The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 7: Oct. 2022 -

[Asteria12]

Its actually not quite so clear-cut and I disagree with the assertion that many trials (of MDMA and Psilocybin) have been found to be effective in some circumstances. In fact, there is a lot of concern that there haven't been enough trials. The ruling by the TGA is at most baby steps.

Psychiatrists will need to get approval by a human research ethics committee, then approval under the TGA’s authorised prescriber scheme. To get those approvals they must demonstrate their training, robust patient selection and evidence-based treatment protocols, as well as patient monitoring. They must also satisfy governance and reporting criteria. “These measures are necessary because there is only limited evidence that the substances are of benefit in treating mental illnesses, and only in controlled medical settings,” the TGA said in a statement.

Not sure if I am allowed to provide a link to the article, but the quote above is from an article in The Guardian, written by Tory Shepherd and dated Saturday 4th Feb 2023, for anyone interested in reading further.

Sorry, I don't agree that this validates Harry and Mate's conversation around the use of psychedelics. If anything, I think this just promotes more mocking [.....] that Harry has unfortunately become tagged with. I actually think its a real shame that its come to this for Harry. I don't enjoy seeing people mocked for their beliefs.

[Denville]

I doubt if this is seriously meant to give out infromation about medical treatment of depression, and I am very very wary of the use of psychedlic drugs. Drugs are great if they work and are carefully used, but they oftne dont work, have unpleasant side effects and if not carefully used, cause more problems than they solve.

[Granada]

I find this campaign of Harry ( and Meghan) to position himself as a "voice" and leader in mental wellness advocacy so troubling. Really reckless.
Who is advising him on this ? Harry is out there pontificating on serious and challenging mental health issues, what are his qualifications ?
Being the "Chief Impact Officer" at BetterUp, a made up job ?

BetterUp's Website says " it provides mental health services and coaching to Clients ONLINE". Yet supposedly Harry didn't do anything to assist his allegedly suicidal wife. Even though he had been in Therapy himself and was involved with William and Kate in " Heads Together " to promote removing stigma's to asking for, and receiving mental health treatment.

Why didn't he know where to turn ? Sounds like his participation - involvement was merely a PR move and that he was "window dressing".
Now we have his latest foray with this controversial " session " with Mate. So troubling to me.

What studies, courses or classes has he participated in to make him feel compelled to enlighten us with his wisdom ?

Why Harry of all People, who confessed just last year that he REFUSED to admit his mother was dead for a decade, and was instead in hiding. Is now amazingly positioning himself as a credible and responsible mental health advisor and crusader seem ludicrous. Does it sound 'healthy' that he has cut off his father, brother and longtime friends from contact either. Are ALL of them to blame? But Harry is completely in the right?
Does that even make sense ?

What really bothers me is how he is now actually saying how "marijuana really did help me" . So grossly irresponsible when so many teens might be tempted to believe him. There is a serious problem with young teens and "weed" and its detrimental effects on their still developing brains. Overused from a social perspective, to many using before and during School. The potency now and side effects compared to even 20 years ago is startlingly stronger.

Why Harry just doesn't keep his overuse of drugs and alcohol to himself is shameful to me. No wonder William and Kate didn't invite him over much, (he says) when he was single at Nottingham Cottage. Is petulant Prince Harry ever going to grow up ? The overstating of his drugs use to "better and heal himself" is just so controversial to me. I wish he would stop it.

[Curryong]

Prince Harry issued a message to the Terry Higgins Trust (UK) in honour of its 40 years as an organisation. They are holding a fundraising auction at Christie’s to raise funds.

https://twitter.com/THTorguk/status/...7Ctwgr%5Etweet

For the past 40 years, Terrence Higgins Trust has been revolutionising the fight against
HIV and AIDS. What began as honouring the loss of a loved one has evolved into the
UK's leading HIV and sexual health charity that provides essential education, funding and
services to thousands living with HIV.
I've been involved with Terrence Higgins Trust for a number of years, and the fight to end
this epidemic is a big piece of my mum's legacy. Like many, my mother grew up in a world
where HIV was likely a death sentence. Yet, in the midst of all that uncertainty, she led with
empathy, finding the humanity in all around her and demonstrating the power of connection
in the face of fear. While my mother did not live to see the success of today's treatments,
I feel immense pride in being able to continue her advocacy with you.
As Terrence Higgins Trust has evolved over the years, their goal has remained the same:
end new transmissions. Terrence Higgins Trust has pledged to make England the first
country to end new HIV cases by 2030, but they need all of us to do our part by
encouraging testing so we all know our status, cradicating stigma that thrives on silence,
and donating the resources Terrence Higgins Trust needs to keep up their efforts at pace.
Though the last 40 years have shown significant progress, we cannot slow down now,
we must finish the job.
My biggest and heartfelt congratulations on this historic milestone. May the next one we
celebrate signal an end to the HIV/AIDS epidemic for all.
Thank you!
Prince Harry, The Duke of Sussex

[Mirabel]

Originally Posted by TLLK

I sincerely hope that in the future that Harry and Meghan will give their children an opportunity to become familiar with their Windsor family members.

I doubt there will ever be a close relationship. Distance alone will preclude that, even if the current situation resolves itself and changes for the better.

[Denville]

Originally Posted by Granada

I find this campaign of Harry ( and Meghan) to position himself as a "voice" and leader in mental wellness advocacy so troubling. Really reckless.
Who is advising him on this ? Harry is out there pontificating on serious and challenging mental health issues, what are his qualifications ?
Being the "Chief Impact Officer" at BetterUp, a made up job ?

BetterUp's Website says " it provides mental health services and coaching to Clients ONLINE". Yet supposedly Harry didn't do anything to assist his allegedly suicidal wife. Even though he had been in Therapy himself and was involved with William and Kate in " Heads Together " to promote removing stigma's to asking for and receiving mental health treatment. Why didn't he know where to turn ? Sounds like his participation - involvement was merely a PR move and that he was "window dressing".
Now we have his latest foray with this controversial " session " with Mate. So troubling to me.

What studies, courses or classes has he participated in to make him feel compelled to enlighten us with his wisdom ?

Why Harry of all People, who confessed just last year that he REFUSED to admit his mother was dead for a decade, and was instead in hiding. Is now amazingly positioning himself as a credible and responsible mental health advisor and crusader seem ludicrous. Does it sound 'healthy' that he has cut off his father, brother and longtime friends from contact either. Are ALL of them to blame? But Harry is completely in the right?
Does that even make sense ?

What really bothers me is how he is now actually saying how "marijuana really did help me" . So grossly irresponsible when so many teens might be tempted to believe him. There is a serious problem with young teens and "weed" and its detrimental effects on their still developing brains. Overused from a social perspective, to many using before and during School. The potency now and side effects compared to even 20 years ago is startlingly stronger.

Why Harry just doesn't keep his overuse of drugs and alcohol to himself is shameful to me. No wonder William and Kate didn't invite him over much, (he says) when he was single at Nottingham Cottage. Is petulant Prince Harry ever going to grow up ? The overstating of his drugs use to "better and heal himself" is just so controversial to me. I wish he would stop it.

No big surprise there. But his appearing on TV will make him seem legitimate.

[Ista]

This is not the place for debate about a term that has become highly politicized, so let's move on.

[SirGyamfi1]

Originally Posted by Curryong

Archie and Lily do have a grandparent they see regularly. That is Doria, Meghan’s mother. Camilla is not grandma to Charles’s grandchildren. And if Charles wished desperately to see his son’s children then taking their parents’ one residence in the UK away (perhaps in order to give it to their disgraced uncle) was hardly imo a warm and loving gesture.

No one ever said Camilla was playing grandmother to Harry’s kids (no one even implied that) and I doubt she tried to play “grandma” with Harry’s kids as she has her own. Doria is not the only grandparent they have. Has the Sussexes questionable behaviour these past three years been a good thing to their family? Please. Besides they hardly lived in Frogmore and live in another country with a house so they aren’t homeless.

[SirGyamfi1]

Originally Posted by Alisa

I am somewhat on the fence about Frogmore being taken away.

I feel it was the couple's personal home. The place they felt most comfortable and most safe. It was their UK base.
If ever they were to come back to the UK it should be at a place where they felt most comfortable- Frogmore.

The coronation is a big deal- a significant moment in history. I do hope the couple decides on attending and bringing their children.

Tyler Perry was spotted headed for the couple's Montecito home. Perhaps he talked some sense into them!

It wasn’t their personal home, it was one that they would have as long they were working royals, I highly doubt Archie would live there even after being a grown up, just like the Gloucesters and Kent’s kids he and his sister would move out eventually. It wasn’t that personal to them considering that they hardly spent any time there. If they are coming for the coronation, then they can stay in one of the London properties most likely.

[Alison H]

This morning's papers are saying that they'll be offered accommodation at Buckingham Palace if they come for the Coronation. Depending on which paper you read, it could be the suite once used by Andrew or the suite once used by Diana. I don't think they'll be expected to stay at the nearest Travelodge.

[TLLK]

Originally Posted by Alisa

I am somewhat on the fence about Frogmore being taken away.

I feel it was the couple's personal home. The place they felt most comfortable and most safe. It was their UK base.
If ever they were to come back to the UK it should be at a place where they felt most comfortable- Frogmore.

The coronation is a big deal- a significant moment in history. I do hope the couple decides on attending and bringing their children.

Tyler Perry was spotted headed for the couple's Montecito home. Perhaps he talked some sense into them!

I believe that all of the working members of the BRF which Harry and Meghan used to be, realize that their residence might not be their "forever home." After all, Harry's lived in several places during his lifetime: KP's Apartments 8&9, Nott Cott, St James Palace, and Frogmore as well as his boarding schools and army barracks. For the majority it's typically not their personal property, however they can make some modifications during their tenancy.



The King has reportedly offered them use of the Duke of York's old apartments at BP, so the couple will have a place to stay for their official visits to the UK as well as private ones in the London area. If they choose to come to the monarch's private estates of Balmoral or Sandringham, they'd be offered accommodation there as well.

[Sionevar]

The mods have given me permission to share this Newsweek article - the United States Patent and Trademark Office has refused an application by Archewell Audio to trademark the word 'Archetypes'.

Refusal was on the grounds there was a "likelihood of confusion" with a trademark already in existence.

https://www.newsweek.com/meghan-mark...s-1786028?s=09

[TLLK]

We'll have to wait and see if she chooses to pursue the application to trademark "Archetypes."



Does anyone know if there were plans for more podcasts in 2023?

[Alison H]

I would have thought that "archetypes" was a general word, like stereotypes or examples or anything similar, not the sort of thing you could trademark. I'm surprised that there's already a trademark which is apparently similar.

[Sionevar]

Originally Posted by TLLK

We'll have to wait and see if she chooses to pursue the application to trademark "Archetypes."

Does anyone know if there were plans for more podcasts in 2023?

The way she signed off on the last episode of Season 1 would indicate that she wishes to come back for a Season 2, but I suppose that decision will also be up to Spotify, and there has been no official announcement so far that I'm aware of.

Would she continue with the trademark process if the podcast did not continue? I suspect yes, because she is going for an 'Arch' theme, and I'm sure she could find a way to apply the word to other projects down the line. But time will tell on that as well

[Lee-Z]

Originally Posted by Alison H

I would have thought that "archetypes" was a general word, like stereotypes or examples or anything similar, not the sort of thing you could trademark. I'm surprised that there's already a trademark which is apparently similar.

it is a general word, meaning "a very typical example of a certain person or thing."

but, as others said before, Meghan uses in the meaning "a widely held but fixed and oversimplified image or idea of a particular type of person or thing", which is a 'stereotype'

no idea why you's want to trademark a word that already exists?

[OwlBranch]

Originally Posted by Lee-Z

it is a general word, meaning "a very typical example of a certain person or thing."

but, as others said before, Meghan uses in the meaning "a widely held but fixed and oversimplified image or idea of a particular type of person or thing", which is a 'stereotype'

no idea why you's want to trademark a word that already exists?

Apple is a common word, but it has been trademarked by the company that makes iPhones. This is pretty normal business practice.

[Magnolia471]

So, Frogmore Cottage went to Princess Eugenie not Prince Andrew.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sky...0c11fa47%3famp

[Toledo]

Originally Posted by Sionevar

The mods have given me permission to share this Newsweek article - the United States Patent and Trademark Office has refused an application by Archewell Audio to trademark the word 'Archetypes'.

Refusal was on the grounds there was a "likelihood of confusion" with a trademark already in existence.

https://www.newsweek.com/meghan-mark...s-1786028?s=09

Frankly, I don't think you can trademark an existing word in the dictionary as they intent to. You can trademark a company or organization name, which in the USA would run about $350.00 dollars to start with or so, and/or a name as part of a logo but in the application, you have to provide the Archewell logo and name what font was used.

Then you get the trademark registration so you can use the symbol at the end to warn anyone this is taken. But trademarking an existing word like Archetypes? I don't think so. They have to document it refers to a company/nonprofit which is probably what their lawyers will take care of explaining to them.

By the way, to enter a registered symbol at the end of a word, just press down the Alt key, type 0174 using the numeric keypad, then release to insert the Registered Trademark symbol.
Archwell®
To enter a trademak, do same but use 0153 on the keypad for the trademark
Archwell™

I learned that from a Photoshop tutorial the other day!

[Curryong]

Originally Posted by Magnolia471

So, Frogmore Cottage went to Princess Eugenie not Prince Andrew.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sky...0c11fa47%3famp

The Brooksbanks are already living there while the Sussexes are allowed to stay until the Coronation. The original source of this story was Hello magazine, not exactly A1!

And I have real doubts about the Brooksbanks remaining at FC full term. Jack is employed by a firm in the US where he recently received a promotion. He will be spending more time there. He is also employed in Portugal, so a house in Britain longterm may not be convenient. And FC may well come with a high monthly rent, something beyond what the Brooksbanks can pay.

Plus, as has already been discussed, Andrew, for various reasons, may well not be able to stay out his lease at Royal Lodge. I have no doubt he has serious financial pressures. It is said that it will be suitable for the Wales’s, while FC, though not cheap accommodation, is a great deal more manageable than Royal Lodge.

So I wouldn’t be holding my breath really for the idea that Eugenie and Jack are at FC for any longer than a few months.