possible to recognize Delphine because until December her legal father was Jacques Boël. The DNA results were released yesterday, after which the King recognized immediately that Delphine is his daughter.

It is true that King Albert had no way to legally recognize Delphine so long as Jacques Boël remained her legal father, as the civil law does not allow the recognition of multiple fathers. However, he could do so now (as Jacques has ceased to be Delphine's legal father) by way of a registered act of civil status. Apparently he has decided against doing so, despite his acknowledgement that Delphine is his biological daughter.

https://diplomatie.belgium.be/nl/Diensten/Diensten_in_het_buitenland/Burgerlijke_stand/Afstamming

In any case, he could certainly have issued a statement unofficially acknowledging Delphine as his blood daughter at any time.

[...] but sources claim she will chose "van Saksen-Coburg". "The entire process was a search for identity. There is nothing that gives more identity than a last name".

https://www.demorgen.be/nieuws/koni...or-de-familienaam-van-saksen-coburg~b7df8316/

Her lawyer Marc Uyttendaele said the same regarding her choice of surname a couple of years ago. Perhaps they are aware of what the Palace said in 2015. I am inferring from Alain Berenboom's reaffirmation that Delphine will continue to apply for legal recognition.

 

[Denville]

Why bother? Albert has had years to shield his & Paola's kid's inheritance, hide and move money about, etc. My guess is they - or at least their attorneys and accountants - have been preparing for this eventuality for some time.

surely he can leave her some money, he is not so badly off.. and it would be a proper gesture after denying she is his daughter for so long. It has come out now, he has admitted it, so noone's going to be scandalised..and though his wife may nto be happy abuot the public exposure of his having a child, it is public now so for him to mention her in his will isn't going to be any worse than wwhat has already happened.

 

[rominet09]

In Belgium you can't legally desherit your children, a part of what you leave is blocked for them

 

[Denville]

In Belgium you can't legally desherit your children, a part of what you leave is blocked for them

but unitl this admission, she wasn't known or recognised as his child...

 

[Addapalla]

surely he can leave her some money, he is not so badly off.. ... it is public now so for him to mention her in his will isn't going to be any worse than wwhat has already happened.

I agree with you 100%. My only point was the royal couple's attorneys and accountants have likely been busy for years protecting to the best of their abilities whatever estate Albert and Paola have planned for the surviving spouse and their three children.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

but unitl this admission, she wasn't known or recognised as his child...

She is still not legally recognized as his child as the admission was a communiqué to the media and not a legal act registered by the municipality, although as Mbruno said earlier, legal recogntion is almost certainly only a matter of time. What King Albert's lawyers have said is that he will voluntarily adapt his testament to grant her an equal share. http://www.theroyalforums.com/forum...er-of-king-albert-ii-6319-69.html#post2288744

 

[Tatiana Maria]

[...]

Danneels adds that claims that Jacques Boël functioned as a father-figure while Albert did not are "nonsense". "Jacques Boël was an absent father while Albert was practically living with Sybille Selys de Longchamps. The three of them even went on vacation together.

[...]

https://www.demorgen.be/nieuws/koni...or-de-familienaam-van-saksen-coburg~b7df8316/

Sad her other father disinherited her.
[...]
What a painful experience to be rejected by your own father for years!!!

It strikes me too that Delphine Boël has had the experience of psychological rejection by not only one father, but two. And that as you say, it must have been painful.

 

[Marengo]

In an article by Yves Delepeleire in De Standaard it is made clear that Delphine tried to get in touch with her father through mediation by other people. She had even approached Cardinal Danneels himself. When all avenues had failed she decided to go to court, knowing that it would end any hope of a reconciliation but fighting for recognition.

A few weeks she went to court in 2013 Albert suggested an arrangement where he would admit in a sealed letter that she is his daughter. The letter could only be opened after Albert's death.

The newspaper concludes that the king had run out of options and had no choice but to announce the news. If the court announced it it would do even more damage to his reputation - which the newspaper claims is already in tatters. And there were rumors of letters between Albert and Sybille Selys de Longchamps that could have been used as well.

In Het Niewsblad Wim Dehandschutter claims that in his Christmas speech in 1999 the King had wanted to go further than he did - he only alluded to marital difficulties in the past- but Paola prevented him from doing so. For her the existence of Delphine was a living memory of the ost painful period of her life.

An article by Koen Baumers writes a background story how it all came about. In 1966 after the birth of Laurent the marriage between Albert and Paola was facing difficulties. There are rumors of affairs and Albert is seen in night clubs in Paris. In the summer of that year he goes alone to Greece where he meets the ambassador, Baron François de Selys-Longchamps. He is staying longer than the planned week as he tells Sybille that he is in love, something that she was not. The next day he went back to Brussels. In December they meet again, Albert arranges that he is sitting next to Sybille at a dinner party.

In March 1967 the two of them went skiing. The chef de cabinet went along - so the court must have known about it. In februari 1968 Delphine is born. Sybille moves to Uccle, where Albert visits her nearly on a daily basis. When Albert let it be known that he also wants to divorce the Prime Minister Leo Tindemans makes it clear that this would mean that he would lose custody over his three other children. The relationship ends in 1984 when he announces that he will celebrate his silver wedding anniversary with Paola.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

Fascinating Marengo, thank you.

So, if Albert lost custody of his children in 1968 who would have gained custody? Paola was in the middle of her own love affairs, and Baudouin had reportedly sided with his brother and threatened to cut Paola off financially if she didn't straighten up and fly right.

Would Baudouin and Fabiola have taken custody of the youngsters in the event of a divorce?

 

[Denville]

Fascinating Marengo, thank you.

So, if Albert lost custody of his children in 1968 who would have gained custody? Paola was in the middle of her own love affairs, and Baudouin had reportedly sided with his brother and threatened to cut Paola off financially if she didn't straighten up and fly right.

Would Baudouin and Fabiola have taken custody of the youngsters in the event of a divorce?

Why would he have lost custody?

 

[Marengo]

Fascinating Marengo, thank you.

So, if Albert lost custody of his children in 1968 who would have gained custody? Paola was in the middle of her own love affairs, and Baudouin had reportedly sided with his brother and threatened to cut Paola off financially if she didn't straighten up and fly right.

Would Baudouin and Fabiola have taken custody of the youngsters in the event of a divorce?

The idea was that Paola would receive full custody. Even though the King and Queen could not stand her at the time. Paola was expected to stay in the Belvedere too and receive a generous amount of money. Both were told that they would lose their title of Prince de Liège. Another condition was that Sybille de Selys-Longchamps would never be allowed -even after she and Albert would have married- to meet the children. Paola's string of affairs never lead to a serious relationship as Albert's did and it was said that she only started to behave the way she did after she discovered Albert's adventures. But the court moved heaven an earth to keep the two together. Friends and even a former lover of Paola were recruited to convince them to make amends.

Baudouin and Fabiola were not functioning at foster-parents at the time. Until the last miscarriage in 1968 it was assumed that they would have children. Of the two parents it was Paola who did most of the parenting by far. Filip, Astrid and Laurent often stayed - separately from each other - with courtiers or friends of parents, such as the De Broquevilles, General Gilbert de Masières (chef of the house of the Princes of Liège), Michel Didesheim (to the great displeasure of Paola who blamed him for her husbands infidelities - as Didisheim accompanied Albert on Trade Missions) and Jacques and Mimi Solvay. In their teens they went to boarding schools and sometimes stayed with teachers in the weekends. In the biography by Danneels about Laurent an anonymous teacher of the primary school relates how Prince Filip often did not want to go home after school, 'He would sometimes be hanging onto my legs, begging not to send him back to the royal domain. The sad stories which he told about the family situation in order to convince us were heart breaking'.

It is claimed that all four children were deeply marked by this period that happened at such a young age, the three legitimate children perhaps even more so than Delphine, who at least had a relatively normal and stable upbringing with her mother. Delphine was one overheard by a journalist while commenting about Laurent: 'as a child you should at least have one good parent'.

--
I have read some claims in the press what Delphine's siblings intend to do. As we know Laurent and Delphine (and Claire) met Delphine in 2008: https://www.demorgen.be/nieuws/prins-laurent-ontmoet-halfzus-delphine-boel~b9d31247/

The general tenure is that Laurent and perhaps even Filip want to establish contact with Boël while Princes Astrid is firmly in the camp of her parents and is 'livid' about the situation. I am not sure how much of this is based on deduction or on reality. I suspect the former.

In 2018 the King -accompanied by his wife Mathilde, his eldest daughter and some other people - and Delphine were coincidently seated at adjacent tables at the restaurant Belga Queen near the Place de Brouckère in downtown Brussels. According to people in the restaurant they looked at each other in surprise but did not speak with each other.

--
In the mean time an invitation to a 'late baby shower' for the 'new daughter' went viral on Facebook. A man named Alessandro De La Vega planned the ficticious event in the royal palace on February 1st. Over 25.000 people have so far responded with interest.

--
All editorials of the Belgian newspapers are damning. Het Nieuwsblad said that the King should have opened his arms and welcomed his daughter, instead his statement is as heartless as has been his treatment of her in these last years. De Morgen speaks about Albert's lack of courage and humanity. The GVA speaks about 'a grim tale without a happy ending'. HLN speaks about Alberts stubbornness, ego-centrism and unworldly behavior. Le Soir says that the inhumanity of Albert's argumentation is inappropriate and downright insulting. Sudinfo regrets the many missed opportunities that have now ruined the reputation of a more sponious king who made the monarchy less rigid than it was in the days of his brother. LDH says that if Albert recognized her earlier this whole painful episode could have been evaded. Instead he buried himself inside a lie. The King has made irreparable damage to himself and to the monarchy.