HRH Duke Carlos Javier (1970- ) and the Royal House of Bourbon-Parma: August 2010-

[GracieGiraffe]

Originally Posted by JR76

What a coincidence given our discussion on the subject just a few days ago. Thank you, btw, for your kind explanations about it.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community mobile app

I was thinking the same thing!

It's a terrible thing for a person when his parent refuses to recognize him. Whatever sorrowful time Carlos went through, I'm wondering what sorrows Hugo has gone through.

[Lee-Z]

Originally Posted by GracieGiraffe

I was thinking the same thing!

It's a terrible thing for a person when his parent refuses to recognize him. Whatever sorrowful time Carlos went through, I'm wondering what sorrows Hugo has gone through.

There wasn't mention so much of a "sorrowful time" but "a personal matter with a sad background"; but one can assume that the stories that have come out about the matter indicate that whatever happened he didn't agree with Ms.Klynstra's decision.

But i agree: it takes two to tango and if you particpate you should be prepared for consequences...

PS. maybe i should explain why to me it's significant (and that's why in an earlier post I asked where it was said) that he doesn't actually use the phrase "sorrowful time" but the (to me much more distant) "matter with a sad background", is because the official comment to me is very distant and non-personal, as if he has nothing to do with it...

[Duc_et_Pair]

Originally Posted by GracieGiraffe

I was thinking the same thing!

It's a terrible thing for a person when his parent refuses to recognize him. Whatever sorrowful time Carlos went through, I'm wondering what sorrows Hugo has gone through.

Actually the parent did recognize him, even before he was born, but both parents agreed there would be no legal recognition, no paternity, no relationship, no cohabitation.

This happens quite often. Think about all those donors who help others to get a baby but have the condition that they do not want to establish any form of parenthood at all. Think about all the IVF-donors who can be traced back (in the past they were guarenteed anonimity but children can request to know who the donor is). Knowing who the natural father is, that is not the same as having legal paternity, having the surname, etc. The cases of Delphine Boël (Belgium) and Hugo Klynstra (Netherlands) show it.

That makes it quite generous by the late Prince Bernhard (possibly his four legal daughters have another opinion on that...) that his two extramarital daughters Alicia de Bielefelde and Alexia Lejeune-Grinda equally shared in his inheritance, together with their sisters Beatrix, Irene, Margriet and Christina. Had Prince Bernhard taken his secret into his grave, his two extramarital daughter probably had to fight for years in Courts to claim a part of Prince Bernhard's inheritance.

Family Law is extremely complicated. Not only children have rights. Also someone as Prince Carlos and Brigitte Klynstra, whom apparently made a certain choice 22 years ago, have certain rights based on their perfectly legal choice to settle it the way they did. Already before Hugo was born, it was known that Prince Carlos de Bourbon de Parme was his father, but also back then it was communicated that it was "an independent decision by Ms Klynstra to become a mother". And: "There is no legal familial relationship with mother and child and it is excluded that there will be ever such a relationship". Rumours went that Ms Klynstra (*1958), a much older friend of the Prince (*1970) was "helped" to become a mother. At the time she was already nearly 40 or something while the Prince was only 28 or something.

[GracieGiraffe]

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair

Actually the parent did recognize him, even before he was born, but both parents agreed there would be no legal recognition, no paternity, no relationship, no cohabitation.

This happens quite often. Think about all those donors who help others to get a baby but have the condition that they do not want to establish any form of parenthood at all. Think about all the IVF-donors who can be traced back (in the past they were guarenteed anonimity but children can request to know who the donor is). Knowing who the natural father is, that is not the same as having legal paternity, having the surname, etc. The cases of Delphine Boël (Belgium) and Hugo Klynstra (Netherlands) show it.

Sperm donation is an entirely different matter. I will tweak my statement; it is a terrible thing to father a child and then not take any interest in it.

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair

That makes it quite generous by the late Prince Bernhard (possibly his four legal daughters have another opinion on that...) that his two extramarital daughters Alicia de Bielefelde and Alexia Lejeune-Grinda equally shared in his inheritance, together with their sisters Beatrix, Irene, Margriet and Christina. Had Prince Bernhard taken his secret into his grave, his two extramarital daughter probably had to fight for years in Courts to claim a part of Prince Bernhard's inheritance.

"Quite generous" to acknowledge one's children...

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair

Family Law is extremely complicated. Not only children have rights. Also someone as Prince Carlos and Brigitte Klynstra, whom apparently made a certain choice 22 years ago, have certain rights based on their perfectly legal choice to settle it the way they did. Already before Hugo was born, it was known that Prince Carlos de Bourbon de Parme was his father, but also back then it was communicated that it was "an independent decision by Ms Klynstra to become a mother". And: "There is no legal familial relationship with mother and child and it is excluded that there will be ever such a relationship". Rumours went that Ms Klynstra (*1958), a much older friend of the Prince (*1970) was "helped" to become a mother. At the time she was already nearly 40 or something while the Prince was only 28 or something.

I read a while back that Carlos agreed, in effect, to be a sperm donor. However, the reference to the "sorrowful time" suggests this was more of an accidental pregnancy. And the "independent decision," well, I think we all now what what means.

I stand by my statements made in the past; when you father a child, you have a moral obligation to act as its father. I don't really care what the law says.

[Duc_et_Pair]

Well, to make things more complicated: Hugo Klynstra was not forgotten, neglected or ignored. His grandmother and step-grandfather were the Count and Countess Van Rechteren-Limpurg. Hugo was raised on their idyllic estate in the East of the Netherlands. He joined the Orange-Nassaus and the De Bourbon de Parmes on holidays. You make it sound like the young dude was hidden somewhere in a mobile home car park and that is not the case. Now, 22 years later, he requests to become known as HRH Prince Carlos Hugo Roderick Sybren de Bourbon de Parme. His natural father objects against that and now it is to Lady Justitia to decide upon Hugo's request. Like in any name-change case, being a son or daughter on itself is not enough to have the surname, especially not when one or both parents disagree.

[TheRoyalCourtisane]

So from what I am understanding the Duke recognized and accepted him, he spent Christmas with nothing sides of his family tree, he is a royal on his own right without his father but still wants to be called a Bourbon-Parme?
Lord this is crazy

[maria-olivia]

Did the late Duke of Parma have a natural Child also .
(a Child with her Children 's Nannie in Spain )

[Duc_et_Pair]

Originally Posted by TheRoyalCourtisane

So from what I am understanding the Duke recognized and accepted him, he spent Christmas with nothing sides of his family tree, he is a royal on his own right without his father but still wants to be called a Bourbon-Parme?
Lord this is crazy

No, this is not crazy. Every year thousands and thousands of children are born while the parents have made legal agreements about cohabitation, parenthood, recognition, surname, etc.

Imagine you are a great friend with a child wish. I am willing to help you. With you I reach an agreement that the child might know that I am the father but that there will not be any legal recognition, no parenthood, the child will be registered with your surname and you are the responsible parent. I will not be a parent, a tutor, an educator nor will the child live in my house.

For law that is a perfectly legal agreement. By ruling of the Court of Justice in Zwolle (East of the Netherlands) the parenthood of Prince Carlos was established. By agreement the child was registered in the municipal registry without father. The case is not that unusual.

[Sunnystar]

So, did Hugo spend holidays/establish a relationship with the Orange-Nassau/Bourbon de Parme side of his family? If so then I'd say that's the point at which his biological father, regardless of what his biological parents might have agreed upon when he was born, tacitly acknowledged Hugo as his son. It's pretty pathetic, I think, for Carlos to deny Hugo the family name, if a relationship with the rest of the family has been established. I hope the law finds in Hugo's favor.

[Lee-Z]

^^^^ as i understand it, according to dutch law a child in this situation has the option to have the fatherhood established after the death of the father; if the fatherhood is established than the child has the same rights with regards to inheritance etc as other children of the father...

Imo this is why Duke Carlos has started the legal procedure to see if this decision would be reached, in which case there will probably be other actions taken (for some reason in doubt whether Mr.Klynstra will ever be the next duke)

When the son was born there were articles in dutch media saying Duke Carlos Javier should have recognized his son and save himself later trouble....they probably were right...

[Duc_et_Pair]

From judex.nl

The biological father is not in a legal relationship with the child when it was not born in a marriage of the biological father and the biological mother. To establish a legal relationship with the child, the father must recognize the child. (Art. 1: 199 sub c Civic Code).

It is important to remember, even within a marriage, that the father can be a biological father in two meanings: the father has naturally conceived a child or the father has donated for artificial insemination of a woman. This terminology is important for reading various articles of law, for example about the denial of paternity.

Recognition of a child is a legal act. By this act a man comes in a legal relationship with a child. Therefore it is possible that the father whom recognized a child -and has vested a legal relationship- is not the biological father of the child. A recognition is irrevocable. (Delphine Boël!).

When the biological or legal father has recognized a child, he has a right of access to the child. Both the child and the parent with whom the child does not reside, have the right to association. If the biological father does not recognize the child (Prince Carlos), he is not a parent in the meaning of law, he does not hold parentship rights and he has no right of access to the child, he has no right on information about the child.

Conclusion: the biological mother and father must consult with each other: should there be a relationship between the child and the biological father? If yes: how intensively should the relationship between the biological father and the child be or will be in the future? On that basis, the biological parents can decide whether it is wise that a biological father recognizes the child or not.

[TheRoyalCourtisane]

I meant crazy the manner in which this will be played out in court, at family function, legal documents.

[Duc_et_Pair]

Originally Posted by maria-olivia

Did the late Duke of Parma have a natural Child also .
(a Child with her Children 's Nannie in Spain )

Wel the Duke died and nothing is ever heard about that alleged extra-marital child, so we may call it just rumours unless the opposite has been proven.

[maria-olivia]

I agree , sorry about that !
I delete my Post , could you delete your answer ? Thanks

[Marengo]

Considering his own daughter Margaritha told about the 3rd brother with some details i would say it isnt just another rumour.

[Benjamin]

Indeed, the illegitimate son of the late Carlos Hugo is supposedly named Xavier.

[Duc_et_Pair]

Originally Posted by TheRoyalCourtisane

I meant crazy the manner in which this will be played out in court, at family function, legal documents.

When the Prince argues: the mother and I have agreed that I would never be a legal parent in the meaning of law, that I would never hold parentship rights, that I would never have the right on an access to the child, that I would never have the right on information about the child, that I would never have a say in the upbringing and the education of the child, therefore I have reservations and objections against the wish of this young man, to whom I have no rights and no duties, to be known with my surname and possibly the title connected to my House. And when the son argues: I only want the surname precisely because he is my daddy-dearest, then only a Court can decide in this matter.

Hugo Klynstra has better cards I think but family law is full of tricks and loopholes. It will also depend very much on how the circumstances were at the time of the conception of the boy and what the Prince means with "an independent decision by Ms Klynstra" and what the exact legal agreements were after the birth of the baby.

I doubt Hugo would be interested in the surname of a man who played no any paternal role in his life except that his father, the Duke of Parma, connected to almost all royal houses in Europe. The Duke probably also holds a stake in the family holding (Lys Fund) and will not be a too pauvre gentleman. Never too bad to wriggle a finger or two in between. Anyway, the father apparently sees reasons for objection. We will see how this works out.

[Duc_et_Pair]

Originally Posted by Marengo

Considering his own daughter Margaritha told about the 3rd brother with some details i would say it isnt just another rumour.

Princess Margarita has claimed more but so far we hear very little about this Mr Xavier....

It was also claimed that Princess Margarita was sort of raped by her eldest brother (claimed by her estranged first spouse), that her father was bankrupt, that there was a halfbrother living in the USA. All this was spread during that dreadful Margarita-gate.

Now that Princess Margarita is divorced from Edwin de Roy van Zuydewijn and has settled with her new husband and re-connected with the De Bourbon de Parmes and the Orange-Nassaus, we hear nothing anymore about these claims she once made in an interview in HP/De Tijd...

[Marengo]

Some surprising news fromt hemagazine 'Royalty': Carlos Xavier did want to be in touch with his son from the start. It was the mother who didn't want him to.

Article in Dutch, here.

And on our blog in English: Duke of Parma Did Want To Be In Touch With His Son After All | The Royal Forums

[Duc_et_Pair]

That is a surprising turn of the story indeed. The Duke was forced with a pregnancy (?) but apparently recognized the child, paid for the upbringing and wanted contact with the child.

I can imagine that the mother saw herself as Duchess of Parma and Piacenza and became bitter when Carlos refused to do so and "as revenge" kept the son away from him.

Hugo, the son, can become a Prince de Bourbon de Parme indeed but only as a member of the Dutch aristocracy.