The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #281  
Old 03-10-2021, 03:28 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: München, Germany
Posts: 39
I'm glad there was a statement from the Queen
__________________

  #282  
Old 03-10-2021, 03:56 AM
Lilyflo's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,207
Quote:
Originally Posted by Excalibur View Post
Just a thought on the racist comment conversation. Assuming that Harry’s recollection is accurate (and I believe that it is), that the conversation occurred i the run-up to their engagement, it could have gone something like this:

“With all the negativity in the tabloids about Meghan’s race, it could get a lot worse for your kids, especially if their skin color is too dark. Are you and Meghan prepared to deal with this?”

Not a racist comment in and of itself (I believe), but just a recognition that racism does exist and could present problems for them they may not have considered.
I agree with you and it also chimes with "recollections vary". Meghan thinks it happened while she was pregnant but that might be because Harry didn't tell her before they were married.

Re: the request to go into a hospital for help - we can't compare what we might have done personally or what usually happens because we're not in the same situation of being a high profile member of the BRF, where every time we go out or plan a stay somewhere, it has to be liaised with security & comms. Meghan told us what she did and when a person is suicidal, we should show sensitivity to their actions and requests. It's sad to read criticisms here (and disbelief) of what she did at a time when she "didn't want to be alive anymore".

Meanwhile, the MP who organised the letter that Harry mentioned in the interview has responded:

"The hounding of the Duchess of Sussex shows that MPs must take further action against press bullying, the MP who organised a letter of solidarity for Meghan has said after Prince Harry suggested the act had given the couple more support than their own families had.

Holly Lynch coordinated the cross-party letter from 72 female MPs to Meghan in 2019. On Tuesday, the Labour MP for Halifax said the warning that MPs would not continue to accept an onslaught of negative coverage with “colonial undertones” had clearly not been heeded by the media."

Full article here: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...press-bullying
__________________

  #283  
Old 03-10-2021, 04:09 AM
Claire's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,607
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leopoldine View Post
I think it's odd that not one private secretary, courtier, personal assistant or equerry is named in the entire interview.
SS had a legal team go over the script of the interview. I presume a lot was removed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucy Scot View Post
It sounds like your company doesn't have an Employee Assistance Program (EAP). Many companies do so that an employee can go to them for help. It is a confidential program. Meghan said that her union as an actress had an EAP. So that was her frame of reference for going to Human Resources.
yep - I know that many companies in the US have them. Mine doesn't in the UK - I presume as most of that is available on the NHS hotlines. Does anyone else's company have EAP?
Also just to be clear - American companies have them to prevent law suits. Ironic isn't it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leopoldine View Post
I read in a book (Royals at War by Dylan Howard) that during her pregnancy she went to a very posh spa, (Heckfield Place in Hampshire) and separately also had a course of acupuncture, availed herself of massage therapy and aromatherapy, did chanting and consulted a numerologist. I don't think she was prevented from getting psychiatric help, I think that the palace didn't like her chosen venue which was probably in another country.
This and several other things are why people are saying is a load of nonsense. Several journalists have asked the Heckfields if they still employ a therapist - at one time there was one on call. So people could discuss prenatal depression, their feelings of change and becoming a mother ect. It might have been part of the package.

1. Meghan had a team of doctors for Archie (team - more then 4 people to look after) all personally picked and not from the palace. This included a midwife. It should be noticed that these people are trained to notice depression if you don't mention it as well.
2. She was getting some sort of religious instruction as well. Apparently she cant talk to a priest either.
3. She never mentioned it in Finding Freedom.
4. Details exactly like Diana's story.
  #284  
Old 03-10-2021, 04:41 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Dubai, United Arab Emirates
Posts: 117
A masterful statement that hit the right note with dignity and not descending into a rabid response I'm sure Meghan, Oprah etc. hoped for. Time to move on and leave the Sussexes to their irrelevance with their two-bit champions. In 100 years time who will remember these people? The Queen's legacy will endure centuries.
  #285  
Old 03-10-2021, 05:01 AM
AC21091968's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 1,439
I know this has been discussed before, but it is confirming that the Met Police and Home Office decides on the security not the Royal Family or Palace.

In regards to royal security that is tax-payer funded, some sources from the Home Office and Met Police have refute claims that Archie was denied protection, because he was not a Prince. The Time article mentioned that Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre (JTAC) conducts the threat assessment and how the Home Office has unanimously tried to cut taxpayer funded cost of protecting royals for the past five years. It also mentioned about the estimate cost of more than £1 million a year (by taxpayer) for round-the-clock protection during the Sussexes' stay in Canada.

Quote:
A police source said: “JTAC do threat assessments for anyone of any note and they obviously know who has targeted who in the past so certain individuals have been targeted by certain terror groups and their threat level is moderate high or very high. The leading royals all get protection but again done on a threat assessment basis.

“If you cease to be a royal, you lose your HRH and you go to another country like America, your threat level is going to reduce quite considerably because basically, who wants to kill you? You’re not a royal. It still will exist — there still will be a threat against Meghan and Harry but it won’t be high. And the threat against their children is non-existent so the notion that her son should get protection just because they were born to Meghan and Harry is nonsense, really.”

Another source familiar with the process mocked Meghan for expecting that Archie would receive his own protection, saying: “The point they were making was stupid. A baby that can’t crawl wouldn’t get protection in its own right. It doesn’t need it. The baby doesn’t go anywhere independently, it’s with Harry and Meghan all the time.”
HARRY AND MEGAN INTERVIEW
Harry and Meghan ‘don’t need police protection — their risk isn’t high enough’
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/h...ough-gcwzdxs6l

Archived link that has the full article: https://archive.ph/RNEU8#selection-707.0-711.78
  #286  
Old 03-10-2021, 05:09 AM
MARG's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 9,868
I don't find it hard to believe that Meghan was feeling isolated. Remember, the press and media were hounding them and the best assist TPTB could come up with was stay home and keep out of sight. As to both feeling cut off then it's worth remembering that Sir Christopher Geidt, HM's Private Secretary was ousted after after he ran afoul of Princes Charles and Andrew over denial of access to the Queen.

Sad because he was a canny man but, it says "something" when the functionary guarding the Queen's Gatekeeper can withhold calls and messages from not just her children but the Heir to the throne. Is it such a stretch to believe Harry and Meghan ran into the same communications difficulties with Charles and the Queen? If so, feeling are hurt through lack of clear lines of communications, edited messages may be received but they would lack context and exacerbate the situation.

On another topic, taking time at a mental health retreat is common in the US, not so in the UK and Europe I think. Health and pampering spa may be all the go, but treatment retreats are rare.

As to gaming out scenarios re Archie's skin colour, it happens to people who aren't royal and the members of the BRF are people too aren't they? Whoever spoke may be loved and loving but lack the nous to realise such a question should never be raised at all. But I believe Harry when he says he won't discuss it and even raising the issue clearly caused him anguish.

People are entitled to their own truth and declaring one "doesn't believe it, is stating straight out that Harry is a liar. We have no evidence that is so.
__________________
MARG
"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes
  #287  
Old 03-10-2021, 05:19 AM
Lilyflo's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,207
"some sources from the Home Office and Met Police" so not officially the Home Office or Met Police.

Quote:
Another source familiar with the process mocked Meghan for expecting that Archie would receive his own protection, saying: “The point they were making was stupid. A baby that can’t crawl wouldn’t get protection in its own right. It doesn’t need it. The baby doesn’t go anywhere independently, it’s with Harry and Meghan all the time.”
What a nasty comment about an anxious mother, particularly as working parents do leave their children.

Harry said in the interview that he was told their risk level hadn't changed so until an official spokesperson from the Met or Home Office publicly refutes that, any speculation by "sources' is coming from a place of ignorance as opposed to Harry's actual knowledge.
  #288  
Old 03-10-2021, 05:23 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,469
Quote:
Originally Posted by Claire View Post
. Mine doesn't in the UK - I presume as most of that is available on the NHS hotlines. Does anyone else's company have EAP?
I know some friends have received mental health support through workplace programmes, but that's usually for public sector workers, and occasionally in large private sector businesses. As I said further up the thread, I got no support whatsoever for depression and anxiety, and my employer complained when I had to attend medical appointments, to which I was referred by my GP, during working hours.

In the UK we do have the National Health Service, so it's less common for medical support to be available at work.

But surely Harry could and should have advised Meghan about that. And, if you did ask for help from HR and it wasn't available, surely they would suggest that you should ask a doctor instead.
  #289  
Old 03-10-2021, 05:30 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Dubai, United Arab Emirates
Posts: 117
There is a big difference here. Meghan did not work for the Royal Family ie. she was not employed. She was a part of the Royal Family, part of the institution - a very different concept. Would it not have been better to talk openly about her mental health during the pregnancy? I think she would have received overwhelming public sympathy. Remember, the press and public were friendly until the Sussexes decided on all the secrecy around Archie's birth etc. and began to treat the British public, press and Harry's family as the enemy.
  #290  
Old 03-10-2021, 05:34 AM
Estel's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: Somewhere, India
Posts: 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lilyflo View Post
"some sources from the Home Office and Met Police" so not officially the Home Office or Met Police.

What a nasty comment about an anxious mother, particularly as working parents do leave their children.

Harry said in the interview that he was told their risk level hadn't changed so until an official spokesperson from the Met or Home Office publicly refutes that, any speculation by "sources' is coming from a place of ignorance as opposed to Harry's actual knowledge.
It is not nasty. Archie would've either been with his parents or at the palace. It's being practical.
  #291  
Old 03-10-2021, 06:00 AM
Nice Nofret's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Zürich, Switzerland
Posts: 695
Why shouldn't I wonder, what coloring, hair, eyes color, features a baby will have - everybody does it with every baby in sight - only becaus Meghan defines herself as biracial and is 'sensitiv' about that matter? I think the whole racial stuff is a made up matter - as in 'all humans are humans' for me there is no race or anything like that. People are people and everyone looks diffrent to the other.... so I may wonder like i wonder about every other baby ... if it is an offence to wonder - then it is for everybodies baby.

[...]


A lot of problems we create in our own mind; most of the time there is no slight - when we choose to feel one.
  #292  
Old 03-10-2021, 06:16 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bordertown, Australia
Posts: 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by roseroyal View Post
They should respond in public. They won’t. That’s one of the problems.
Once the Firm starts that though, it's a slippery slope and can only negatively affect the prestige and standing of the monarchy in my opinion. This would simply open it up to more criticism. Standing silent and firm is the way to go. I think the statement was at the same time telling but dignified. I would have left out the "much loved family members" bit at the end, but that's just me!
  #293  
Old 03-10-2021, 06:30 AM
Fem's Avatar
Fem Fem is offline
Courtier
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: UK, Poland
Posts: 711
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alisa View Post
Meghan herself said she wanted to go to a hospital but that she couldn't just call an uber- that inplies that she wasn't asking for anything elaborate or extravagant.
Moreover, if a senior palace official denied her request in makes sense that in the throws of her anguish and despair that she would ask for help from any logical place such as the palace's HR department. Many organizations -HR departments have employee health offices on premises(physical and mental) to assist employees.

There is also the shame stigma that comes from asking for help. Like Meghan said in the S. African interview- no one checked in on them to see if they were ok or how she was coping with it all. Moreover as she and Harry were told that they should "just get on with it". Imagine how that affects ones self esteem in the midst of a crisis.
At no point during the interview the word "hospital" is mentioned. "Institution" can be so many things, including some hipster-ish "spa treatment" that we hear about so often with celebrities and such. During the pregnancy she had handpicked team of her own doctors - no "stuffy, old, white men" from the palace for Meghan. Her husband has been for many years now worked with many organizations dealing in mental health, he has his own psychologist/therapist, they could have went to William or Charles if they could not get this done on their own - but they didn't.

And no, it doesn't make sense. HR department is for paid employees of the royal family, she was a member of the royal family. They very well knew their money come from Charles and not HR department, but thought their healthcare does? Really?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MARG View Post
I don't find it hard to believe that Meghan was feeling isolated. Remember, the press and media were hounding them and the best assist TPTB could come up with was stay home and keep out of sight. As to both feeling cut off then it's worth remembering that Sir Christopher Geidt, HM's Private Secretary was ousted after after he ran afoul of Princes Charles and Andrew over denial of access to the Queen.
Meghan did not have a support system in the UK, so yes, the isolation thing, I can get behind. But then there is this story "lay low and don't go out to lunch with your friend", so are we meant to believe that a lunch in London/Windsor was bad and she couldn't go, but an extravagant baby shower in NYC was accepted? That leaving Archie in the UK and flying out to watch Serena Williams was fine, but she couldn't leave the house to get lunch. Yeah. It just doesn't make any sense whatsoever.
  #294  
Old 03-10-2021, 06:43 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Vienna, Austria
Posts: 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by roseroyal View Post
They should respond in public. They won’t. That’s one of the problems.

They made a statement & didn't remain completely silent, because that just wasn't possible or advisable in this case. However, the Queen as monarch & head of state cannot start to discuss family issues in detail.

What would that look like? Harry & Meghan have made accusations, if the Queen now explained what she has gathered about these issues from other family members, Harry & Meghan would probably respond again. So it would be some kind of back and forth of
"You said this"
"No, I worded it this way and that's what I meant"
"That's not how I felt about it."
"I'm sorry but that's not how I meant it"
"Yes, you did!"
"No, I didn't!"
...

How is that supposed to turn out? Family conflict resolution in the public realm? That's obviously something Harry and Meghan do not mind, and Oprah has made an impressive career out of that sort of thing - people love to watch it! - but it is highly inappropriate for a Queen to engage in.
  #295  
Old 03-10-2021, 06:49 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,469
There was a lot of arguing about security a few years ago. Most of it was aimed at Beatrice and Eugenie, but that's just because they were the ones in the public eye at the time. It was felt that the cost of security for members of the Royal Family, other than whilst they were carrying out public duties, was too high. Moves were made to reduce that.


As has been pointed out by other people, these decisions were made by the Home Office and the Metropolitan Police, not by the Royal Family. They were not an attack on Archie, several years before he was born. They had nothing to do with anyone's ethnicity. And they were not connected with titles or styles. I can understand Meghan having concerns about security, but she implied that Archie was denied a title so that he wouldn't have his security paid for, and that this was something to do with his racial heritage, and all of that is simply untrue.
  #296  
Old 03-10-2021, 06:58 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: bedford, United States
Posts: 1,690
If Harry and Meghan want to turn the Windsors into the Royal Jerry Springer Show that’s on them. The Queen is so far above that he said she said level it’s not even funny and she and the senior Royals will never stoop to the level Harry and really Meghan are most likely desperately wanting.
  #297  
Old 03-10-2021, 07:02 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 7,240
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alison H View Post
There was a lot of arguing about security a few years ago. Most of it was aimed at Beatrice and Eugenie, but that's just because they were the ones in the public eye at the time. It was felt that the cost of security for members of the Royal Family, other than whilst they were carrying out public duties, was too high. Moves were made to reduce that.


As has been pointed out by other people, these decisions were made by the Home Office and the Metropolitan Police, not by the Royal Family. They were not an attack on Archie, several years before he was born. They had nothing to do with anyone's ethnicity. And they were not connected with titles or styles. I can understand Meghan having concerns about security, but she implied that Archie was denied a title so that he wouldn't have his security paid for, and that this was something to do with his racial heritage, and all of that is simply untrue.

Yes, those iissues are clear and, in my opinion, settled.


In a republic like the United States, PPOs are restricted to:


1. The President (i.e. the Head of State), his/her spouse, and their underage children if any.


2. Former Presidents and their spouses.


It is baffling to me that some American posters are complaining about the lack of life-long PPOs in the UK for a great-grandson in collateral line of the Head of State, or, in the next reign, an adult grandson of the Head of State in collateral line.
  #298  
Old 03-10-2021, 07:11 AM
rominet09's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: LIEGE, Belgium
Posts: 4,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darius1 View Post
A masterful statement that hit the right note with dignity and not descending into a rabid response I'm sure Meghan, Oprah etc. hoped for. Time to move on and leave the Sussexes to their irrelevance with their two-bit champions. In 100 years time who will remember these people? The Queen's legacy will endure centuries.
How right you are ! What a dignity in this response from the Queen. A good lesson how to behave properly.
  #299  
Old 03-10-2021, 07:14 AM
Lilyflo's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,207
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fem View Post
At no point during the interview the word "hospital" is mentioned. "Institution" can be so many things, including some hipster-ish "spa treatment" that we hear about so often with celebrities and such.
Meghan's words after describing her frightening thoughts about not wanting to be alive anymore: "I went to the institution and I said that I needed to go somewhere to get help and I was told that I couldn't, that it wouldn't be good for the institution."

and

Quote:
Originally Posted by soapstar View Post
She says specifically she wanted residential treatment.

Oprah: Did you ever think about going to a hospital? Or is that possible, that you can check yourself in some place?

Meghan: No, that’s what I was asking to do.
  #300  
Old 03-10-2021, 07:14 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 272
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alisa View Post
When someone is in a crisis and says they feel like they " don't want to be here anymore"hospitalized- in home treatments don't work- they need to be hospitalized. After stabilization then arrangements can be made for outpatient treatment. Meghan claimed she was begging for help and "nothing was being done" that implies they didn't even try to get her as you suggested private in-home care. Those are serious charges and like I have been saying it definitely
warrants and inquiry and procedures need to be reformed if it is in fact true.
Is there data available on the efficacy of 24/7 in-home care in those situations? I doubt it, because very few people are able to do that. Only the wealthiest have the option for any kind of in-home care, and that those choose that route usually do so because they want privacy. Most of them aren't going to later go around saying "I had such-and-such treatment and it worked" or "it didn't work."

She says she was told she couldn't have inpatient treatment. She said nothing about asking for any other kind of help or being denied it. It's not obvious why she and Harry couldn't have arranged some in-home treatment themselves, since he'd sought similar help himself and ran a mental health charity - he surely knew how it could be done discreetly. If she tried to do that and was denied it or it didn't work for her, fine. But if she dismissed every option other than inpatient treatment without trying it, that's on her, and I think it's fair to question her sincerity in claiming to need it.

It's worth keeping in mind here that the Queen hasn't seen Philip, her husband of 73 years, since he entered hospital nearly a month ago. That's because she knows her presence will cause a disruption to the hospital's operations and possibly to patient care. That would have been just as true of any facility where Meghan might have sought inpatient treatment. I'm sure they'd like to see each other, and I'm sure visits would be beneficial to Philip's mental health and recovery, but for working royals, what's best for them personally isn't the be-all, end-all. If what's best for them personally has the potential to harm others, then they'll choose a less-beneficial option for themselves if an adequate one exists. Here, I don't see any reason to conclude that her other options weren't adequate for the situation... especially if she didn't try them.
__________________

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 II - Interview, March 7th-9th 2021 Jacknch The Electronic Domain 1196 03-09-2021 01:48 PM




Popular Tags
america archie mountbatten-windsor asian biography birth britain britannia british british royal family buckingham palace camilla camilla parker-bowles camilla parker bowles carolin china chinese ming dynasty asia asian emperor royalty qing colorblindness coronation customs dresses duchess of sussex duke of cambridge duke of sussex edward vii elizabeth ii family life family tree fashion and style gemstones genetics george vi gradenigo gustaf vi adolf harry and meghan henry viii highgrove history hochberg house of windsor hypothetical monarchs jack brooksbank japan history king juan carlos liechtenstein list of rulers medical meghan markle monarchist movements monarchists monarchy mongolia names nara period pless politics prince harry queen consort queen elizabeth ii queen louise queen victoria royal ancestry speech sussex suthida swedish queen taiwan tradition unfinished portrait united states of america wales welsh


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:51 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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