The Queen: Would She Consider Abdication or Retirement?

[scooter]

I meant a head injury leading to a coma. Sorry for not being clear.

[Iluvbertie]

Originally Posted by scooter

I firmly believe that the only reason that the POW would (or could) become Regent is if HM The Queen was physically or mentally incapacitated. In the absence of that, the POW will have to wait his turn. Long live Queen Elizabeth! An example to us all.

Originally Posted by scooter

I agree Iluvbertie, except for example if HM had some kind of head injury or stroke event, which would render her absolutely comatose or physically incapable. I hope that day is decades away and that she lives to QEQM's life span.

Originally Posted by scooter

I meant a head injury leading to a coma. Sorry for not being clear.

As you can see from these quotes you mention, in the first one physically incapcitated but then only give examples on mental incapcity.

A coma would render her mentally incapable.

I can think of no physical impairment, can you?

I mean a physical impairment that doesn't also involve a mental incapacity so something like being bedridden would make her physically incapable but not mentally and therefore no need for a regency.

[scooter]

OK, if we're going to parse it...how about QEII has a stroke rendering her not only completely paralyzed but also unable to speak, but mentally all there... regardless, I would not trade her for a second.

[MARG]

In such a case she would not have a lot of "say", as the situation has absolutely nothing to do with the Queen "considering abdication or retirement".

She would be totally unable to undertake any official role as Queen, in which case I believe Charles would be declared Regent until such time as she either improved dramatically or died.

Neither instance has any element of "choice" and is therefore irrelevant to the topic at hand.

[Warren]

Yes, rather than thinking up various types of incapacities, we should stick to the topic of [shudder] abdication.

[scooter]

Shudder, indeed Warren!

[Russophile]

Originally Posted by scooter

Shudder, indeed Warren!

I triple that! It's a darned good thing HM does a lot of preventative care as well as natreopathic!

[scooter]

All I know is she is what has held the public esteem of the BRF together through all the tribulations and scandals of her children and their spouses. If it was to just be Charles and the now wife/former mistress (or during the first marriage but that's all part and parcel together) and Andrew and the former wife and Anne back when she was misbehaving with either husband....however Sophie and Edward have kept their nose and reputation clean...so 1 for 4.

[Skydragon]

HM certainly represents the times and values of an older generation, very few of her mishaps were every put into print. There were allegations of affairs but the PTB managed to keep the press on a tight leash.

Much as I would not wish to see the death of Elizabeth II, I do look forward to a new era that would come with Charles & Camilla.

To everything there is a season.

[Roslyn]

I, too, look forward to the change. HM has been there for such a very long time. I would like to see a new reign in my lifetime.

Though I don't long for her death, I foresee many years of HM gradually and inevitably deteriorating before eventually disappearing from public duties completely, with Charles taking on more and more of her jobs but still not being the boss. He might be an old man before becoming king, and I think that would be a shame.

At 21 HM devoted her life to the service of her subjects, but perhaps there is more than one way to serve them.

[Madame Royale]

I don't look for change as of yet, myself. Infact, I hope the Queen has another 10 to 12 years left in her, god and good health willing. And imo, with the death of Elizabeth we'll see the end of what is likely to be considered the last "golden" era of monarchy not just in England, but in Europe and the world I'm sure. Though far from certain, it's very unlikely we'll ever see a sovereign reign as long as EIIR (certainly not forgoing the King of Thailand) and I for one will miss her.

[Lumutqueen]

I do not think that HM will abdicate or retire. However I think, she should and let Charles become King.

[Warren]

Originally Posted by Roslyn

I, too, look forward to the change. HM has been there for such a very long time. I would like to see a new reign in my lifetime.

I guess we'd all like to be around for a Coronation, possibly the most grand and glittering ceremony on the planet. However, we should also appreciate living in the time of what may be the longest reign in recorded British history. As each year passes HM moves further into that realm of something quite special, unique and venerated, just as Queen Victoria did. When the Queen-Empress died, it was the end of an era and some thought the beginning of the end of the Monarchy.

But here we are, approaching 110 years since the death of the great Queen and the end of that particular era. Yet the Monarchy and the dynasty have survived two world wars, the Great Depression, an abdication, political change and social upheaval, annus horibilis (now 17 years in the past), the Diana-era turmoil, and every other major and minor shock-horror scandal, from Princess Margaret and Peter Townsend to Charles and cherry brandy. The strength of the institution resides largely with the Monarch and the still-powerful and indefinable royal mystique. One day Charles will assume his destiny and become his own style of King and the social and environmental activism of his life as Prince of Wales will become muted as befitting a constitutional monarch. Charles and then William's time will come, but for the present we should savour being witness to the tail end of a very special reign of a very special Sovereign. When the era of Elizabeth II does come to a close there will be a large percentage of the world's population who will have known no other British Monarch, yet still know remarkably little about the private side of the dutiful figurehead who modelled herself on her father and who had been there for most or all of their lives.

[Sereta]

I hope she doesn't abdicate unless she absolutely has to.

[Marsel]

Originally Posted by Warren

I guess we'd all like to be around for a Coronation, possibly the most grand and glittering ceremony on the planet. However, we should also appreciate living in the time of what may be the longest reign in recorded British history. As each year passes HM moves further into that realm of something quite special, unique and venerated, just as Queen Victoria did. When the Queen-Empress died, it was the end of an era and some thought the beginning of the end of the Monarchy.

But here we are, approaching 110 years since the death of the great Queen and the end of that particular era. Yet the Monarchy and the dynasty have survived two world wars, the Great Depression, an abdication, political change and social upheaval, annus horibilis (now 17 years in the past), the Diana-era turmoil, and every other major and minor shock-horror scandal, from Princess Margaret and Peter Townsend to Charles and cherry brandy. The strength of the institution resides largely with the Monarch and the still-powerful and indefinable royal mystique. One day Charles will assume his destiny and become his own style of King and the social and environmental activism of his life as Prince of Wales will become muted as befitting a constitutional monarch. Charles and then William's time will come, but for the present we should savour being witness to the tail end of a very special reign of a very special Sovereign. When the era of Elizabeth II does come to a close there will be a large percentage of the world's population who will have known no other British Monarch, yet still know remarkably little about the private side of the dutiful figurehead who modelled herself on her father and who had been there for most or all of their lives.

Wonderfully put, Warren!
I fully agree with your post.

Her Majesty managed to introduce a new approach to Monarchy, at the same time maintaining the ideals of her father and many of her ancestors.
When it's Charles' turn, he will introduce his own personal touch; however I think on the whole, he will maintain much the same attitude as his Mother.
Because British Monarch is not just a person, it's an Institution.


As for the immediate question of this thread, I don’t think Her Majesty would consider abdication under any circumstance. Her job is not one that allows retirement; it’s a job for life. And the Queen has shown that she realises it quite well.

[NotAPretender]

I wish with all my heart to see HM live to an age beyond her mothers' years.

She has much left to offer her subjects, and her service ends with her death. I genuinely believe that at the time of her accession, she believed wholeheartedly that she had been called, by God, to serve, and that only God can release her from her service.

I also believe that she considers herself "married" in a manner to being a monarch. And this is someone who believes in the basic teachings of her Faith, that marriage is indissoluble. I can only imagine how her family's cavalier attitude toward marriage has tested her patience, but I doubt it has ever tested her faith or her beliefs in what it means to be called to this service.

However, I am not a mind reader.

[Rebafan81]

Being from America, I have always felt a great bond with the British Royal Family, it really was the only one that was ever reported on here. I learned everything else about royals from this great forum.
I second what Warren said, I feel so blessed to have been able to witness a little bit of history and to be exposed HM.
She is such a classy lady, I feel that no matter who takes over for her, it will be a disappointment. I don't mean that they won't be a wonderful King and a great person, but how do you follow-up a woman who put everything she had into what she believed? She is, in my opinion, the last link to the Golden era before the Royals were "exposed" to the world for real people, someone appointed by God, with Divine authority. I hope she continues with good healthy and continues to enjoy her job.
God Bless the Queen.

[Iluvbertie]

Originally Posted by Rebafan81

Being from America, I have always felt a great bond with the British Royal Family, it really was the only one that was ever reported on here. I learned everything else about royals from this great forum.
I second what Warren said, I feel so blessed to have been able to witness a little bit of history and to be exposed HM.
She is such a classy lady, I feel that no matter who takes over for her, it will be a disappointment. I don't mean that they won't be a wonderful King and a great person, but how do you follow-up a woman who put everything she had into what she believed? She is, in my opinion, the last link to the Golden era before the Royals were "exposed" to the world for real people, someone appointed by God, with Divine authority. I hope she continues with good healthy and continues to enjoy her job.
God Bless the Queen.

If you ever read the letters, editorials etc to the newspapers from about 1897 onwards you will see similar, if not the exact same sentiments expressed about the forthcoming passing of Queen Victoria with many expressing doubts about Albert Edward's (Edward VII's) fitness to take the throne. In hindsight he is seen as a very good king who set his own tone and did a brilliant job of following his mother.

We are now seeing History repeat itself and I am confident that Charles will be just as good a king as his great-great grandfather was in similar circumstances.

[Dierna23]

I personally think, HM would never ever consider abdiction or retirement. But it was a very interesting and informative read, to see what would happen in case of a physical impairment or mental incapacity.

[Madame Royale]

Originally Posted by lumutqueen

I do not think that HM will abdicate or retire. However I think, she should and let Charles become King.

On what logical grounds though? The Queen is of able body, mind and spirit and boasts such an approval rating throughout Britain and certainly the Commonwealth, that to abdicate would be unquestionably the most nonsensical decision ever undertaken by a British monarch, in modern times.

Unfortunately for Charles this of course means his time as monarch will be considerably lessened with each passing year. C'est la vie...that comes with the territory.

Certainly though, I think Charles will surprise a good many folk at how balanced a monarch he will (could?) be. From the interviews I've seen of the Prince of Wales, I think he's a genuinely lovely man with a healthy outlook and charitable disposition.