The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 6: Aug. 2021- Oct. 2022

[A-Bik]

Originally Posted by UglyAmerican

I'll grant you it might be best for all sides if Meghan and the royals never have to interact again - she clearly despises them, and the sentiment is undoubtedly returned, even if the royals are quieter about it. But why does that mean it's best if the Queen never sees Archie again, and never gets to meet Lili? Not getting along with your in-laws is one thing. Using your children as tools to try to force your in-laws to publicly apologize for some perceived slight having nothing to do with the children is quite another, and it's not good for anyone - especially the children. If one parent can't force him or herself to tolerate their in-laws for a few days, that's their own issue, and it doesn't justify preventing the other parent from taking their own children to see their own relatives. The right answer in that case is that the parents who hates the in-laws either sucks it up and manages to be civil because they're an adult and sometimes adults need to do that, or resigns themselves to occasionally being parted from their children on those occasions.

And why is it essential for Lili to be in California for her first birthday? It might be different for a child old enough to understand that 1) today is their birthday, and 2) they're not getting a party on their birthday because Great-Grandma's having a bigger party for herself, but we're talking about a one-year-old. First birthdays are typically geared towards extended family anyway, because one-year-olds can't really have independent meaningful friendships with peers. They can certainly afford to fly Doria to the UK with them if they think her presence on that specific date is important. It's not as if Lili goes to full-time daycare while her parents work, so she's probably never or almost never around other kids her age anyway. If Harry and Meghan have their hearts set on a party with Lili's "friends" from a well-baby group or something like that, that's all well and good, but it makes no difference to Lili whether that happens on her birthday or 1-2 weeks later.

But why would it benefit the children if their parents have to engage in an unhappy environment purely for the optics?
How much are you supposed to 'suck up', so two wee toddlers can experience something they won't even remember by the time they hit double digits? And for how long?

After everything that has transpired, the negatives, of such a visit completely overwhelm any positive.
(Especially with talkative courtiers/principals, gleefully anticipating opportunities to run off to the press about who Meghan made cry this time Pt 467.)

I also don't understand why it's essential for Lili be in the UK on her 1st birthday, for what can only generously be described as a likely uncomfortable reunion.
Archie & Lili are really no different to millions of children who live happily content lives on different continent from extended families, either by choice or necessity.
Their father can always bring over pictures, videos, cards, if need be, while the children remain with their mother.
I'm sure they easily communicate to their great grandmother by video call, as many great grandchildren round the world - who are lucky to have access - already do.

I'll add that for whatever reason, this security story was leaked now.
(The actual Home Office request was made in Sept 2021, only 'revealed now, some 6 months later.)
I believe this unlikely-to-be-granted request, is merely serving as a precursor for the family's eventual no-show.

[US Royal Watcher]

Originally Posted by A-Bik

But why would it benefit the children if their parents have to engage in an unhappy environment purely for the optics?
How much are you supposed to 'suck up', so two wee toddlers can experience something they won't even remember by the time they hit double digits? And for how long?

After everything that has transpired, the negatives, of such a visit completely overwhelm any positive.
(Especially with talkative courtiers/principals, gleefully anticipating opportunities to run off to the press about who Meghan made cry this time Pt 467.)

I also don't understand why it's essential for Lili be in the UK on her 1st birthday, for what can only generously be described as a likely uncomfortable reunion.
Archie & Lili are really no different to millions of children who live happily content lives on different continent from extended families, either by choice or necessity.
Their father can always bring over pictures, videos, cards, if need be, while the children remain with their mother.
I'm sure they easily communicate to their great grandmother by video call, as many great grandchildren round the world - who are lucky to have access - already do.

I understand your point but I don't think that a trip back to the UK is simply a matter of optics. Both Harry and Meghan have expressed their love for the Queen. She is unable to travel to them. They could return for a separate visit but will Harry and Meghan regret it if they don't "suck it up" and attend the jubilee for the Queen? Will they regret if the Queen never sees her great-grandchild. Only they can answer that.

[Queen Claude]

Originally Posted by Denville

I think that that is the worry. If Harry is allowed to do this, then say a divorced ex member of the RF could make the same request of Can I hire the MEt officers /RPOs provided I pay for them. It just seems odd.. Harry's been back in the UK twice in the past 9 months and he has I presume had RPOs looking after him durig those brief visits. Why does he think he wont be safe now?

Harry did not have RPOs looking after him for the entirety of the two visits. The first visit was Philip's funeral. He may have had RPO protection for most, if not all, of that visit, but he spent most of that visit at Windsor, which is a secured property.

The second visit was for the Diana statue unveiling and an appearance at a charity event. He did not have RPOs at the charity event, and an incident happened involving paparazzi, which apparently led to him making the request, although, based on other comments, I suspect that he's felt that he's been short-changed long before that visit and incident.

Originally Posted by Leopoldine

There may also be elements of status at play. According to many accounts, they seem very sensitive about the visuals, like no Sussex photos visible during the Queen's Christmas message, or their exclusion from the senior royal processional into Westminster Abbey at the Commonwealth service. Lack of full police protection is another visual indicator of the difference in rank between the Sussexes and Cambridges. I can't help but think it plays at least a small part in their demands for full-on police security.

Yep I agree. It may not be the one and only motive, but Keeping Up With The Cambridges is a thing with the Sussexes IMO.

Originally Posted by A-Bik

But why would it benefit the children if their parents have to engage in an unhappy environment purely for the optics?
How much are you supposed to 'suck up', so two wee toddlers can experience something they won't even remember by the time they hit double digits? And for how long?

After everything that has transpired, the negatives, of such a visit completely overwhelm any positive.
(Especially with talkative courtiers/principals, gleefully anticipating opportunities to run off to the press about who Meghan made cry this time Pt 467.)

I also don't understand why it's essential for Lili be in the UK on her 1st birthday, for what can only generously be described as a likely uncomfortable reunion.
Archie & Lili are really no different to millions of children who live happily content lives on different continent from extended families, either by choice or necessity.
Their father can always bring over pictures, videos, cards, if need be, while the children remain with their mother.
I'm sure they easily communicate to their great grandmother by video call, as many great grandchildren round the world - who are lucky to have access - already do.

Harry is the one that stated that he wants to visit the UK with his family and that he can't do so because he does not feel that they will be adequately protected.

While I think that Harry, his father and grandmother would rather meet in the flesh along with Harry's children, I agree that if any of these parties are really pining for each other, they have great technology available to them to enable interaction.

[HighGoalHighDreams]

Originally Posted by ladongas

Wasn’t it because he is 6 th in the line of succession? And he still is. To be blunt, with all senior royals being in the same place at the same time, if Harry does not have the same level of security, he- and the “line” could be very vulnerable.

And were I Queen, I would want all of my nearest and dearest to be near to me for this grand occasion. It very well may be the last happy occasion for them all to gather. Continuing to gnaw on the bone of what Harry has done- however that is described- is not a good look for the family. We really don’t know what caused Harry and Meghan to leave, but it could be something rather shocking and poorly-reflecting on the family. Charles is allegedly concerned about the content of Harry’s memoirs.

Protecting the Sussex family on this occasion seems like a no brainer. It would be somewhat healing for all concerned to gather around and celebrate the Queen.
And before anyone mentions money- the BRF has enough to pay for it.

We don't know the true answer to your question- why did Harry receive full-time protect, when he did- but we can be fairly certain this is not it. There seems to be no correlation between place in order of succession and receiving full-time security. Beatrice and Eugenie were higher in the order when they lost full-time security.

It seems the rough formula is full-time working royals and their children under the age of 18, plus anyone who is expected to assume full-time royal duties, to avoid a situation where a person has to make private arrangements and then shift back to RPOs after a few short years.

I would suggest the decision-makers use this as a rough base, and make individual decisions based on their assessment of threat. This explains apparent discrepancies with, for example, Anne and Andrew's security.

[Somebody]

To develop any kind of bond between young children and their extended family a visit is necessary. Of course, they can see each other online and might recognize their grandfather, uncle, aunt, cousins and other family members but especially at that age, nothing beats a personal visit. That's the way to create memories and start developing a bond...

[Mirabel]

Originally Posted by ladongas

Wasn’t it because he is 6 th in the line of succession? And he still is. To be blunt, with all senior royals being in the same place at the same time, if Harry does not have the same level of security, he- and the “line” could be very vulnerable.

I thought he received security not because he is 6th, but because he was a working royal?

No longer a working royal, so no more security.
After all, Harry's cousins do not get security for that reason.

[Osipi]

Originally Posted by Mirabel

I thought he received security not because he is 6th, but because he was a working royal?

No longer a working royal, so no more security.
After all, Harry's cousins do not get security for that reason.

Not only that but also Harry's Aunt Anne, Aunt Sophie and Uncle Edward, working daughter and son of a monarch and a daughter-in-law only get RPO protection when they're doing official duties and engagements.

[Alison H]

Originally Posted by Somebody

To develop any kind of bond between young children and their extended family a visit is necessary. Of course, they can see each other online and might recognize their grandfather, uncle, aunt, cousins and other family members but especially at that age, nothing beats a personal visit. That's the way to create memories and start developing a bond...

It's very sad. I'm sure that Doria is a brilliant grandma, but the children aren't really getting the chance to develop a relationship with any other extended family members. OK, if you're on the opposite side of the world then you aren't going to have the same relationship as you would with grandparents who collect you from school and take you to the park and invite you round for Sunday lunch every week and so on, but you can still have a meaningful relationship. We don't even know if they're seeing each other online.

[TLLK]

Originally Posted by ladongas

Wasn’t it because he is 6 th in the line of succession? And he still is. To be blunt, with all senior royals being in the same place at the same time, if Harry does not have the same level of security, he- and the “line” could be very vulnerable.

And were I Queen, I would want all of my nearest and dearest to be near to me for this grand occasion. It very well may be the last happy occasion for them all to gather. Continuing to gnaw on the bone of what Harry has done- however that is described- is not a good look for the family. We really don’t know what caused Harry and Meghan to leave, but it could be something rather shocking and poorly-reflecting on the family. Charles is allegedly concerned about the content of Harry’s memoirs.

Protecting the Sussex family on this occasion seems like a no brainer. It would be somewhat healing for all concerned to gather around and celebrate the Queen.
And before anyone mentions money- the BRF has enough to pay for it.

Knowing that the BRF doesn't make the decisions regarding who receives Met Police protection, I don't see how having them paying for it will influence the Home Office's and Metropolitan Police's joint decision on the Sussexes' demand.

The Metropolitan Police will be busy enough providing protection to the public who will be present for the Jubilee events. The Sussexes will just have to make their decision to attend or not if the Home Office/Metropolitan Police decline to meet their demand.

[UglyAmerican]

Originally Posted by A-Bik

But why would it benefit the children if their parents have to engage in an unhappy environment purely for the optics?
How much are you supposed to 'suck up', so two wee toddlers can experience something they won't even remember by the time they hit double digits? And for how long?

After everything that has transpired, the negatives, of such a visit completely overwhelm any positive.
(Especially with talkative courtiers/principals, gleefully anticipating opportunities to run off to the press about who Meghan made cry this time Pt 467.)

I also don't understand why it's essential for Lili be in the UK on her 1st birthday, for what can only generously be described as a likely uncomfortable reunion.
Archie & Lili are really no different to millions of children who live happily content lives on different continent from extended families, either by choice or necessity.
Their father can always bring over pictures, videos, cards, if need be, while the children remain with their mother.
I'm sure they easily communicate to their great grandmother by video call, as many great grandchildren round the world - who are lucky to have access - already do.

I'll add that for whatever reason, this security story was leaked now.
(The actual Home Office request was made in Sept 2021, only 'revealed now, some 6 months later.)
I believe this unlikely-to-be-granted request, is merely serving as a precursor for the family's eventual no-show.

One could argue that it benefits the children to build relationships between them and relatives who love them, regardless of any of the adults' feelings about each other. You're right that if the supposed adults can't behave, a tension-filled visit may not benefit the children. But security arrangements won't change anything about the interpersonal issues that led to that situation, and Harry has clearly stated that security is the reason he won't take his children to the UK.

If Harry believes a visit will be harmful to the children, there are only two possibilities here. The first is that he never had any intention of bringing them for a visit, but he recognized that his family was more likely to accede to his wishes about security (and perhaps other issues) if they believed they might get to see the children as a result, so he lied to them and used his children to manipulate them for his own gain. The second is that he's perfectly happy to put his children in a situation he believes is harmful to them as long he gets something out of it, such as sufficient security for him to feel comfortable doing red carpet events. I'm not sure which is worse, but both are very difficult to defend.

As for how much a person is supposed to "suck up" so their children can form meaningful relationships with their relatives: as much as is in the best interests of the children. That's unlikely to require complete cessation of in-person contact if all of the adults involved are willing to behave like adults. If Meghan would rather stay home for the simple reason that she wouldn't enjoy the trip because she doesn't like these people anyway, that's a perfectly good reason for her not to go. But it's not a good reason for her to prevent her children from going.

Of course it's not "essential" for Lili to be in any particular place on her birthday, or at any other time. But since she can be wherever her parents want her to be on that date, the fact that her birthday falls during the Jubilee isn't much of a justification for her parents choosing not to attend. A one-year-old's birthday falling on the same date as a major family event that was planned well before the child was born would be a non-issue in most families, because most people they'd want at any party they might have would be at the family event anyway.

[ACO]

I mean according to the media the Queen didn't even want the child named after her. Don't we all remember that giant fuss over a newborn? I am sure she will love reading all about that when she is older. Anyways, I think they will all be fine if Meghan and the kids stayed in California. I don't think they are much welcomed anyways.

Harry can go London alone. Saves them all grief. But it will be interesting when Invictus is happening because I am sure they will travel to the Netherlands as a family.

[iceflower]

The Duke of Sussex had a video conversation with Gareth Thomas to mark the UK's National HIV Testing Week:


** standard: Prince Harry vows to continue mother Diana’s ‘unfinished’ work on eradicating HIV stigma **


** dm article: Prince Harry breaks his silence... to pay tribute to Diana: Duke uses interview to vow to continue .. **

[angieuk]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...n-Camilla.html

Whatever the Duke of Sussex personal feelings towards Camilla; it is what it is!

[Denville]

rahter a rambling article?

[Osipi]

Maybe, just maybe, because Camilla's title as Queen (consort) is a matter pertaining to the monarchy and the next reign, Harry doesn't feel he has to give his opinion on it. As angieuk said, "it is what it is". Whatever his stepmother's title is during the next reign has no reflection on his personal feelings towards her at all.

Only the DM would make a mountain out of a molehill.

[Denville]

Originally Posted by Osipi

Maybe, just maybe, because Camilla's title as Queen (consort) is a matter pertaining to the monarchy and the next reign, Harry doesn't feel he has to give his opinion on it. As angieuk said, "it is what it is". Whatever his stepmother's title is during the next reign has no reflection on his personal feelings towards her at all.

Only the DM would make a mountain out of a molehill.

\I Presume that his new book may have some negative stuff about Camilla, but that article is rather badly written....And if he is not too keen on his stepmother, the fact that she will be queen IS going to have a bearing on things

[muriel]

Originally Posted by Osipi

Maybe, just maybe, because Camilla's title as Queen (consort) is a matter pertaining to the monarchy and the next reign, Harry doesn't feel he has to give his opinion on it. As angieuk said, "it is what it is". Whatever his stepmother's title is during the next reign has no reflection on his personal feelings towards her at all.

Only the DM would make a mountain out of a molehill.

I don't think I particularly care about Harry's view on Camilla being Queen. He only has bad things to say (or allow to be said on his behalf through Sunshine Sachs or Omid or other such means) about pretty much every member of the royal family, so how does it matter. To me, it reveals more about Harry's mental state than that of the members of the BRF he is criticising.

[Kataryn]

Originally Posted by Osipi

Maybe, just maybe, because Camilla's title as Queen (consort) is a matter pertaining to the monarchy and the next reign, Harry doesn't feel he has to give his opinion on it. As angieuk said, "it is what it is". Whatever his stepmother's title is during the next reign has no reflection on his personal feelings towards her at all.

Only the DM would make a mountain out of a molehill.

Harry has been punished for leaving the UK and the Royal service; the case of the exhibition at Kensington Palace, where his HRH has not been used though it wasn't for business, for me was a clear sign that he is not longer regarded as a HRH in the UK (same as happened later to Andrew). His wife won't forget that, as nice as she can be when she wants.


IMHO both feel that their position as Royals has been stripped from them, what left is what people want to give them but not what is their due.



What Richard Kay writes here is not the point. Here I so agree with Osipi.
It doesn't matter if Harry and Meghan wanted what happened or not, but now they are in the US, living their version of the American dream and Harry uses the fascination US citizens still have for Diana to make a good living.


It doesn't matter to him whether Camilla will bei Queen or a Princess in her own right. At least in public. He doesn't care if Camilla will stay a HRH or become HM, what does it matter to him and his wife? His father and grandmother want Camilla to become Queen, so she will be queen. He has surely known about that for years and years, why comment now? Camilla's life as queen has nothing to do with his life in the US. His mother is dead and cannot be hurt anymore. He has his own children, who are Mr. and MIss in the US. So what?


Everything he could say will be used against him by the British media. He has nothing to gain from voicing his opinion. He learned, so he stays quiet.

[Denville]

If Harry is writing an autobiography, Im sure (if he is negative about Camilla) the fact that she is now going to be a queen, rather than Princess Consort, will aggravate him. He has talked abuot his mother being chased to her death because she loved a non white person.. clealry he still thinks a lot about his mother and her successor becoming queen may well feel painful to him. It depends if he DOES still harbour negative feelings about Camilla or if hes prepared to talk about them in his book

[TLLK]

Originally Posted by muriel

I don't think I particularly care about Harry's view on Camilla being Queen. He only has bad things to say (or allow to be said on his behalf through Sunshine Sachs or Omid or other such means) about pretty much every member of the royal family, so how does it matter. To me, it reveals more about Harry's mental state than that of the members of the BRF he is criticising.

Sadly I have become more concerned about his mental and emotional health in recent years. I sincerely hope that one day that he will find some peace as his actions and words do not appear to me to be the from a content and happy person.