The Royal Forums

The Royal Forums (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/)
-   The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and Family (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f269/)
-   -   Baby Cambridge: Musings and Suggestions (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f269/baby-cambridge-musings-and-suggestions-34427.html)

Daria_S 04-29-2013 06:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Archduchess Zelia (Post 1544508)
If I was Catherine (presuming that they know the sex of the baby), I'd totally mislead people just for the kicks.



I'm not at all jealous :glare:
Have you seen Rachel Tucker as Elphaba? I will regret for the rest of my life not having seen her in Wicked (living in Denmark absolutely sucks) because she has some of the best vocals I've ever heard.

I love the possibility of her tricking the press, because as you, in her position, I'd do the same exact thing. And no, I didn't get to see Rachel Tucker as Elphaba. I keep hoping that she'll come and do a run in NYC, but so far, we've been getting everyone else, but her (though current NYC Elphaba is pretty darn awesome).

Archduchess Zelia 04-30-2013 05:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daria_S (Post 1545403)
I love the possibility of her tricking the press, because as you, in her position, I'd do the same exact thing. And no, I didn't get to see Rachel Tucker as Elphaba. I keep hoping that she'll come and do a run in NYC, but so far, we've been getting everyone else, but her (though current NYC Elphaba is pretty darn awesome).

That's too bad, I hope for you that she'll come to Broadway once. I've only heard good things about Willemijn Verkaik, so I don't doubt she's amazing. I hope you have a great time! :flowers:

LadyCatharine 05-01-2013 04:03 PM

She's still baby small...so,I'm saying she has a Prince in the oven ;-)

cepe 05-02-2013 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lady Erton (Post 1547499)

Interesting to find this article in the Christian News.

Its the old stuff rewritten but my fav quote is

"They have a small nursery prepped, but it's humble. Kate felt it wasn't worth the money to go all-out," a source close to the couple told Us magazine.

Of course it isn't because they move to their permanent home 3 months later! :lol:

cepe 05-02-2013 01:03 PM

No you don't need to do that. I've given my view - that's what happens in the forums. You don't have to agree with me. If everyone removed a post that someone else didn't agree with, these forums would be empty.

What the quote I used highlights is that the "source" isn't that good.

Avicenna 05-02-2013 02:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lady Erton (Post 1547499)

Is it only me whose Norton Software issued a warning when I tried to open this site? Malicious exploit kit Website ... attacking Computer qazocuyi.longmusic.com ...:ermm:

Roslyn 05-02-2013 05:25 PM

Strange, but interesting, article. Thanks for drawing it to our attention, Lady Erton. :flowers:

I must confess I am confused. When is their own home going to be ready to move into? If Kate & William will spending the first six weeks with the baby in the $7million Georgian mansion, just how long will the child be in the "humble" nursery in their cottage in the grounds of Kensington Palace before they move into their permanent digs?

I loved the bit at the end: "and surely it is no bad thing this little prince or princess is given a taste of life outside of the Royal Family?" I'm sure the child will have fond memories of its few few months as a newborn. :rofl:

cepe 05-02-2013 07:25 PM

I think the info about staying 6 weeks with the Middletons has no firm evidence behind it. And the bit I picked up about a "humble" nursery just reemphasises that these "sources" know about the same as us because they are confused as well :)

Daria_S 05-02-2013 08:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Archduchess Zelia (Post 1545772)
That's too bad, I hope for you that she'll come to Broadway once. I've only heard good things about Willemijn Verkaik, so I don't doubt she's amazing. I hope you have a great time! :flowers:

Thank you! I saw her in February, and loved her portrayal, so I'm excited to see her again.

As to the 'modest nursery', I think it's just speculation. We're never going to get the real details about what type of nursery they'll have, and we'll be counting ourselves VERY lucky if we every get any sort of pictures of the baby in the said nursery. However, judging by Catherine's tastes, it's very possible that the baby's room will indeed not be too ostentatious.

Frideswide 05-03-2013 12:43 PM

Kate Middleton, Prince William Prepare Modest Baby Nursery

Quote:

Kate Middleton and Prince William are counting down the days until the Duchess of Cambridge gives birth to their first child
They make it sound as though they have recruited a surrogate mother. :rolleyes:

Ish 05-03-2013 01:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frideswide (Post 1547897)
Kate Middleton, Prince William Prepare Modest Baby Nursery

They make it sound as though they have recruited a surrogate mother. :rolleyes:

Lots of people are making it sound like that - there's a circle speculating that the bump is fake and that Catherine isn't really pregnant.

Isabella 05-03-2013 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lady Erton (Post 1547909)
I'd like to know how the tabloids know this information. William and Kate are the two most circumspect royals in a generation and and frankly the tabloids just make this stuff up. There are NO Royal Sources!!!

Of course they just make it up. News about the royals' personal lives sells papers and since there isn't much, they just make it up. That's pretty much how tabloids operate much of the time anyway - it's creative writing, not actual reporting.

HRHHermione 05-03-2013 07:44 PM

Somehow I can't see William and Kate going in for a $21,000 carriage-shaped crib. The Royal Family has never been much for conspicuous consumption. That looks more like something a footballer's wife would go for, or a reality tv star.

The Cambridge baby won't need fake princess stuff :)

Osipi 05-03-2013 08:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HRHHermione (Post 1548052)
Somehow I can't see William and Kate going in for a $21,000 carriage-shaped crib. The Royal Family has never been much for conspicuous consumption. That looks more like something a footballer's wife would go for, or a reality tv star.

The Cambridge baby won't need fake princess stuff :)

Good grief! People that would shell out that kind of money for those kind of items, to me, have more money than brains.

I can see both William and Kate looking at the things in the article and going "You've GOT to be kidding me!" I can see both of them being quite conservative in what they buy for infants even though it will possibly be used again for a second child. We know Kate likes to recycle. :biggrin:

NGalitzine 05-03-2013 08:41 PM

It would certainly be a waste of money to send any of that stuff to Baby Cambridge as gifts because Catherine & William will just turn it around and donate it to a charity and you wont even get the tax credit.
I do agree that people who buy most of that stuff would have more money than brains.

Iluvbertie 05-03-2013 08:54 PM

To say that the tabloids are making this stuff up is possibly true but there are 100s of people who work in royal households and some of them do sell their information to the tabloids to supplement their pay. So long as it isn't too serious the royals tend to turn a blind eye. There are also the staff employed by their friends and the friends of all this staff who can and do sell information.

There would be literally 100s if not 1000s of people who have a snippet of information and if you buy enough snippets you get some idea of what things are like.

I personally think it a total waste of money to send anything to the royals as they are way richer than I am and can afford everything they want for themselves that they want.

HRHHermione 05-03-2013 09:04 PM

Yup. I am however, making a small donation to EACH through the Baby Cambridge fundraiser as my little baby gift.

cepe 05-03-2013 09:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iluvbertie (Post 1548065)
To say that the tabloids are making this stuff up is possibly true but there are 100s of people who work in royal households and some of them do sell their information to the tabloids to supplement their pay. So long as it isn't too serious the royals tend to turn a blind eye. There are also the staff employed by their friends and the friends of all this staff who can and do sell information.

There would be literally 100s if not 1000s of people who have a snippet of information and if you buy enough snippets you get some idea of what things are like.

I personally think it a total waste of money to send anything to the royals as they are way richer than I am and can afford everything they want for themselves that they want.

I think that this would be a valid point 30 years ago. But Catherine and William don't have 100's of staff, not do they live in any royal household. I think that William in particular has a really firm grip on information regarding his friends. Their life style has really shut down available sources of information.

This tight approach to info is what drives the press wild - so I think they are having yet another punt at making it up, to see if there is any type of response.

Osipi 05-03-2013 09:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HRHHermione (Post 1548070)
Yup. I am however, making a small donation to EACH through the Baby Cambridge fundraiser as my little baby gift.

TBH, I think that would be the gift that would please Will and Kate the most. We have to remember that they also asked for donations to selected charities when they married. This is the kind of people William, Kate and Harry are and from the looks of things, even Baby Cambridge is getting into charity work and its not even born yet. :biggrin:

Personally, I think the Baby Cambridge Fundraiser is the greatest thing since sliced bread. There is such a flurry of attention given to this impending birth and what better way to put that attention to a good advantage than have folks make a donation for children that really need it.

HRHHermione 05-03-2013 10:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Osipi (Post 1548082)
TBH, I think that would be the gift that would please Will and Kate the most. We have to remember that they also asked for donations to selected charities when they married. This is the kind of people William, Kate and Harry are and from the looks of things, even Baby Cambridge is getting into charity work and its not even born yet. :biggrin:

Personally, I think the Baby Cambridge Fundraiser is the greatest thing since sliced bread. There is such a flurry of attention given to this impending birth and what better way to put that attention to a good advantage than have folks make a donation for children that really need it.

Exactly! Plus I think it's a really nice way for those of us who enjoy royal watching and appreciate the bloggers who work really hard to bring us the information we like talking about to come together as a community.

It was a genius idea and a great way to celebrate the baby.

BritishRoyalist 05-04-2013 02:03 AM

I have to laugh when Tabloids and Media compare Kim Kardashian to Kate Middleton. No comparison except for the fact that they Are both Pregnant and Due in July. Kate is married to the Future king of England and pregnant with a Future heir. Kim made a Sex tape that made her famous and got her onto a reality show. The Kardashian Kid is going to need years of Therapy!

Iluvbertie 05-04-2013 02:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cepe (Post 1548074)
I think that this would be a valid point 30 years ago. But Catherine and William don't have 100's of staff, not do they live in any royal household. I think that William in particular has a really firm grip on information regarding his friends. Their life style has really shut down available sources of information.

This tight approach to info is what drives the press wild - so I think they are having yet another punt at making it up, to see if there is any type of response.


If your point is accurate then it is true what others are saying and William has cut himself off from the royal family as otherwise they would certainly know what is happening and even share that information with other family members and that is where the staff come into it - not only the staff of William and Kate (and they do have some staff - 27 went out to Christmas with them last year) but Charles has nearly 200 and The Queen another nearly 200 not to mention Anne, Edward and Andrew who all have staff - and yes their friends families also have staff.

Skippyboo 05-04-2013 08:53 AM

I don't think the members of the BRF are in daily contact . In a regular family, most are not in daily contact with their aunts, uncles and cousins. You see them at family occasions. In the BRF, they don't just pop in to see each other, your private secretary calls their private secretary and it gets set up. We saw this when Kate went with the queen and Philip to the tube station. She didn't call up the queen directly. Rebecca called the queens priv. sect. and asked and then waited for a invite from the queen.

William and Harry are notorious for being weary of leaks. They would pass a friend a false story to see if it makes the press. If it did, the friend is out of the circle. Their staff is small -12 plus the protection officers. There isnt a footman standing behind them in their dining room like downton abbey. We learn more about baby c from twitter tracking Kate shopping trips.

Lumutqueen 05-04-2013 09:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lady Erton (Post 1548180)
William and Kate operate on a need to know basis. No one outside 2 or 3 three trusted friends that have been tested over the years are privy to anything that goes on in the couples private life.
I don't think Kate tells her mum and dad any details, let alone 'Uncle Gary'
The days of phone hacking are over and William and Catherine are too circumspect to let details of their upcoming baby 'leak' to the media, and that goes for where they will live and who the godparents may be.

Days of phone hacking are not over and to even think Catherine wouldn't tell her own parents anything about their first grandchild is laughable IMO.

nascarlucy 05-04-2013 10:37 AM

I think a lot of this talk is speculation and guessing as to how much they will spend on the nursery or what the nursery will look like. Probably will not be flashy or be something you would see on a reality show.

While it would be nice to send royals a gift for their baby, chances are as previous bloggers have said that they would turn the gift over to charity. I really wonder if they would actually see all the gifts that were sent to them, especially if the gifts ran into the hundreds or thousands. Do people who send a gift (wedding, baby, etc) to royals get acknowledgement of having received the gift?

Another thing that would concern me is that someone else who saw the gift might like it and then take it for themselves or someone else. Who would really know especially if there were large numbers of gift send.

cepe 05-04-2013 01:11 PM

All gifts to the BRF are logged and made public eventually. Thank you letters/cards are sent out - certainly for weddings and I remember that presents for Royal babies have been displayed.

All letters are answered apparently, even if it is just a thank you. This applies to all the family.

cepe 05-04-2013 01:27 PM

Personal gifts are not made public. But gifts from organisations and the general public are logged - the gifts are deemed to have been given to a member of BRF in their formal role. It stems from transparency in dealings with businesses/charities etc.

But if, for example, Michael Middleton gave Catherine a bracelet for her birthday, it would not be announced.

nascarlucy 05-04-2013 01:53 PM

Glad to hear that cepe.

Lumutqueen 05-04-2013 03:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lady Erton (Post 1548189)

I think Kate tells her mum 'typical' baby happenings. Doctor's appts. , shopping for items for the nursery etc but I don't think IMO that Kate's family, including her mum are privy to the upcoming living arrangements and the all the security details that go along with that. In fact I don't think William is fully up to speed on what is happening with regards to the security details of baby Cambridge. Again JMO
The baby is months away, there is plenty of time to inform the people that need informing. The earlier you tell people, including family, the greater the possibility for leaks.

The baby is two months away. If William and Catherine have decided where they're going to live (which is Kensington palace 99% definite) then her parents will know. Catherine is incredibly family orientated, they're her safety in her life.

Whatever security arrangements are for baby Cambridge, Catherine and William will be the first to know. Nothing is decided without them, it's their child after all.

Lumutqueen 05-04-2013 04:00 PM

Your viewpoint seems to suggest that Catherine cannot trust her own family, with the minor day to day decisions of her life. Which I don't understand. For instance Kensington will need to be decorated for their taste and I think Catherine will turn to Carole and Pippa for advice and help.

Dman 05-04-2013 09:30 PM

Kate Middleton baby: Prince Harry reveals sex of Duchess' baby:
Kate Middleton baby: Prince Harry reveals sex of Duchess' baby - Mirror Online

Most likely a false story.

Pranter 05-04-2013 09:41 PM

Drivel.


LaRae

cepe 05-04-2013 09:44 PM

but there's a 50/50 chance he's right! ;)

Ish 05-04-2013 10:29 PM

Well now Catherine's (allegedly) revealed it's a girl and Harry's (allegedly) revealed it's a boy. They've covered the bases.

Iluvbertie 05-04-2013 11:14 PM

Catherine has revealed it is both - the 'd' comment and the blue buggyboo thingy - suggests girl and boy.

The Alexandra bets being stopped also points to a girl.

angieuk 05-05-2013 02:41 AM

The making of a very Middle Class Monarch: A resolutely ordinary father-in-law William calls 'Mike' or 'Dad', cosy TV suppers and none of the flunkies so adored by his own father... how the Royals will never be the same again | Mail Online

Kataryn 05-05-2013 04:15 AM

This article is a shortened form of a book called "Diana's baby" - any more questions anyone? :bang:

Skippyboo 05-05-2013 08:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iluvbertie (Post 1548402)
Catherine has revealed it is both - the 'd' comment and the blue buggyboo thingy - suggests girl and boy.

The Alexandra bets being stopped also points to a girl.

The d comment was disproved the week it came out with a video that has clear audio that Kate didn't say anything close to that. The buggy story is also fishy why it is being reported 2 months later from when she said it. Plus Kate and Carole were spotted looking at buggys and car seats at a London dept store a few weeks ago.

These people kept their engagement secret for weeks and Kate kept her dress designer secret for months. They can keep a secret. It is a dead period of no events for Kate. So the press is filling it with stories of possible nurserys and look a likes at fake baby showers.

DukeofMontpelier 05-05-2013 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lumutqueen (Post 1548298)
Your viewpoint seems to suggest that Catherine cannot trust her own family, with the minor day to day decisions of her life. Which I don't understand. For instance Kensington will need to be decorated for their taste and I think Catherine will turn to Carole and Pippa for advice and help.

I think advice but I have a feeling it will be her taste in the end not theirs that will end up in the apartment.

angieuk 05-05-2013 11:58 AM

Kate Middleton pregnant: Has Prince Harry given the game away? | Mail Online

I am now totally confused especially as the whole world (including myself) had been saying it was a girl.

If it is a boy??? Shame the surprise has been leaked mistakenly it seems? But then again, maybe its a girl after all! Can't believe its only 8 weeks to go!!

angieuk 05-05-2013 12:10 PM

Then again, it could be a girl but harry just wants to pretend otherwise?

nascarlucy 05-05-2013 12:41 PM

Prince Harry didn't officially say this, so whether or not he actually said this may or may not be true. Well, it's 50/50. Kate will either have a boy or a girl. It's possible he might have said this just to see if someone would spill the beans.

angieuk 05-05-2013 04:08 PM

Yes, I agree. No one really knows for sure. So many things being said ---- a bit like Chinese whispers.

Avicenna 05-05-2013 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by angieuk (Post 1548567)
Then again, it could be a girl but harry just wants to pretend otherwise?

The Daily Mail also says:

Princess Eugenie, Prince William’s cousin, has also been telling friends the baby is a boy, according to another royal insider quoted by the Sunday People.






vkrish 05-05-2013 04:19 PM

Probably Harry is planning to induct some new "friends" into his inner circle, and this is a test for them, and they fell for the bait...too tempting to resist, isnt it?
William already told he has been using this trick since a long time..

Frideswide 05-05-2013 06:52 PM

There is one bit I do believe. Re the name:

Quote:

Harry’s been making up crazy suggestions and winding them up too.
:lol:



MichelleQ2 05-06-2013 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frideswide (Post 1548737)
There is one bit I do believe. Re the name:

:lol:


HRH Princess Harriet of Cambridge?

GracieGiraffe 05-06-2013 04:57 PM

WHY would Harry AND Eugenie be telling friends the baby's gender? If the parents wants the gender kept secret, it would be a very rude and thoughtless thing to do, as the news was bound to leak. If your brother or cousin asks you to keep something in confidence like this, you do it. Full stop.

Therefore, I don't believe the story. Although I do think it's a boy.

Iluvbertie 05-06-2013 06:04 PM

However they may have told them and then not told them to keep the secret.

If you genuinely want to keep a secret you tell no one.

BrazilianEmpire 05-06-2013 06:09 PM

The Duchess has said they don't know the sex.

Unless Prince Harry and Princess Eugenie are psychics, the tabloids are lying (again).

BritishRoyalist 05-06-2013 06:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrazilianEmpire (Post 1548985)
The Duchess has said they don't know the sex.

Unless Prince Harry and Princess Eugenie are psychics, the tabloids are lying (again).

Or unless they bribe the doctor in yelling them which I highly doubt they would do that all.

Ish 05-06-2013 06:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iluvbertie (Post 1548983)
However they may have told them and then not told them to keep the secret.

If you genuinely want to keep a secret you tell no one.

I really don't think any member of the BRF is stupid enough to not realize that they shouldn't be telling people the sex of the baby (assuming that they know said sex).

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrazilianEmpire (Post 1548985)
The Duchess has said they don't know the sex.

Unless Prince Harry and Princess Eugenie are psychics, the tabloids are lying (again).

For all we know the Duchess was simply saying they don't know it. She's already under a lot of pressure to reveal the sex, even while she's saying that she doesn't know. The minute she says "I know the sex but I'm not going to tell you" the pressure will just get worse and people asking will go to greater lengths to deliberately trip her or William (or Harry or anyone else in the family) up.

Skippyboo 05-06-2013 07:12 PM

I kind of believe that they don't know. From what i understand that it isn't that common in the UK to find out. Our British members may know more about it. It is also believable that Kate knows and William doesn't especially if it is a boy since they are easier to spot on a scan. In Andrew Morton's book, Diana says she knew ahead that William and Harry were boys not the girl that Charles wanted. I don't think if W&K both know it would be spread out to entire family. Harry maybe Eugenie I don't think so.

Dman 05-06-2013 08:18 PM

I somehow think they probably do know the sex of the baby, unless they want to be surprised. I'm thinking Catherine's maternal instinct's is probably telling her if she's having a girl or boy.

kathia_sophia 05-07-2013 03:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dman (Post 1549031)
I somehow think they probably do know the sex of the baby, unless they want to be surprised. I'm thinking Catherine's maternal instinct's is probably telling her if she's having a girl or boy.

Probably, but instincts do play tricks sometimes. My mom thought I was a boy throughout the whole pregnancy, she said it was her instinct, and I already had a boy's name choosen. But in the end, when I was born I was a girl, she had to choose a girl's name then:lol:

Iluvbertie 05-07-2013 04:03 AM

My mum was the same - predicted a girl all through her pregnancy with my brother and everyone around her said 'she is carrying it in such and such a way so she is having a girl' - she had a boy. With me she was carrying the same way to how she carried my brother, her instinct said I was a boy based on her earlier experience and guess what - this time a girl.

I have recently had a colleague at work who was told by everyone 'girl' - even the scan said girl - and yet a bouncy baby boy arrived.

someonelikeyou 05-07-2013 10:10 PM

I just had a crazy thought... What if Catherine is carrying twins (as discussed early in her pregnancy as a possible cause for the extreme nausea), but claimed a "singleton" pregnancy to quell media insanity that impending twins would cause. Wouldn't that be an amazing thing to pull off if they tricked everyone and ended up with a boy AND a girl!

HRHHermione 05-07-2013 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by someonelikeyou (Post 1549414)
I just had a crazy thought... What if Catherine is carrying twins (as discussed early in her pregnancy as a possible cause for the extreme nausea), but claimed a "singleton" pregnancy to quell media insanity that impending twins would cause. Wouldn't that be an amazing thing to pull off if they tricked everyone and ended up with a boy AND a girl!

Oh god. No. I don't think I could take the media after something like that. It'll be insane enough as it is.

LadyGabrielle 05-07-2013 10:43 PM

That would be quite a ruse. I cant even imagine what a media frenzy it would cause. If it ends up being twins, I guess we will have our answer. I cant wait to find out.

Baroness of Books 05-07-2013 10:47 PM

I'm going into hibernation until this baby is born!:dizzy:

LadyGabrielle 05-07-2013 10:56 PM

I know,I know, it is driving some of us mental! :)

Lumutqueen 05-08-2013 01:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by someonelikeyou (Post 1549414)
I just had a crazy thought... What if Catherine is carrying twins (as discussed early in her pregnancy as a possible cause for the extreme nausea), but claimed a "singleton" pregnancy to quell media insanity that impending twins would cause. Wouldn't that be an amazing thing to pull off if they tricked everyone and ended up with a boy AND a girl!

If she's carrying twins in that tiny bump, it'd be a miracle.

kathia_sophia 05-08-2013 09:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lumutqueen (Post 1549454)
If she's carrying twins in that tiny bump, it'd be a miracle.

I don't think it would be a miracle, my friend is expecting twin girls for June and she has a small size bump, around the size of Catherine's. For a women who is having twins she certanily doesn't look like it, but her doctor said the babies are healthy and that they are "fat" (in a good way).

However, I'm sure she's having only a child, what's the point of hiding if you're having twins? I understand it with gender, but not number. Besides, the court would announce if she were to be expecting twins.

Skippyboo 05-08-2013 08:18 PM

I can see W&K doing a jungle theme nursery with kid friendly lions, rhinos, giraffes etc. Since they both love Africa

GracieGiraffe 05-08-2013 09:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skippyboo (Post 1549846)
i can see w&k doing a jungle theme nursery with kid friendly lions, rhinos, giraffes etc. Since they both love africa

perfect!!!!!!!!

semisquare 05-10-2013 03:03 PM

when is she due?

windsorgirl 05-10-2013 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by semisquare (Post 1550401)
when is she due?

Mid-July according to comments she made at a recent engagement to members of the public.

Mariel 05-10-2013 10:15 PM

Twins can inhabit a womb with a fairly small bump if there is little amniotic fluid. This is not a good thing as far as getting delivery started, but of course the doctors will be monitoring everything. I had no amniotic fluid at all when they broke my so-called and non-existent water. This was because my baby was huge in comparison to me. Only one, but big. These things can surprise doctors. Surely surprised mine. He thought my baby was 7.5 and it was 9.5. I would have a caesarian if I did it again, especially with my daughter-in-law's great deliveries by caesarian. No harm in it, I believe, and avoids surprises. Just my guesses.

cepe 05-11-2013 05:16 PM

:previous: Typical DM - they make it sound like she chose that date on purpose! :lol:

Grandma828 05-11-2013 09:38 PM

And babies are known to come when they are ready. They can't read a calendar.

GracieGiraffe 05-11-2013 09:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lumutqueen (Post 1549454)
If she's carrying twins in that tiny bump, it'd be a miracle.

Mary of Denmark looked incredibly small during her twin pregnancy, and had fairly large babies for twins. That said, I'm fairly sure a twin pregnancy would have been announced here.

Lumutqueen 05-12-2013 02:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bosco (Post 1550760)
Not necessarily. One way or the other, I believe the Royal Family keeps their cards close to their vest.

Yes necessarily, there is no reason to hide such information and contrary to watch Gracie said Mary had quite a large bump when pregnant with twins particularly 2 months of giving birth. It was announced that The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge were expecting their first child not children.

Osipi 05-12-2013 02:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lumutqueen (Post 1550804)
Yes necessarily, there is no reason to hide such information and contrary to watch Gracie said Mary had quite a large bump when pregnant with twins particularly 2 months of giving birth. It was announced that The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge were expecting their first child not children.

I remember seeing that too. Put to rest any ideas that she would be having twins.

Anything is possible when it comes to pregnancies as far as the baby bunp goes. With my daughter, I only gained 12 lbs total throughout the entire pregnancy and 7lbs 2oz of it was her.

angieuk 05-12-2013 05:31 AM

Revealed: Kate's due date is Saturday July 13... right in the middle of the Queen's Coronation party | Mail Online

Some internet sites are saying that usually first born babies are late?? The second babies are usually early?

Osipi 05-12-2013 05:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by angieuk (Post 1550842)
Revealed: Kate's due date is Saturday July 13... right in the middle of the Queen's Coronation party | Mail Online

Some internet sites are saying that usually first born babies are late?? The second babies are usually early?

The only thing that one can be assured of is that the baby will arrive when it is ready to. Unless one is having a ceasarean section where the date and time of birth can be planned, nothing is written in stone. Could be early. Could be late and could actually arrive on the due date. :biggrin:

Dman 05-12-2013 10:15 AM

MonarchySociety BMS 2h
Happy Mothers Day to all Mums and Mums-to-be in Canada, the US and around the World! pic.twitter.com/y2nh6FGQ5I

iisuzieii 05-12-2013 10:26 AM

Am I the only one starting to get annoyed with all the speculation the uk press is doing. Just freaking wait until she gives birth...really! Is it really necessary to find out personal information...its not really there place or an appropriate thing to do. (PS i don't believe alot of the stuff thats out there right now--and wouldn't be surprised if will and kate are lying to people, so they can keep their personal business quiet.)

Do people really think prince harry or even eugiene would know the sex i don't think so. They were some of the last people to know Will and Kate were even engaged/same as with her pregnancy announcement(none of the royals knew). I think there are alot of fluff stories right now.

And regarding her due date...most babies aren't born on them. My mom gave birth to both my sister and I 3 weeks early. Like others have said...that baby is gonna come when its good and ready and its not gonna care what is going on in their royal or personal calendars.

Happy Mothers Day to all the moms on the forum! :)

Lumutqueen 05-12-2013 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iisuzieii (Post 1550888)

Do people really think prince harry or even eugiene would know the sex i don't think so. They were some of the last people to know Will and Kate were even engaged/same as with her pregnancy announcement(none of the royals knew). I think there are alot of fluff stories right now.

I certainly think Henry knows the sex of his first neice or nephew, why wouldn't he? We've seen on countless occasions the three are extremely close. I'm not sure where you get your information from about the engagement, and the pregnancy well no royals knew because I doubt at 12 weeks Catherine and William wanted to tell anyone anything until it was safer and sounder. The whole world found out because of her hospitalisation.

Ish 05-12-2013 01:58 PM

I have no doubt that if Catherine and William know then some members of the family know as well, including Harry (I don't know that Catherine and William do know, as they've said they don't).

As for the BRF not knowing before the public announcement was made, it's common to not tell people before the end of the first trimester, as the possibility of miscarriage is high then.

GracieGiraffe 05-12-2013 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iisuzieii (Post 1550888)
Am I the only one starting to get annoyed with all the speculation the uk press is doing. Just freaking wait until she gives birth...really! Is it really necessary to find out personal information...its not really there place or an appropriate thing to do. (PS i don't believe alot of the stuff thats out there right now--and wouldn't be surprised if will and kate are lying to people, so they can keep their personal business quiet.)

Do people really think prince harry or even eugiene would know the sex i don't think so. They were some of the last people to know Will and Kate were even engaged/same as with her pregnancy announcement(none of the royals knew). I think there are alot of fluff stories right now.

And regarding her due date...most babies aren't born on them. My mom gave birth to both my sister and I 3 weeks early. Like others have said...that baby is gonna come when its good and ready and its not gonna care what is going on in their royal or personal calendars.

Happy Mothers Day to all the moms on the forum! :)

The people who work for the media have bills to pay and mouths to feed, so they make up stuff or embellish. Not giving the media an excuse, but it is what it is (shrugs shoulders).

I have know idea whether Harry knows the sex but if Eugenie did know, if the circumference of knowledge goes out that far, that's too many people in on the world's biggest secret. But I don't think Harry would betray his brother's confidence and let the cat out of the bag, but who can say? I don't know Harry personally nor does anyone else here. But if Harry blabs to one person, he must realize that the information would get to the media, it's not like they're ordinary people and telling your friend, who's most likely somewhat disinterested in the sex of your brother's child anyway, would cause no real outing of the big secret.

If Will and Kate don't want anyone to know, they had best not find out themselves. Once they know, the techs who had to go looking know (if they did not look surreptitiously) It becomes impossible to keep the secret.

Mariel 05-12-2013 02:05 PM

It's impossible to conceal pregnancy if the mother has HG, as Kate did. I suspect the Middletons knew about it weeks before anyone else, as the nausea starts in most people within weeks, not months. With me i was in the hospital with nausea one week after conception, dx'd pregnant at two weeks from conception. What a lot of fuss that was.

AdmirerUS 05-12-2013 05:16 PM

Personally - I don't think this due date thing in the press is a big deal.

First - due dates are rarely delivery dates (unless you have scheduled a C Section), what with human biology being an inexact science.

Second, any number of us here in the forums have said that we thought mid July was our best guess. Given any info that has been out there, it is a solid, good guess. Any number of us have been looking at the calendar, too. ;)

Finally - that little by or girl will come when they are good and ready.

Happy Mom's Day to all the US Moms BTW. And anywhere else it is mom's day today!

4Pam 05-13-2013 12:22 AM

Babies show up when they want. Her due date could be July 13 but if he or she decides that next week is a better time, then that's when he/she will arrive.

NGalitzine 05-13-2013 01:20 AM

I agree. Babies come when they want to come. Personally I arrived a month early and was still over 7lbs. My then 45 yr old mother, already the mother of 4 between the ages of 19 and 10 yrs, had been told she was having twins but on the day only I showed up. Surprise!!

Princess Pillow 05-13-2013 02:48 AM

For the first time, in the British monarchy if a daughter is first born to an heir, she will be heir not heiress presumptive. That is so historical, so cool.

miche 05-13-2013 09:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mariel (Post 1550933)
It's impossible to conceal pregnancy if the mother has HG, as Kate did. I suspect the Middletons knew about it weeks before anyone else, as the nausea starts in most people within weeks, not months. With me i was in the hospital with nausea one week after conception, dx'd pregnant at two weeks from conception. What a lot of fuss that was.

Base on how early it was announce to the public, I doubt the Middletons knew weeks beforehand

Lumutqueen 05-13-2013 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Princess Pillow (Post 1551094)
For the first time, in the British monarchy if a daughter is first born to an heir, she will be heir not heiress presumptive. That is so historical, so cool.

Not yet she won't.

GracieGiraffe 05-13-2013 02:13 PM

With a July birth, it could arrive on any number of fortuitous days:

July 1; Diana's birthday
July 4; a Yankee Doodle Dandy!
July 14; Bastille day and Crown Princess Victoria's birthday
July 17; Camilla's birthday (admit it; how awesome would that be! :eek:)

principessa 05-13-2013 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GracieGiraffe (Post 1551313)
With a July birth, it could arrive on any number of fortuitous days:

July 1; Diana's birthday
July 4; a Yankee Doodle Dandy!
July 14; Bastille day and Crown Princess Victoria's birthday
July 17; Camilla's birthday (admit it; how awesome would that be! :eek:)

July 20: Crown Prince Haakons birthday.

Princess Pillow 05-13-2013 03:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lumutqueen (Post 1551312)
Not yet she won't.


Thank you, Lumutqueen for the reminder that while Parliament has passed such a law The Succession to the Crown Act 2013 in April 2013, it needs to be approved by the 15 Commonwealth Nations. However, the law is based on principles decided by those Commonwealth nations when meeting in Perth, Australia, in October 2011. Therefore there is little reason to think it won’t be approved. Unless you Brits know something what isn't in the news yet.
You are technically correct, it remains ‘not yet’.
Please forgive my presumptuous American claim, haste, and cheer at such a momentous event in the history of humanity. The welcoming of a possible, female heir to such a famous throne and in my lifetime!

Lumutqueen 05-13-2013 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Princess Pillow (Post 1551327)

Thank you, Lumutqueen for the reminder that while Parliament has passed such a law The Succession to the Crown Act 2013 in April 2013, it needs to be approved by the 15 Commonwealth Nations. However, the law is based on principles decided by those Commonwealth nations when meeting in Perth, Australia, in October 2011. Therefore there is little reason to think it won’t be approved. Unless you Brits know something what isn't in the news yet.
You are technically correct, it remains ‘not yet’.
Please forgive my presumptuous American claim, haste, and cheer at such a momentous event in the history of humanity. The welcoming of a possible, female heir to such a famous throne and in my lifetime!

Of course it'll be passed, eventually. But I doubt by July when the baby is due. Personally I'm hoping for a boy, it'll make life a lot easier.

Osipi 05-13-2013 03:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lumutqueen (Post 1551331)
Of course it'll be passed, eventually. But I doubt by July when the baby is due. Personally I'm hoping for a boy, it'll make life a lot easier.

:biggrin: And then too, the baby will be the heir to the heir of the heir apparent to the throne. Talk about splitting heirs eh?

I think its going to be a boy myself.

Princess Pillow 05-13-2013 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lumutqueen (Post 1551331)
Of course it'll be passed, eventually. But I doubt by July when the baby is due. Personally I'm hoping for a boy, it'll make life a lot easier.

Whew, you had me concerned there for a moment Lumutqueen!
I believe the law will pass eventually as well. If it isn’t passed by the birth, does that mean if a girl, she won’t become the heir?
I prefer a boy, too. It is just the concept that a female heir is going to become a reality, one day that to me, is really cool.



Lumutqueen 05-13-2013 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Princess Pillow (Post 1551347)

Whew, you had me concerned there for a moment Lumutqueen!
I believe the law will pass eventually as well. If it isn’t passed by the birth, does that mean if a girl, she won’t become the heir?
I prefer a boy, too. It is just the concept that a female heir is going to become a reality, one day that to me, is really cool.


They may have to change the wording of the law if it is a girl. Similar to the Swedish situation.

BrazilianEmpire 05-13-2013 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Princess Pillow (Post 1551347)
Whew, you had me concerned there for a moment Lumutqueen!
I believe the law will pass eventually as well. If it isn’t passed by the birth, does that mean if a girl, she won’t become the heir?
I prefer a boy, too. It is just the concept that a female heir is going to become a reality, one day that to me, is really cool.



Once the law is passed in all Commonwealth Realms, it will take effect for everyone born in October 28, 2011 onwards.

Ish 05-13-2013 04:20 PM

The law is set to be retroactive up until a certain date (I think in 2010). As long as they don't change the date that it's retroactive to, then it doesn't matter if the law is passed before or after the baby is born (assuming that it's a girl).

Princess Pillow 05-13-2013 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrazilianEmpire (Post 1551351)
Once the law is passed in all Commonwealth Realms, it will take effect for everyone born in October 28, 2011 onwards.


Thank you so very much BrazilianEmpire, I appreciate the information.

SLV 05-13-2013 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Osipi (Post 1551333)

:biggrin: And then too, the baby will be the heir to the heir of the heir apparent to the throne. Talk about splitting heirs eh?

I think its going to be a boy myself.

Lol!
Very true.

scooter 05-13-2013 09:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GracieGiraffe (Post 1551313)
With a July birth, it could arrive on any number of fortuitous days:

July 1; Diana's birthday
July 17; Camilla's birthday (admit it; how awesome would that be! :eek:)

My Darling Gracie,
You poke hornets nests! Take cover and prednisone!

Having said that, I firmly believe there will be a name, in the very long line up of given names, to honor the baby's late grandmother.

Ish 05-13-2013 09:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GracieGiraffe (Post 1551313)
July 17; Camilla's birthday (admit it; how awesome would that be! :eek:)

If that happened, I think the Internet really would blow up.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:13 PM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020
Jelsoft Enterprises