The Queen: Would She Consider Abdication or Retirement?

[royalistbert]

On Her death bed!

[Osipi]

Originally Posted by Rebafan81

Wasn't trying to be disrespectful to HM because there is no one who deserves more respect than the Queen. I wasn't even suggesting it, only saying it would be a nice idea. She has been a "royal" jewel in every sense of the word. I only wish it for her because it would give her a chance to enjoy some private time with the Duke and her great-grandchildren as a woman who just turned 87. She has given so much to the crown, she started so young, so I would just like to see her relax and enjoy her golden years. I just enjoyed the idea of the Dutch abdication because it was a complete celebration, but knew it will never happen in Great Britain

Like you, I think there are millions of people out there that would be happy to see HM gracefully slow down and retire and leave the business end of things to her son as Beatrix did. Not because Britain needs a change but out of love and respect for HM. It might have had a very small chance of happening too if the stigma of the abdication of Edward VIII had never happened. Historically, British monarchs have very long memories. Balmoral is the same as it was in Victoria's time and some names are just not used when naming a royal baby because of associations with the past.

To be honest, I think Elizabeth and Philip are spending their golden years doing exactly what they want to be doing. They both have more strength and stamina than many people I know that are 20 some years younger than they are. Including me.

I do admire the way the Dutch do things and it was a wonderful ceremony as mother passed the torch onto her son but it will never ever have a chance of happening in Britain. If anything, what we will be seeing is Charles doing more and his mother doing less. Its a job they hold on to dearly... for life.

[Dman]

I do think there's a possibility of Charles becoming Regent. Even if it don't happen, we are starting to see even more of Charles & Camilla, William & Catherine and Harry. Now that The Queen is 87 and Prince Philip nearing 92, things are changing and it's expected for the new faces of the royal family to step in and help the aging Queen and her Consort.

The Queen and palace officials didn't bring the focus on the Wales's and Cambridge's for nothing in her Diamond Jubilee year. There's a reason why Charles & Camilla is attending the State Opening of Parliament next week.

[XeniaCasaraghi]

I don't think any job should be for life except being a parent. I know this is not how it really is, but it comes off a little cruel to force someone that elderly to continue working. I see Phillip and his wife walking around so slowly and quite hunched over and it almost breaks my heart. They should be siting around doing absolutely nothing except enjoying their lives. Again I am not saying this is how it really is, that's just how it sometimes comes across in my mind. I seem to recall her mother not wanting to slow down even as she approached 90. I suppose a compromise could be Charles just taking over more of the duties while his mother retains the title of Queen.

[Lee-Z]

If you respect her you should respect her wish and vow to do this for life,

besides that, not all people want to slow down with age and not all people dislike their work and are glad to retire

That said, QEII is probably a bad example in this case because even if abdication was an option I'm not so sure she'd take it

[Iluvbertie]

Originally Posted by Dman

I do think there's a possibility of Charles becoming Regent. Even if it don't happen, we are starting to see even more of Charles & Camilla, William & Catherine and Harry. Now that The Queen is 87 and Prince Philip nearing 92, things are changing and it's expected for the new faces of the royal family to step in and help the aging Queen and her Consort.

The Queen and palace officials didn't bring the focus on the Wales's and Cambridge's for nothing in her Diamond Jubilee year. There's a reason why Charles & Camilla is attending the State Opening of Parliament next week.

The Diamond Jubilee things was the same as happened at Victoria's - her heir and his family only on the balcony.

As for William, Kate and Harry - it is still a wait and see if they are picking up more - and there is no word of when Harry will be leaving the army for full time royal duties but that has to be in the works as well as they are the only ones in their generation who will be taking on that load and with the recent illness to the Duke of Kent and Princess Alexandra it isn't only The Queen and Philip who are slowing down but all those over 70 and the over 60s can't be expected to pick up the duties of the over 70s while the 30 somethings don't do much at all.

[helenbeee]

Its a different situation altogether. I think she will give over the throne to Prince Charles pretty soon. But not off of the 50th jubilee probably when the baby is born and the line to the throne settled. I reckon she will more than likely go parttime and still be active on public duties just not as monarch.

[vkrish]

Originally Posted by helenbeee

Its a different situation altogether. I think she will give over the throne to Prince Charles pretty soon.

The throne is not her personal property to "give over" whenever she wants, whomever she wants.
She has neither conquered it, nor built it.
She was here only and only "By Grace of God" and she has to be there till "The Grace of God" wills Prince Charles to ascend the throne, and that is in no one's hands.
This is the British perspective of monarchy. As simple as that..
The Dutch do not take it religiously. So they can do it.

So everybody please stop saying "She can do it like Queen Beatrix...".
What Queen Beatrix did was lovely, smart and common-sensical, but just will not fit the British (even Danish/Spanish/Japanese/Swedish/Norwegian, you name it..) perspective. Sorry..

[Lumutqueen]

Whilst she may not want to, and more than likely never will, Elizabeth can abdicate if she wanted to. It is in her hands.

[Ish]

The perspective of the British monarchy (as opposed to the British perspective of the monarchy) has traditionally been that abdication is not something that one willingly does. In almost 1,000 years there have only been a handful of monarchs who have abdicated, and only one (from an English/British perspective, i'm not certain of the Scottish/Irish/Welsh perspectives) who can be seen as having done so in any way voluntarily. Furthermore, a good chunk of those monarchs who abdicated went on to meet rather bad ends.

The British coronation does involve hugely religious aspects, including the vow and the anointing. While to some vowing to God to rule for the rest of your life and being anointed by His representative on Earth as a monarch may not be that big of a deal, it is a pretty big deal to someone who is religious, as HM is. This kind of vow and religious association is not something that is done in monarchies that have a custom of abdication, it's something that separates them from the British.

Technically speaking, the Queen could decide that she wanted to abdicate and do so rather promptly. I don't even doubt that the majority of her subjects - be they British or of the Commonwealth - would be bothered by it. Personally, I'm not a fan of abdication in general, but I feel that if HM were to make that decision for herself then I would whole heatedly support her. And given the recent abdications - especially that of Pope Benedict - and the reaction to them around the world, I can't see any reason why people would really hold an abdication against HM (beyond, perhaps, some lingering resentment of Charles and Camilla, or an opportunistic approach of republicans).

I do think, however, an abdication would have resentment on the part of the Queen. Every impression that I've had of her is that she takes her role, her vows, and the religious associations seriously. There's also the fact that she was hugely influenced by the Abdication Crisis and the people who had instrumental roles in raising her and influencing the development of her personality - Queen Mary, KGVI, and QEQM - all had very strong feelings on the matter of abdication, feelings that I have no doubt were passed on to QEII. I could see the Queen abdicating if she felt that to do so was necessary to preserve the monarchy, but I think she would resent it if she had to (and resent those who pushed her into it). My impression of the Queen makes me think that she views abdication as a failure on the part of the abdicator. To abdicate is to fail to do one's duty, and HM has always been a dutiful woman.

[Iluvbertie]

Just some facts:

Can the Queen abdicate - Yes - all she would have to do is tell parliament of her intention and have them pass the necessary legislation and have that legislation passed in the other realms as well - and voila she is no longer The Queen.

Will the Queen abdicate - No - she believes that the job is for life and she will serve as Queen for life.

Simple really.

Yes she can but no she won't.

[vkrish]

British monarchs:
Havent abdicated when they have gone mad
Havent abdicated when they had severe personal grief and withdrew for decades from public life..
Havent abdicated when they had to be physically carried in a chair
Havent abdicated when they had most of their lung removed or their blood vessels totally blocked their legs..
Havent abdicated when people started questioning their family origins to their "bloody" enemy

So, seeing from all those point of view, it will be rather odd to see the present monarch to even consider abdication.. Just wondering..

[Lumutqueen]

My point is;
British Monarchs CAN abdicate, does not mean they ever WILL abdicate.

Also George III and Victoria aren't your best examples, George III had a regent because he was too insane to abdicate and Victoria withdrew from Royal life so much it would have been better for the country if she had abdicated.

[Iluvbertie]

Originally Posted by vkrish

British monarchs:
Havent abdicated when they have gone mad
..

George III, who went mad, couldn't then abdicate because he coudn't make a decision like that and so the country had to continue.

To make a decision to abdicate and thus to sign the legislation a monarch has to be 'of sound mind' and he wasn't.

[Jacknch]

Originally Posted by Lady Erton

https://www.royal.gov.uk/ImagesandBr...2June1953.aspx

The Queen took a solemn Oath, she will never abdicate.

Thanks for posting this. The wording of the oath does not specifiy "for the rest of your life" or "for so long as you shall live". Therefore, am I to take it that the promise she made on her 21st Birthday is the reason why HM will never abdicate?
EDIT: Actually I remember that she rededicated that promise last year.

[Jacknch]

Thanks, Lady Erton for your comment!
Now, I do not wish to be deliberately awkward or controversial, but even considering the Queen's 21st Birthday declaration and had she not re-dedicated that promise last year, I do think she could technically have abdicated by now without any controversy or feelings of having broken any promises because she wouldn't need to be the actual head of state in order to dedicate her life to the service of the country (the Queen Mother continued to carry out her duties for decaded after she became a widow).
Anyway, I really only wanted to establish and be satisfied that if a British monarch decided to abdicate/retire they could do so without any technical, legal or religious fallout.
Long Live the Queen!

[Dman]

Not sure if The Queen will abdicate but as she is getting older and her health will get even trickier down the road, she will have Charles and his family do a lot more. That's just the way things go within the royal family.

If it's possible, I hope we have many more years with her. Long Live The Queen!!!

[cepe]

she has cut back already IMO

[vkrish]

Originally Posted by Jacknch

Thanks, Lady Erton for your comment!
Now, I do not wish to be deliberately awkward or controversial, but even considering the Queen's 21st Birthday declaration and had she not re-dedicated that promise last year, I do think she could technically have abdicated by now without any controversy or feelings of having broken any promises because she wouldn't need to be the actual head of state in order to dedicate her life to the service of the country (the Queen Mother continued to carry out her duties for decaded after she became a widow).
Anyway, I really only wanted to establish and be satisfied that if a British monarch decided to abdicate/retire they could do so without any technical, legal or religious fallout.
Long Live the Queen!

Do you mean that 21st b'day speech and last year's re-dedication are holding back the Queen from abdicating? No way..
It is just her own principle of "once a monarch, life-long a monarch"..
The Queen of Denmark/other monarchs never gave such speeches, ao are they abdicating? no..because they too believe in that principle.
The speech is not a legal/technical or even a moral barrier for abdication.
All she said was she will "serve" the nation, not she will remain the Queen right?
She can "serve" the nation even after abdication by attending rare public engagements and advising the future monarchs.
Like Q.Beatrix she can add in her abdication speech that she is not going anywhere but will still be around.
Then no one can criticise her for breaking a 'promise/declaration".
So what I wanna say is, it is the "life-long" principle and the associated deep sense of responsibility that holds her back, not some speech she gave ages ago..

[Queen Camilla]

The people keeping her from abdicating are herself, Queen Victoria & Prince Phillip.

Queen Elizabeth won't abdicate at least until after she surpasses Queen Victoria. She came this far, she is not going to let Victoria win.

The Queen likes to be in control (her pillow said it all 'It's nice to be Queen.')

I don't think she'll ever want to be known as Princess Elizabeth after being Queen Elizabeth.

Prince Phillip would fall in rank behind his son and I don't think Phillip would like that.