The Queen: Would She Consider Abdication or Retirement? - Page 14

Sister Morphine · #**261** 05-10-2010, 09:23 PM

After what she saw her father go through with her uncle, I doubt very seriously she would even entertain the idea of abdicating or retiring. If she became incapacitated in any way and unable to do her duties as Queen, I'm sure Charles would step in as Regent and do those things for her until her death. He wouldn't be the King, but he would be the Queen's Regent.

Royal Fan · #**262** 05-10-2010, 11:24 PM

She shouldnt even consider it at the moment

nascarlucy · #**263** 07-07-2010, 05:34 PM

She should continue to reign unless she is physically incapacitated, or until she takes her last breath on earth. If she want to retire, then that is her own decision, not one that someone else makes for her. I've never heard of any monarch retiring.

Russophile · #**264** 07-07-2010, 07:55 PM

Which Russo fervently hopes is not for a while yet!

Iluvbertie · #**265** 07-07-2010, 08:07 PM

The Dutch monarchs regularly abdicate but British monarchs don't.
The Queen will reign until she dies. There might be a period of a regency when Charles acts as monarch because she is menatlly incapacitated. A physical incapacity wouldn't mean a regency however.

crisscross1 · #**266** 07-08-2010, 05:42 AM

I don't see abdication as a problem. It is the same as 'normal people' retiring. Why shouldn't QEII enjoy life out of the public eye for a few years. I would have thought that handing over the throne to the next in line while she is still able to give advice would be the better option. I know that if I were Charles I would be more confident in my role having The Queens living support than having her memory. The Queen has been loyal to England and her people for almost 60 years, does she not deserve a rest?

muriel · #**267** 07-08-2010, 05:47 AM

The reason that the Queen cannot "retire" is because her coronation oath was not a "fixed term contract" with retirment provisions but a commitment for life. Being monarch is something you do for life, with no opt-out clauses, no weekends or vacations or retirement.

Iluvbertie · #**268** 07-08-2010, 06:47 AM

We may think so but her own opinion is that at the age of 21 in South Africa she made a promise to the people of the then Empire to serve those people for the rest of her life 'whether it be long or short' and she wouldn't consider breaking that promise. She reaffirmed that promise in 1952 at her Accession and again the following year at her Coronation.

I have read a number of times that she would love to retire and live in the country but she also believes that she was given a task by God - to be the British monarch for the rest of her life and she won't slacken from that duty.

Charles also would never be able to command the love and respect of the people if the Queen was still there in the background but once she is gone then a lot of the natural love the British people have for the monarch will be transferred to Charles. This is not a love or respect for Charles the man necessarily but love for the position he holds (like an army officer where the concept is not to salute the man but to salute the uniform he wears so it will be for the Crown Charles wears not necessarily for the man himself). While the Queen is alive that simply won't happen.

Vecchiolarry · #**269** 07-08-2010, 11:57 AM

Hi,

The Queen & Prince Philip just completed a very grouling tour of Canada and NYC in unprecedented heat and drew large cheering crowds everywhere.
Charles & Camilla also did a tour of Canada months before and not many people were out and the media didn't even cover much of it.

I do think that after the Diamond Jubilee in 2012, that The Queen should ull back on her public appearances and let the other members of the Royal Family do more public duties.
This may already be occurring; I hope so.

Larry

Osipi · #**270** 07-08-2010, 12:19 PM

The day HM and the DoE were in NYC, I believe the temperatures rose to (with heat index) to 103F. Many of the people that might have gone out to see the Queen probably opted for their air conditionings and TV sets. HM looked as cool as a cucumber and not one bit bothered by the heat. This woman is the epitome of the word stamina and regal grace. Its no wonder that after almost 60 years on the throne that she is so well loved and welcomed everywhere she goes. Diana may have had iconic crowd drawing appeal but to me in no way can she hold a candle to HM the Queen.

Charles and Camilla as King and consort, nor any other monarch, will ever match the rapport that QEII has had with the entire world. Maybe because for most of the world's population, Queen Elizabeth is the only monarch of Great Britain any of us have known. I do think as Charles and Camilla do start taking on some of the more strenuous duties of the Queen, they also will make their own marks and impressions with the world at large. I do believe I've read somewhere that the Queen and the DoE are planning on taking things a bit easier in the future but in no way believe that they'll retire from public duties. As HM has said "whether my life be short or long... "

Iluvbertie · #**271** 07-08-2010, 05:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Osipi

I do believe I've read somewhere that the Queen and the DoE are planning on taking things a bit easier in the future but in no way believe that they'll retire from public duties. As HM has said "whether my life be short or long... "

I read that for the first time in the 1970s and have read it regularly ever since but amazingly they are still maintaining a gruelling schedule and Charles has upped his schedule over those years as well.

agogo · #**272** 07-16-2010, 12:16 AM

QE apperars to have such great health and stamina. She is a beloved queen and should never never retire. Bad luck for Prince Charles (old king) Bad luck for Prince William (young king)

Iluvbertie · #**273** 07-16-2010, 12:58 AM

I don't think William will be all that young when he becomes King. He is already 28 and the Queen is still healthy and may very well be in her 90s before she passes - say another 15 years making William 43 and middle-aged. Charles would be 77 and is also healthy and could live as long as his parents say mid-90s for him too adding anohter 18 years for Charles from putting William to 61 - the age his father is now. So if Charles lives to 95 (and with his ancestry that isn't unreasonable) William will also be an old King.

Lumutqueen · #**274** 07-16-2010, 04:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by agogo

QE apperars to have such great health and stamina. She is a beloved queen and should never never retire. Bad luck for Prince Charles (old king) Bad luck for Prince William (young king)

Like IluvBertie, I do not think William is going to be a young king. He will be slightly younger than his fathe perhaps, but not by much. I think it's better this way, to have older kings, rather than a young monarch.

muriel · #**275** 07-16-2010, 07:17 AM

Even if Charles lives till he is 80, William will be nearly 50 when he ascends the throne, so he will not exactly be a spring chicken.

firelight · #**276** 07-16-2010, 09:56 AM

It's almost unimaginable to think of the Queen not being there - she's an institution in her own right!

That said, I don't think it's undesirable to have a young monarch. A young king / queen can bring a lot of energy, and (public) interest and attention to the position than an older person might not. OTOH, an older person would have more wisdom, maturity, experience and gravitas. I think it depends a lot on the individual. Honestly, I think both William and Charles would be better in that role at an older age. I get the impression William at least would be happy to put it off for as long as he can.