Meghan Markle: Family and Background - November 2017-May 2018

[Lady Reem]

I am sure he must have shown a keen interest before now in his beloved daughter’s adult life and participated (even a teeny weeny bit) on the special occasions of her life as an adult (ie. her 1st wedding), the way Doria has. Surely there are photographs floating about somewhere that depicts a loving, close father relationship with his adult daughter. Childhood, prepubescent pics of them together are constantly shoved in our faces. And no, I don’t believe a generic photo of a group of hands posted on Thanksgiving via instagram (captioned and perhaps trying to hark back to happier memories) necessarily mean they were hands of her with both parents at the time. She hasn’t been shy in presenting full photographs of her as an adult with one of her parents, and did so frequently. He isn’t shy either and my goodness hasn’t he and his inner circle gone out of their way in making it known he would love to attend her wedding this time around. And walk her down the aisle. It is not something that would be done publicly in that way if there weren’t uncertainties, or it was already assured/guaranteed that he would be granted that honour as is usually the case with most weddings if a healthy very close adult daughter/father relationship existed. Markles along with their friends constantly trying to force the issue via the press, media is just eek. Plus not meeting Harry before the engagement announcement, perhaps not even before the big day itself. To me there is something off and like someone else previously pointed out certain things simply don’t add up. It is not a crime for a Person to try paint a rosy picture of a difficult/estranged parental relationship, even if that wasn’t a reality, especially when you’re in the public eye. I think she does love her dad in her own way but they were probably not as close in her adult years enough to keep in touch, up until now that is. Anyway he is no longer shy it seems and now desperately wants to walk Meghan down the aisle on such a momentous Royal occasion. I do hope he gets chance to, even if he it means he might have to share that platform with Meghan’s mum. Happy ending all around, eh. I’m done with this topic

 

[Lady Reem]

^ Amen ^

Beyond the age of 25, 'proper' adulthood, it is inadequate and a bit pathetic to blame ones 'childhood' or others for defects in character or behaviour..

The Markle older children lived with their dad from their prepubescent years onwards, enough time for him to have made either a positive or negative impact in both their lives, well, probably. But I do agree with others that there are varying other factors that can determine how a person turns out. In the case of not one just one person but both Tom and Sam, who can really tell? No one. Certainly is interesting. I do know Meghan moved out with her mum after her parents separated when she was just 2 years old. But yeah he did play some part in raising her during childhood and she spent time on occasions with him and extended family. But she primarily resided with her mum.. Truly finished with this topic.

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

It does appear that perhaps the reason Tom and Samantha are so dysfunctional is because they didn't have a dad for most of their early lives; whatever lies society tries to create about fathers, they are very important in childrens lives. Apparently they also suffered financially due to a one parent income. I am not excusing Tom and Samantha's behavior I'm just trying to see where it may stem from. To add insult to injury both have apparently been worse parents than their absent father.
I must say I giggled at the comment that this thread isn't about Roslyn's children... when clearly it is.
Additionally I don't think Uncle Gary is comparable to the Markle's; he is just one bad apple while the Markle's have Sam, Tom, Tom's ex, Tom's son, and now Tom Sr. 's lady friend.

 

[royal rob]

Meghan Markle: Family and Background

Without being rude to anyone
WHY is hells name are you all so interested in this family. I can’t believe on a royal forum we are discussing how these children were brought up. I’m pretty sure we shouldn’t be accusing a private person of these things Isn’t there a name for doing this on line. I thought this forum had high standards in this sort of discussion

 

[O-H Anglophile]

Without being rude to anyone
WHY is hells name are you all so interested in this family. I can’t believe on a royal forum we are discussing how these children were brought up. I’m pretty sure we shouldn’t be accusing a private person of these things Isn’t there a name for doing this on line. I thought this forum had high standards in this sort of discussion

Because Samantha and Tom Jr opened the door themselves by drawing attention to themselves and trying to sell out their half sister for personal gain.

 

[Royal Suitor]

Without being rude to anyone
WHY is hells name are you all so interested in this family. I can’t believe on a royal forum we are discussing how these children were brought up. I’m pretty sure we shouldn’t be accusing a private person of these things Isn’t there a name for doing this on line. I thought this forum had high standards in this sort of discussion

Thanks Royal Rob. It does seem like a lot of discussion of people who had little to no knowledge or contact with Meghan throughout her life. And will absolutely not be part of her life going forward. Now that it's clear they won't be at the wedding, I'm not sure what more there is to say. I hope uncle Gary doesn't inspire this level of debate.

 

[French Toast]

Without being rude to anyone
WHY is hells name are you all so interested in this family. I can’t believe on a royal forum we are discussing how these children were brought up. I’m pretty sure we shouldn’t be accusing a private person of these things Isn’t there a name for doing this on line. I thought this forum had high standards in this sort of discussion

Well said.

 

[ACO]

Without being rude to anyone
WHY is hells name are you all so interested in this family. I can’t believe on a royal forum we are discussing how these children were brought up. I’m pretty sure we shouldn’t be accusing a private person of these things Isn’t there a name for doing this on line. I thought this forum had high standards in this sort of discussion

I mean, no offense, but the thread is about her family and background. Not accusing but discussing what they have put out themselves. If they are going to constantly attach themselves to her and the media is giving them a platform then it will likely be discussed. It is pretty easy to just ignore if you don't want to contribute. That is why there are different topic threads for those that do.

And on that note of "family" --

Samantha hired an agent and they put out an interview. She had changed her book title and it is coming out. I am sure Thomas Jnr is next.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/meghan-markles-sister-drops-pincess-12281083

 

[Osipi]

Well... it is about Meghan's family and background and half siblings and their mother and uncles are on the periphery of her family growing up. As was said, these estranged "family" members are bringing it all on themselves. Its comical. Its people that are putting the "fun" in dysfunctional.

Like a car crash, you can't help but slow down and see what happened.

Samantha hired an agent and they put out an interview. She had changed her book title and it is coming out. I am sure Thomas Jnr is next.

Another ploy to wangle an invite to the wedding, Sammie? If that's the case, perhaps an appropriate title for the "soon not to be on the best seller list" is "Karma Chameleon."

 

[MARG]

There is a difference between reading about the incredible audacity of Meghan's grasping half siblings that are jealous of their sister's life and trying to sabotage her and psychoanalysing them and absolving them of their faults by attributing their venal behaviour to their father's bad parenting is unbelievable.

In my opinion that is unacceptable, it crosses a line that should not be crossed. Until "Harry and Meghan" we knew nothing of these people and since then we only know them from what they have publically said and done. We categorically do not have the right to trash Tom Snr for any reason whatsoever.

 

[jacqui24]

There is a difference between reading about the incredible audacity of Meghan's grasping half siblings that are jealous of their sister's life and trying to sabotage her and psychoanalysing them and absolving them of their faults by attributing their venal behaviour to their father's bad parenting is unbelievable.

In my opinion that is unacceptable, it crosses a line that should not be crossed. Until "Harry and Meghan" we knew nothing of these people and since then we only know them from what they have publically said and done. We categorically do not have the right to trash Tom Snr for any reason whatsoever.

Well said! Co-sign this entire post.

 

[Lady Nimue]

I mean, no offense, but the thread is about her family and background. Not accusing but discussing what they have put out themselves. If they are going to constantly attach themselves to her and the media is giving them a platform then it will likely be discussed. It is pretty easy to just ignore if you don't want to contribute. That is why there are different topic threads for those that do.

Exactly. Ignore if it's not anything you'd like to discuss. But attempting to snuff out conversation is over-reaching.

 

[Lady Reem]

Thomas Jr talking.

Thomas Markle Jr says he is waiting for a royal wedding invite | Daily Mail Online

Highlights:

He expects an invitation.
He plans on writing a book about Meghan
He hopes there will be a family reunion after the wedding

These people are crazy.

Oh dear, and on and on it goes....There’s also the new lady friend of the patriarch putting out stuff to the press as well

 

[Lady Reem]

I mean, no offense, but the thread is about her family and background. Not accusing but discussing what they have put out themselves. If they are going to constantly attach themselves to her and the media is giving them a platform then it will likely be discussed. It is pretty easy to just ignore if you don't want to contribute. That is why there are different topic threads for those that do.

And on that note of "family" --

Samantha hired an agent and they put out an interview. She had changed her book title and it is coming out. I am sure Thomas Jnr is next.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/meghan-markles-sister-drops-pincess-12281083

Quoted for truth!

No one has “trashed” Mr Markle but I guess there are those more inclined to muddy the waters if an opinion / discussion is different to theirs or not going their way

Stating things that Tom Jnr and Samantha have themselves said that they had spent their adolescent period living with their dad is not a rule breaker. And to me, believing that period are part of formative years is not a crime either.

“bad parenting” ....would love to see where that was attributed to anyone !
There’s a whole forum on here dedicated to discussing the former Princess of Wales, her lovers, her friends, family and how they impacted on her. Plus discussions relating to her relationship with her parents, why she ended up a certain way. These topics are obviously allowed., so exploring or trying to understand why certain Markles & those linked to them put themselves out there exploiting Meghan non-stop, ought not to be an issue.

 

[Lady Reem]

Exactly. Ignore if it's not anything you'd like to discuss. But attempting to snuff out conversation is over-reaching.

I second this.

 

[Madame Verseau]

This is phase two of Operation Image rehab for Sam. She finally realized she damaged herself in the court of public opinion with her year long smear campaign against Meghan. Her agent probably told her to change the title of the book because the public sees it as a hit piece and it won't sell.

 

[Lady Reem]

‘Meghan Markle's sister drops 'Princess Pushy' book title as she hopes for wedding invite‘

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/meghan-markles-sister-drops-pincess-12281083

Oh good! I suppose we can all sing kumbaya and forget the things she used to tweet then delete on SM as well as the numerous other stuff she told the papers about her dearly beloved “sister”

 

[Cocoasneeze]

I mean, no offense, but the thread is about her family and background. Not accusing but discussing what they have put out themselves. If they are going to constantly attach themselves to her and the media is giving them a platform then it will likely be discussed. It is pretty easy to just ignore if you don't want to contribute. That is why there are different topic threads for those that do.

And on that note of "family" --

Samantha hired an agent and they put out an interview. She had changed her book title and it is coming out. I am sure Thomas Jnr is next.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/meghan-markles-sister-drops-pincess-12281083

I agree.

When Meghan's and Harry's relationship became public knowledge, Samantha was the first one to trash Meghan. She's the one who got the 'social climber' and 'pushy' titles attached to Meghan. At first her words were taken quite seriously by some even on this forum, questioning Meghan's character because of 'her sister' thought so lowly of her. We didn't know anything about Samantha even then. IMHO it is only fair that Samantha's own story was checked out after the character assassination she did on Meghan. And Samantha still keeps giving interviews, and they get posted here.

IMHO anyone from Meghan's family and background who themselves are giving interviews or selling info about Meghan become fair game.

 

[jacqui24]

I agree.

When Meghan's and Harry's relationship became public knowledge, Samantha was the first one to trash Meghan. She's the one who got the 'social climber' and 'pushy' titles attached to Meghan. At first her words were taken quite seriously by some even on this forum, questioning Meghan's character because of 'her sister' thought so lowly of her. We didn't know anything about Samantha even then. IMHO it is only fair that Samantha's own story was checked out after the character assassination she did on Meghan. And Samantha still keeps giving interviews, and they get posted here.

IMHO anyone from Meghan's family and background who themselves are giving interviews or selling info about Meghan become fair game.

I understand that people take issue with Samantha’s because of her comments. I think it’s fair to judge a person for their own behavior. The issue here is blaming others for how Samantha could’ve turned out the way she did when we don’t know a lot of stuff about her childhood. I think some of us are having a difficult time getting comfortable with the discussion regarding how she became this way as a result of her parents. Especially with some insinuating that Tom Sr. was the negative influence on his children when Meghan has made it clear in the past what her father taught her and meant to her.

 

[ACO]

I don't blame anyone for Samantha being a hateful person except her. She is a grown woman who made her own decisions. I have learned enough to come to that conclusion. Her mother did the best she could and then Thomas Snr did the same once he was able. Nothing stopped her from getting her stuff together. She went to college. Thomas Snr was supportive. She just didn't make it as an actress/model.

I think the best thing to have happened to Meghan was being so much younger than them. She was raised basically an only child.

But really.... how Thomas Snr raised Meghan and his lack of raising the older two is glaring. People can (and do) act differently with second families. That is just life. That doesn't make him a bad person. He was young and irresponsible when he had Samantha and Jnr and then 15 years later came Meghan. It is not Snr's fault that Samantha was jealous and bitter over her new baby sister but it does highlight why she does the things she does.

And as said she was the same with her own kids. It is all about Samantha.

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

Not trying to be rude.... but if you don't want to talk about Meghan's family don't come into a thread about Meghan 's family. Seriously it says in big letters what the topic of convo is; no one is forcing anyone to participate.
Additionally, just because Meghan was raised one way doesn't mean Tom and Samantha were raised the same; there is a large age gap between them and has been stated before Tom Sr. could have been a different type of parent. We don't know anything and are just speculating, but it's not just Samantha that is off the rails but also her brother, a common influence on them both was either Tom Sr. or Roslyn. That is not to excuse their bad behavior, at their age they should have already gotten it together and there is definitely no excuse for how they both have treated their own kids.

 

[royal rob]

Not trying to be rude.... but if you don't want to talk about Meghan's family don't come into a thread about Meghan 's family. Seriously it says in big letters what the topic of convo is; no one is forcing anyone to participate.
Additionally, just because Meghan was raised one way doesn't mean Tom and Samantha were raised the same; there is a large age gap between them and has been stated before Tom Sr. could have been a different type of parent. We don't know anything and are just speculating, but it's not just Samantha that is off the rails but also her brother, a common influence on them both was either Tom Sr. or Roslyn. That is not to excuse their bad behavior, at their age they should have already gotten it together and there is definitely no excuse for how they both have treated their own kids.

I don’t think it’s topic that should be discussed at all. There are children involved etc but if you enjoy that I can’t stop you.

 

[Cocoasneeze]

I understand that people take issue with Samantha’s because of her comments. I think it’s fair to judge a person for their own behavior. The issue here is blaming others for how Samantha could’ve turned out the way she did when we don’t know a lot of stuff about her childhood. I think some of us are having a difficult time getting comfortable with the discussion regarding how she became this way as a result of her parents. Especially with some insinuating that Tom Sr. was the negative influence on his children when Meghan has made it clear in the past what her father taught her and meant to her.

Oh yeah, I agree. I couldn't care less how Tom Sr & co were as parents. Meghan says, that she's close to her dad, has told sweet stories about him and how he raised her. I take that as the truth, and I don't need to know more.

I do wish for Meghan's sake, that her estranged siblings didn't make themselves known, but they seem to feel entitled to a piece of Meghan's life, no matter how they get it. Imo it's necessary to double check the info and their claims, and as it has turned out, their claims seem to be less than truthful.

 

[Osipi]

I don’t think it’s topic that should be discussed at all. There are children involved etc but if you enjoy that I can’t stop you.

The "children" are grown adults and are taking their stories to the press. They're the ones that opened the door to be discussed. They're not innocent victims here.

 

[Zaira]

I don't blame anyone for Samantha being a hateful person except her. She is a grown woman who made her own decisions. I have learned enough to come to that conclusion. Her mother did the best she could and then Thomas Snr did the same once he was able. Nothing stopped her from getting her stuff together. She went to college. Thomas Snr was supportive. She just didn't make it as an actress/model.

I think the best thing to have happened to Meghan was being so much younger than them. She was raised basically an only child.

But really.... how Thomas Snr raised Meghan and his lack of raising the older two is glaring. People can (and do) act differently with second families. That is just life. That doesn't make him a bad person. He was young and irresponsible when he had Samantha and Jnr and then 15 years later came Meghan. It is not Snr's fault that Samantha was jealous and bitter over her new baby sister but it does highlight why she does the things she does.

And as said she was the same with her own kids. It is all about Samantha.

Exactly

 

[AlowVera]

Women are not responsible for the actions of grown men or women. The Markle siblings know they have a certain privilege which allows their voices to be heard and amplified without question while Meghan must remain silent and cannot tell her own narrative. This makes their actions even more insidious. They have very limited story regarding Meghan and instead of living their own lives and pursuing their own adult children they pursue fame and money so they can embarrass Meghan.

 

[Cocoasneeze]

Women are not responsible for the actions of grown men or women. The Markle siblings know they have a certain privilege which allows their voices to be heard and amplified without question while Meghan must remain silent and cannot tell her own narrative. This makes their actions even more insidious. They have very limited story regarding Meghan and instead of living their own lives and pursuing their own adult children they pursue fame and money so they can embarrass Meghan.

That makes their actions even more nasty. The markles have talked themselves into a corner, shown, that they have no contact with Meghan, and they just want to exploit her. But her ex-bff took the opportunity to sell their whole decades long friendship for 6 figure sum of money, and Meghan can't tell her side of any of it. They all know that, and used that to their advantage.

 

[O-H Anglophile]

I don’t think it’s topic that should be discussed at all. There are children involved etc but if you enjoy that I can’t stop you.

I agree it is not appropriate for us to assign blame to others for lack of character or to judge parenting.

But those people who are willingly after their 15 minutes of fame are legitimate subjects for discussion.

There are no children involved here. They are all adults.

 

[Madame Verseau]

I have a question: if Sam is going to be a "tv commentator" on behalf of a network for the wedding, why is she begging for an invitation with the help of an agent? It could be only two things: 1) the previous reports about the tv gig were wrong; 2) Kensington Palace - with an assist from Buckingham Palace - informed this TV channel it, the on air talent and the crew will not have access to Windsor grounds or be granted permission to do live coverage (video feed included) if Samantha is part of the programming. I lean to no. 2 because of the blatant begging by Samantha. She realized she got on the wrong side of very powerful people, therefore an agent from Britain (Linda Langton) to get her out of this PR mess Sam alone created.

 

[Osipi]

I agree it is not appropriate for us to assign blame to others for lack of character or to judge parenting.

But those people who are willingly after their 15 minutes of fame are legitimate subjects for discussion.

There are no children involved here. They are all adults.

Even the adult "children" playing games with the tabloids have adult children. I don't get where the "children involved" comes from.

We're not armchair psychologists nor do we know these people and the innermost details of all their years as a family. We know what the attention seekers are telling us and its been a game of flip flop ever since the beginning. Now the tabloids are being used by one of the half siblings to beg, plead and moan and beg again for a wedding invite. Not going to happen.

Another thing that is contradictory that has occurred to me is that if Samantha Grant has contracted and agreed to be a "wedding correspondent" on the day of the wedding, what happens should she actually get an invite? Does she drop the contract with the TV station in a New York minute and put on the glad rags and hightail it to Windsor Castle? The woman is delusional and has a very short attention span. Says one thing one day and flip flops to something else totally opposite the next.

Go figure.