The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1061  
Old 03-09-2021, 09:08 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Somewhere, United States
Posts: 1,956
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
Nobody says "I went to the institution".. it doesn't make any sense. If she said "I went to the Private Secretary" or "I went to the queen".. it would make sense...


Meghan used the word institution on purpose. It sounds cold, remote....

Meghan knew what she was doing.
__________________

  #1062  
Old 03-09-2021, 09:10 AM
Kellydofc's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Out in the country, United States
Posts: 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by poppy7 View Post
I think its thr most on point thing anyone has said and smacks of absolute truth. Harry lost his Mum and through all those years could not protect her.

I think in the long term it is worrying and potentially totally damaging. I hope they continue to receive support.

I think to a certain extent William has the same thing with his wife and kids but Kate isn't damaged and had a secure upbringing and they are not clinging to each other codependently. And codependency in parents can negatively impact on children so like I said I hope they continue to get support.
I don't know how much support they're going to get from outside because celebrity is a fickle thing and I'm not sure how many celebrities are truly friends with one another. We know Meghan is cut off from all her family except her mother and I do think this interview has cause irreparable damage to Harry's relationship with his family. It might just be him and Meghan and their kids and few friends. No matter what I think it's a sad story.
__________________

  #1063  
Old 03-09-2021, 09:11 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,617
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kellydofc View Post
My guess is that she told a member of staff, not a doctor, that she wanted to go to a spa like place out of the UK and was told the logistics for that would be incredibly complicated and it would be better for her to see someone how could come to the palace. We also don't know by the way if Meghan told this person she was suicidal or that she was feeling depressed or blue or stressed. Their answer might have some bearing on what she told them in the first place and their feeling that it would be better handled "in house".

I still highly doubt anyone flat out told her she just could not receive any help at all. I do believe she might have been told that getting the specific help she wanted would be difficult or impractical. I can also see how she could have taken this and run with it. I do believe what the doctor said on Irish tv that H&M got stuck in a cycle with one another and shutting everyone else out. Sadly I don't see that ending any time soon.
A lot of people have also been pointing out that mental health during pregnancy is taken very seriously in the UK now even on the NHS CBT is offered right away if necessary and Meghan with her personal, hand picked team around her should have definitely been able to reach out to a doctor and have a discreet specialist at her doorstep right away.

I just don't think there's any way "The Institution" would have prevented her from getting the care she needed when we know any of them and many connected with them are or have been in therapy and they've been part of the effort to destigmatise mental health in the UK in a way that's not just perfunctory.

The might well have vetoed a health clinic in a different country for practical, logistic reasons but that's entirely different from being refused any treatment because it would look bad if she was in therapy 7 days a week.

I really do feel very sorry for her if she was feeling suicidal and in way over her head but her accusations don't really make sense except in the specifics completely without context: HR couldn't deal with it because she wasn't an employee and a clinic/retreat was vetoed.

And Harry saying he was too embarrassed to ask for help further confuses the issue.

I think Dr. Hillary was spot on which is a difficult situation for both of them. I hope they are both getting effective professional help.
  #1064  
Old 03-09-2021, 09:15 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Washington, United States
Posts: 1,694
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucy Scot View Post
I don't think it's unusual for wealthy families to financially support their children.
It may not be unusual but I don't know if it is the norm either, particularly in cases when the child has his own assets and has declared that he no longer wants to be part of the family business. Harry argued that he was born into the risk but he was also born into the wealth.

In our country, former presidents and their spouses get protection, but not family members. As poster pointed out, Members of Congress generally don't get taxpayer protection. All sorts of celebrities have to pay for their own security and that of their family.

Harry said that he only made the Netflix and Spotify deals because Charles cut him off. So if making those types of deals wasn't his plan, what was his plan? How else did he think he could make enough money to be financially independent in the style to which he wanted to live.

I was very confused by Meghan's complaints about security for Archie and their other children. As others have discussed, his taxpayer funded security did not depend on whether he was a prince. She was probably talking about the reports that Charles wants a slimmed down monarchy and it is very possible that the HRHs will be limited to William's immediate family and after that, George's.

I can understand that she and Harry are disappointed in that but the line has to be drawn somewhere.

California is expensive and I imagine the security bills for that huge mansion are very expensive. Like everyone else, Harry and Meghan will have to determine their priorities and budget accordingly. They just have a lot more money than almost everyone else. Maybe they should buy a nice private home in Nevada, close to Doria but less expensive.
  #1065  
Old 03-09-2021, 09:17 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,470
I think that the inevitable palace statement will be an acknowledgement of the difficulties experienced and the fact that they did helped as much as they felt fit and that the person within the family or indeed the entire family will be send to race re education which you know is what theybdid with Harry and the drugs, racism etc.
  #1066  
Old 03-09-2021, 09:21 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Somewhere, United States
Posts: 1,956
I wonder if Meghan and Harry have any concept about how they sound complaining about money- while everyone knows they live in a multi million dollar mansion in California. And California is not a cheap place to live.

What a tough life they lead.
  #1067  
Old 03-09-2021, 09:21 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,470
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kellydofc View Post
I don't know how much support they're going to get from outside because celebrity is a fickle thing and I'm not sure how many celebrities are truly friends with one another. We know Meghan is cut off from all her family except her mother and I do think this interview has cause irreparable damage to Harry's relationship with his family. It might just be him and Meghan and their kids and few friends. No matter what I think it's a sad story.
I hope for the children's sake then Kate and Wliam can be involved. Because as it stands they may be the only potentially stable influence.

They aren't stable. I think that is evident and being so cut off from people who actually love you is going to be dangerous.
  #1068  
Old 03-09-2021, 09:24 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 830
Didn't harry say this interview is the last we'll hear from them?
  #1069  
Old 03-09-2021, 09:25 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,086
Quote:
Originally Posted by US Royal Watcher View Post
I

Iy.

Harry said that he only made the Netflix and Spotify deals because Charles cut him off. So if making those types of deals wasn't his plan, what was his plan? How else did he think he could make enough money to be financially independent in the style to which he wanted to live.

hey should buy a nice private home in Nevada, close to Doria but less expensive.
I agree, What DID he think he was going to do for the rest of his life, if he only did the Netflix deals when Charles cut off funding? THey said they wanted to leave to have a professional income. Did they not intend then to do some kind of work to earn that income? Or did they think that Dad and the British Tax payer would fund them forever, paying his security and paying him and Meghan an income for life??
or is all this a farrago of lies and misinformation?
Meghan should know that Arch would not be a Prince or HRH until Charles became king and that security has nothing to do with his race or with his having a title.. as a child he would share in their security as long as they were wroking royals.. but when he grew up, or went to school its possible that she and H would have to pay for the security.. but it has nothing to do iwht his racial origin or his having a title or not. Eugenie and Bea are HRH's but they dont have state funded security....
Did she really not understand that?? Or does she understand perfectly well but is saying this to make the RF look bad and relying on the fact that the American public wont know the finer points?
  #1070  
Old 03-09-2021, 09:26 AM
Yashal's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Catania, Italy
Posts: 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erin9 View Post
People were already speculating online about Philip by the time Harry issued the statement. Philip was getting thrown under the bus. Just another example of how utterly thoughtless theses 2 are.
I agree. Not sure if I buy it but if he wanted to "protect" his grandparetns it was too late.
  #1071  
Old 03-09-2021, 09:27 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Location: N/A, Bulgaria
Posts: 347
Kate made Meghan cry? I remember Meghan crying in the South African interview as well. I was not impressed then and I'm not impressed now either. Which one was the actress and which one was either pregnant with HG or a postpartum mother by the time of this exchange? BTW, the South African interview made it clear for me why Meghan did all right for herself but never made it to the top of her profession. If her tears of the time of this exchange were anything like the ones in the interview, colour me unmoved.
Did I say "this exchange"? Sorry, I meant "the supposed exchange'. FF and the "the didn't take part," "Well, they let friends speak" things sealed it for me: Meghan's relationship with truth is tenuous at best. Her relationship with "her" truth is glorious.


BTW, the first coloured member of the family remark is very telling. It fits with their entire narrative and behavior since the very first days. For two people who preach "we're linked, not ranked", they seem very fond of their titles and they want every royal distinction they can get. They want it or they play the racist card, determined not to notice the growing trend of slimming down the number of this particular distinction all over Europe. In recent years, we've seen children actually stripped of this style - children who are perfectly white. But this doesn't fit the narrative they and Oprah want to show.
  #1072  
Old 03-09-2021, 09:34 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 7,067
Quote:
Originally Posted by SLV View Post
Lol, ours has 17? verses, but we only ever sing the first ( and rarily the 6th).
Still, while I don't know the lyrics to the British anthem (something with God safe the Queen repeatedly), I do immediately recognise the music. Just as I do the US, French or German anthems. Plenty of sportsevents to get familiar with the music.



See below two verses (or stanzas?) of God Save The Queen (the second beginning with "Thy choicest gifts in store") sung during the Diamond Jubilee Service. It is not that uncommon actually to hear the two parts in the UK.



https://youtu.be/42TZ11arVis?t=1416
  #1073  
Old 03-09-2021, 09:37 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,617
Quote:
Originally Posted by US Royal Watcher View Post
It may not be unusual but I don't know if it is the norm either, particularly in cases when the child has his own assets and has declared that he no longer wants to be part of the family business. Harry argued that he was born into the risk but he was also born into the wealth.

In our country, former presidents and their spouses get protection, but not family members. As poster pointed out, Members of Congress generally don't get taxpayer protection. All sorts of celebrities have to pay for their own security and that of their family.

Harry said that he only made the Netflix and Spotify deals because Charles cut him off. So if making those types of deals wasn't his plan, what was his plan? How else did he think he could make enough money to be financially independent in the style to which he wanted to live.

I was very confused by Meghan's complaints about security for Archie and their other children. As others have discussed, his taxpayer funded security did not depend on whether he was a prince. She was probably talking about the reports that Charles wants a slimmed down monarchy and it is very possible that the HRHs will be limited to William's immediate family and after that, George's.

I can understand that she and Harry are disappointed in that but the line has to be drawn somewhere.

California is expensive and I imagine the security bills for that huge mansion are very expensive. Like everyone else, Harry and Meghan will have to determine their priorities and budget accordingly. They just have a lot more money than almost everyone else. Maybe they should buy a nice private home in Nevada, close to Doria but less expensive.
Some children of wealthy parents are Trust Fund Babies their entire lives but that isn't usually a compliment and many of them don't necessarily do anything with their lives. Harry has a trust fund and more might be coming later but it's apparently not enough to keep up with the mega wealthy celebrity philanthropists they want to be.

I think they're not being entirely accurate with the truth about what deals they might have done if Charles had been bankrolling them but taking it at face value I assume their plan was (and still is) to be royals but on their terms where they can wade into politics and join the celebrity philanthropist ranks by having a Foundation and several other charities and NFPs. Maybe invest in people's businesses like the "gift" Oprah opened on camera.

But it takes a lot of money they don't seem to have to do that. That's why it's mostly people like Bill and Melinda Gates and others who have earned $100s million or more throughout their careers and not something you can just jump in to.

Where it also gets messy is that their commercial arm and foundation are both named Archewell and they'll have to be careful about separation of funds between them both.
  #1074  
Old 03-09-2021, 09:42 AM
Prinsara's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: A place to grow, Canada
Posts: 1,200
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erin9 View Post
Meghan used the word institution on purpose. It sounds cold, remote....

Meghan knew what she was doing.
Also vague. She's pointing fingers but not making specific accusations, and it makes it harder to refute her.
  #1075  
Old 03-09-2021, 09:42 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 830
I wonder if harry thought quitting the way he did would force the family to give him what he wanted and he became angry when they didn't take the bait.
  #1076  
Old 03-09-2021, 09:43 AM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: Unspecified, United States
Posts: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by US Royal Watcher View Post

In our country, former presidents and their spouses get protection, but not family members. As poster pointed out, Members of Congress generally don't get taxpayer protection. All sorts of celebrities have to pay for their own security and that of their family.
Children of a former President get protection until they are 16 years old.
And according to this Washington Post story, President Trump extended Secret Service protection to his adult children and their spouses after he left office.

In the days before he left office, President Donald Trump instructed that his family get the best security available in the world for the next six months, at no cost — the protection of the U.S. Secret Service.

According to three people briefed on the plan, Trump issued a directive to extend post-presidency Secret Service protection to his four adult children and two of their spouses, who were not automatically entitled to receive it.

Trump also directed that three key officials leaving government continue to receive the protection for six months: former treasury secretary Steven Mnuchin, former chief of staff Mark Meadows and former national security adviser Robert C. O’Brien, two people familiar with the arrangement said.

Under federal law, Trump, his wife, Melania Trump, and their 14-year-old son are the only members of his immediate family entitled to Secret Service protection after they leave office. The couple will receive it for their lifetimes, and Barron is entitled to protection until he turns 16.

Trump wanted every family member who had been protected by the Secret Service during his administration to be covered for six additional months, according to the people familiar with his directive, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe security arrangements.

That means the expensive, taxpayer-funded security will continue for daughter Ivanka Trump and her husband, Jared Kushner; son Donald Trump Jr.; son Eric Trump and his wife, Lara Trump; and daughter Tiffany Trump.

The 24-hour protection will focus on Trump’s grown children, although his grandchildren will receive protection that derives from being in proximity to their parents.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...8bf_story.html
  #1077  
Old 03-09-2021, 09:43 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,086
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavs View Post
Some children of wealthy parents are Trust Fund Babies their entire lives but that isn't usually a compliment and many of them don't necessarily do anything with their lives. Harry has a trust fund and more might be coming later but it's apparently not enough to keep up with the mega wealthy celebrity philanthropists they want to be.

I think they're not being entirely accurate with the truth about what deals they might have done if Charles had been bankrolling them but taking it at face value I assume their plan was (and still is) to be royals but on their terms where they can wade into politics and join the celebrity p

Where it also gets messy is that their commercial arm and foundation are both named Archewell and they'll have to be careful about separation of funds between them both.
its very interesting... I think that Harry may have jibbed at selling toasters on the shopping channel.. (he was born a prince after all)...
but he believed that Dad would supply money, eternally.. that the tax payer would pay security.. Tthey would do an odd public appearance for money.. and would pop up now and again making a donation to charity or putting in a day at a homeless shelter.. and that they'd still (when Covid was over,) pop over to UK and do an odd royal event or charity event there.. just to keep their names alive...
AND of course they would do their little pod casts telling people to vote and commuting on American and Commonwealth politics...and Meghan will do the odd narrating a documentary job for money. but It seems like full time money earning wasn't really their plan...
  #1078  
Old 03-09-2021, 09:47 AM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: Unspecified, United States
Posts: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
It sill beggars belief that they would tell her she could not have it. It might be difficult to arrange, but they could have done it, and i find it hard to believe that having supported Harry and Diana when they had mental health issues they would not do the same for her...
Meghan mentioned that she emailed them, so she probably still has the emails.
  #1079  
Old 03-09-2021, 09:47 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Scotland, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
I dont know what the truth it, but I find it hard to believe that the RF and royal staff would refuse her help. If they did, why didn't Harry step in?
My feeling is that Meghan is giving one sentence out of a paragraph, what was the next part of the conversation.
The same with Archies title, she only gave half the story, the part that would cause the most headlines.
She didnt say none of the great grand children other than Williams have a title.
  #1080  
Old 03-09-2021, 09:48 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Torrance, United States
Posts: 5,100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erin9 View Post
I wonder if Meghan and Harry have any concept about how they sound complaining about money- while everyone knows they live in a multi million dollar mansion in California. And California is not a cheap place to live.

What a tough life they lead.

It's very expensive and I'd also to point out that they chose one of the most expensive areas of the state to live in as well. I doubt that Archie and his sister will attend public (state supported) schools, so in the future his parents will have to cover tuition costs as well.
__________________

Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Duke & Duchess of Sussex with Oprah III - Post-Interview, March 9th 2021 - Marengo The Electronic Domain 746 03-12-2021 05:30 AM




Popular Tags
abu dhabi america archie mountbatten-windsor background story baptism biography birth britannia british british royal family brownbitcoinqueen buckingham palace camilla camilla parker-bowles camilla parker bowles china chinese ming dynasty asia asian emperor royalty qing commonwealth countries countess of snowdon customs daisy doge of venice doll duchess of sussex duke of cambridge duke of sussex edward vii elizabeth ii family life family tree fashion and style george vi gustaf vi adolf harry and meghan highgrove house of windsor jack brooksbank jewellery king willem-alexander książ castle line of succession list of rulers luxembourg meghan markle monarchy nepal nepalese royal jewels plantinum jubilee prince charles of luxembourg prince constantijn prince harry princess alexia (2005 -) princess ariane princess catharina-amalia princess chulabhorn walailak princess ribha queen consort queen maxima queen victoria royal ancestry spain speech sussex suthida swedish queen taiwan tradition unfinished portrait united states of america wales welsh


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:27 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021
Jelsoft Enterprises
×