Was King Baudouin really in love?

[Moonmaiden23]

Originally Posted by Osipi

Although ultrasound was first used in 1956, it wasn't common to be used in OB/GYN medicine until later. I had all 3 of my kids in the 70s and didn't have an ultrasound with any of them. Its most likely that ultrasounds were not readily available at the time Fabiola became pregnant and subsequently miscarried.

To this day, the Roman Catholic Church still has strict guidelines on what is allowed and not allowed in these matters too.

CONCERNING "UTERINE ISOLATION" AND RELATED MATTERS

Its amazing to think how in such a short span of time (at least to me) how far medical science has advanced.

I so agree with you. There is a new book released about the heartbreaking drama surrounding the premature birth and subsequent death of 2 day old Patrick Bouvier Kennedy-born to President JFK and Jackie Kennedy in August 1963 (Patrick Bouvier Kennedy: A Brief Life That Changed the History of Newborn Care auth. Michael S. Ryan)

This was just over 50 years ago, and the only thing that could be done for a preemie born 6 weeks early in respiratory distress was to watch him/her die...even if its' parents were one of the most famous and influential couples on the planet at that time.

Historically speaking the 1960's was last month, but in terms of medical advances the 60's might as well be the Middle Ages.

[Osipi]

That is just something that would have been something very private between Fabiola, Baudouin, her doctors and as much as I've read on their deep devout Catholic faith, most likely would have involved the Church. Don't quote me on this but I believe there were/are times when special dispensation was granted with the Church's permission and absolution of wrongdoing when a medical condition would be so severe. As devout as the couple was, I don't think they would have gone ahead with the procedure without the Church's permission

Its most likely something we will never know or to be honest, its something we don't really need to know. The main point is that through all of that heartache, where it would and could have torn the couple apart, it served to bring them even closer together.

[episcogal]

Originally Posted by Osipi

Its most likely something we will never know or to be honest, its something we don't really need to know. The main point is that through all of that heartache, where it would and could have torn the couple apart, it served to bring them even closer together.

Yes, this last paragraph is so true. It's not for us to know. It doesn't really matter. The beauty of their story is in how they lived their lives through good and bad times.

[Moonmaiden23]

The biographers never explicitly stated that a hysterectomy was performed after the 1968 miscarriage, but from reading between the lines I agree with NotHRH that that is what is very likely to have happened in order to protect Fabiola's life AND to admit that it was hopeless.

Fabiola went into a period of seclusion after the final miscarriage, probably to grieve and resign herself to the fact that she really never was going to be a mother. She celebrated her 40th birthday quietly that June of 1968, and she did not accompany Baudouin to the wedding of his cousin King Harald to Sonja Haraldsen in August 1968.

There was a lot of gossip and speculation in the tabloids about it(Fabiola's no-show at the wedding) at the time, but Fabiola was probably still in seclusion/mourning.

But when she did emerge she is said to have had a new vibrancy and outlook on life.

[episcogal]

She had a golden touch with children

[NotHRH]

Originally Posted by episcogal

She had a golden touch with children

Prince Gabriel's huge tears at her funeral showed us her obvious profound effect on him and his deep affection for her

[Sancia]

Originally Posted by Mbruno

I don't know if the story is true, but it is a different situation when your husband is the king and the country needs an heir (after all, monarchy is still a hereditary institution).

Fabiola's case is not unique in royal history though and there were cases of annulments in the past based on the argument that the queen could not conceive. I just think that would have looked odd in the 20th century.

Of course cases are very different. But it would still be the most painful move to go for an annulment of a wedding one believes to be valid only to remarry to get an hair. When people marry in our days, and royals are no exception, they are in love and want to be parents with their dear spouse.

[Sancia]

Originally Posted by NotHRH

I will be crucified for this question - why...if she knew this, why would a devout, pious woman do this to an unborn life and jeopardize her own life? Determination and courage? Maybe her thoughts on the subject, but I actually do not understand that line of thinking. She was human though, but just somewhat selfish on her (and her husband's) part.

Women who desperately try to have children can do things who would seem weird to everyone else. I don't blame Fabiola at all, for the day I am told there is a choice to be made between the child and me, I am not sure I will choose my health before the child as this child may be our only child. Wanting desperately to become parents and not be given this is the most painful a couple can get through, except loosing a child.