Harry and Meghan Are Expecting, Baby Due Spring 2019


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
She gave a due date of a period between April 21-May 5. Logically she was taking into account a baby could come early or late. If her due date was May 7 she would never had said she was due 'late April'. To suggest she could go to May 21st is beyond belief.
"Logically " ? I think you are making an assumption.

No date was given. Even one's definition of "late April/Early May" is subjective. Meghan never said she was due somewhere between April 21st and May 5th. That is simply your interpretation.

Keep in mind that when a woman is "due" or a due date is an exact date- 40 weeks or 280 days after a woman's last menstrual period. Unless Meghan and Harry did IVF it is impossible to be 100% certain of that date.
So turning 40 weeks between late April and early may certainly does not mean she took into account the child could come 2 weeks early or 2 weeks late.
 
Well there's one thing I'm certain about in all this & it's that I couldn't bear to have my body & menstrual cycle picked over in public. Birth is such an intense & personal event (especially the 1st) that I don't believe any woman's duty is to share more than she wants to. The fact that some of the press are annoyed at their perceived lack of access is incredible & a marker of how ridiculous & intrusive some royal coverage is becoming. It's about time it was rolled back to include more privacy & personal choice in control of the coverage. The Queen wouldn't have given this level of information in a million years & I know we're in a different era but any royal woman who wants to pull it back a bit has my support & understanding.
 
Each woman is different and each delivery is different. One thing I know is that I would never have made it out the door so fast after giving birth. I especially appreciate too that I didn't leave so soon after delivery because then I could rest and recoup (with breakfast in bed) and best of all, get intimate with my new son/daughter. Just the two of us after Daddy was sent home. That time is precious.

All things in good time. I just hope for a easy and safe delivery and two very happy, ecstatic parents welcoming their much awaited and longed for first child. They *should* be able to create their own little, private bubble and totally embrace the newness of being a family. 😄

Every delivery is different. I gave birth at 6:50pm after a labour induced at 7am that morning. I drove home with the baby at 11pm that night. I certainly had discomfort but not enough to medicate it.

Assuming that Meghan will be "torn apart" makes no more sense than assuming that she'll be 100% fine. It really feels like there's such a need to defend Meghan's decision that people are prepared to throw other mothers who've chosen a hospital photocall under the bus. Why can't we just accept that Meghan made the right decision for her (with whatever consequences that leads to) without having to assert that this is the best decision in general?
 
Well there's one thing I'm certain about in all this & it's that I couldn't bear to have my body & menstrual cycle picked over in public. Birth is such an intense & personal event (especially the 1st) that I don't believe any woman's duty is to share more than she wants to. The fact that some of the press are annoyed at their perceived lack of access is incredible & a marker of how ridiculous & intrusive some royal coverage is becoming. It's about time it was rolled back to include more privacy & personal choice in control of the coverage. The Queen wouldn't have given this level of information in a million years & I know we're in a different era but any royal woman who wants to pull it back a bit has my support & understanding.

Preach it! Some of these breakfast shows saying “the public owns baby” has been incredible to hear. The entitlement is through the roof. No we don’t own this baby. And honestly I’m glad the Sussexes doing what’s good for them.
 
When did she give dates. She said late April or early May from what I heard on the video.


LaRae

Exactly, she said late April, which is any time after April 20th.

The poster I was responding to suggested her due date is as late as May 7th. If she was due May 7th, she wouldn't have made the comment of late April. The suggestion she could go until 21st of May without being past the place where a doctor would induce, is beyond a push.

The question really isn't if she is over due. Its how much she is over due at this point.
 
Yeah,the public entitlement is incredible.

Imagine the reverse situation, where an heir to the throne refuses to marry or have babies.
:whistling:
How would british public reacted if that was the case? I mean, the Queen has plenty of grandkids and cousins.
 
Yeah,the public entitlement is incredible.

Imagine the reverse situation, where an heir to the throne refuses to marry or have babies.
:whistling:
How would british public reacted if that was the case? I mean, the Queen has plenty of grandkids and cousins.

There are over 1000 people in the line of succession to the British throne , so. i’d Assume it wouldn’t matter .
 
I don't think any of us should be bad mouthing the press for their stories when you read some of the stuff on here. You don't need to by a newspaper, magazine or watch a news programme. Poor Meghans body function s are being discussed all over this. The baby will come soon enough with our without a wee nudge.
 
It's only since the birth of Prince William in 1982 that the idea of the new Royal mum appearing freshly made up and blown out less than 24 hours after labor and delivery became "tradition".

Before that it was mostly unheard of in Royal circles, so by refusing to do it, it is Meghan who is reverting to tradition.

Diana and Kate were marvels of nature for doing that so well but I don't fault ANY woman Royal or not for refusing to commit to such a thing.

What if she had a grueling ordeal and is exhausted and unwell? What if she is too emotional?

Is it really so bad to just announce the birth and sex of the newborn and release a few photos later...like it used to be in Britain and still is in other monarchies?
 
She said late April, not last day of April. Anything after April 30 is late April. So of course people have been on count down for weeks now. If you don't want to be, tune out until you hear the news.

I never said that she mentioned April 30th as her due date. I took it as example.
April 30th is one of the days of the period between late April and the beginning of May.
 
I think the enthusiasm for the imminent birth in this thread doesn’t reflect the mood of the general population of the UK. The news of the birth will be greeted with plenty of well wishes, but in the meantime most are preoccupied with how to spend a rather cold bank holiday weekend.
I recall when Kate appeared looking wonderful following the birth of Louis, there was a lot of comment that this was not a helpful ‘statement’ for new mothers. So I hope Meghan and Harry do what is right for the well being of mother and baby.
 
Let’s not forget that there was backlash to the photocall when Kate did it—increasing backlash each time—coming from mothers or women with motherhood possibly on the horizon, who resented the idea of a woman forced to present herself before hundreds of hungry members of the media as a Pretty Princess so soon after the physical marathon that is birth and during the emotional rollercoaster of those first days of parenthood. Royal watchers aside, the tide of public opinion is turning on those hospital photo calls. I honestly think this kind of change was coming sooner or later, even if it wasn’t Harry and Meghan who pulled the trigger on eliminating the onsite press pen.

As a reminder, this is the kind of backlash that Meghan would have likely gotten had she kept up with the “tradition” (which is really just one generation’s trend that’s only been followed since by one couple in direct line to the throne, so tradition is a strong word):

http://https//www.express.co.uk/new...hotos-meshel-laurie-kensington-palace-twitter

http://https//www.google.com/amp/s/...ing-birth-no-this-isnt-normal/?outputType=amp

http://https//www.google.com/amp/s/...tley-kate-middleton-post-baby-body-criticism/

http://https//en.newsner.com/news/m...kate-middleton-childbirth-just-wanted-scream/
 
Last edited:
She gave a due date of a period between April 21-May 5. Logically she was taking into account a baby could come early or late. If her due date was May 7 she would never had said she was due 'late April'. To suggest she could go to May 21st is beyond belief.

Meghan's mother arrived on Tuesday 16, so if she arrived exactly 2 weeks before Meghan's due date she would have been due on the 30th. I would think that she would at the latest arrive about a week before due date (given that she wanted to be there before Meghan gave birth and not wait until after the baby is born) but that's already a bit ridky, so due date of April 30 or a few days prior seems likely imo. So, I'd say a birth before or on (American) mother's day would be the most likely scenario. I don't think she will go over 2-3 days past mother's day (as that would be 2 weeks after my latest estimated due date).
 
Since we're going back in time throwing feminist points around like it was rice at a wedding it's worth remembering how Duchess Catherine was lauded after the birth of Prince George because she did nothing to try to hide her protruding postpartum tummy while after the birth of Prince Louis she was criticised for having had her hair done. The media wants to sell magazines and generate clicks by making these so-called scandals up and it relies on it's readers to have a very short memory.
Don't fall for it.
 
There are over 1000 people in the line of succession to the British throne , so. i’d Assume it wouldn’t matter .

If it didn’t matter, then Charles would never have proposed to Diana.

And we wouldn’t be discussing the upcoming birth of Harry’s first child.;)
 
Last edited:
If they don't want to do it, they don't have ot. but it is their fans who want to see pictures. the Press don't care. If there were no fans who want to see pictures, the press would not be there.

So their complaining and impatience, the need to know everything is just the press speaking on behalf of fans? No.

Since we're going back in time throwing feminist points around like it was rice at a wedding it's worth remembering how Duchess Catherine was lauded after the birth of Prince George because she did nothing to try to hide her protruding postpartum tummy while after the birth of Prince Louis she was criticised for having had her hair done. The media wants to sell magazines and generate clicks by making these so-called scandals up and it relies on it's readers to have a very short memory.
Don't fall for it.

I don't think it's accurate to say this is all coming from the same media or people though. Some recent "dissenters" are women who may not have had a platform or weren't comfortable speaking on the topic before. And while we might not all agree, I don't think it's fair to lump them in with regular tabloid media.
 
There are over 1000 people in the line of succession to the British throne , so. i’d Assume it wouldn’t matter .

There may be a 1000 in line for the throne, but there is only one direct heir. And there is the expectation that the heir to the throne do his/her duty which includes marrying and at least attempting to have children (doesn't always happen). Why there was pressure for Charles to marry and have children, even if he had three siblings and a niece and nephew.

Harry or his cousins there would be less pressure. Unlike William, none of them are next direct heir. If Harry decided to be a bachelor for life and not have kids, there wouldn't be as much pressure. There would still be talk as people would wonder why a healthy young man was not planning to have kids.
 
So their complaining and impatience, the need to know everything is just the press speaking on behalf of fans? No.



I don't think it's accurate to say this is all coming from the same media or people though. Some recent "dissenters" are women who may not have had a platform or weren't comfortable speaking on the topic before. And while we might not all agree, I don't think it's fair to lump them in with regular tabloid media.
Talking about fairness, to celebrate someone one time she does something and then throw her to the dogs another time she does it isn't what I'd call fair. For it to not even happen in real time but a year later to be able to score cheap points about two different women and sell magazines is definitely not fair.
For women to speak out about how they're pressured to conform to a sanitised image of what pregnancy and childbirth is like and how it effects the image of women is on the other hand definitely something that should be discussed much more in our society, but might I suggest in other ways than through tabloid headlines.
 
The London betting companies have stopped taking bets on the birth date. They are telling the media that they believe the child has already been born.

Maybe we'll know about it tomorrow.
 
Maybe we'll know about it tomorrow.

The palace has confirmed they will let us know when she is in labor. The baby has not been born and waiting for a news day to announce it.

The betting companies seem to think that some secret was leaked. Although they also seem to think that the insider leaked the name Ivy.
 
BP has said in the last few days...the baby has not been born.


LaRae
 
Talking about fairness, to celebrate someone one time she does something and then throw her to the dogs another time she does it isn't what I'd call fair. For it to not even happen in real time but a year later to be able to score cheap points about two different women and sell magazines is definitely not fair.
For women to speak out about how they're pressured to conform to a sanitised image of what pregnancy and childbirth is like and how it effects the image of women is on the other hand definitely something that should be discussed much more in our society, but might I suggest in other ways than through tabloid headlines.

What I noticed was a grassroots online rumbling that started with the birth of George and then was finally noticed by a piggybacking press by the time Louis came around, not a media-driven narrative.

Times change, public attitudes change...and then royals adjust in small but sometimes significant ways.
 
Talking about fairness, to celebrate someone one time she does something and then throw her to the dogs another time she does it isn't what I'd call fair. For it to not even happen in real time but a year later to be able to score cheap points about two different women and sell magazines is definitely not fair.
For women to speak out about how they're pressured to conform to a sanitised image of what pregnancy and childbirth is like and how it effects the image of women is on the other hand definitely something that should be discussed much more in our society, but might I suggest in other ways than through tabloid headlines.

Again, this assumes or suggests it's all coming from the same people and that's not true. Not all of it is coming from tabloids.
 
The palace has confirmed they will let us know when she is in labor. The baby has not been born and waiting for a news day to announce it.

The betting companies seem to think that some secret was leaked. Although they also seem to think that the insider leaked the name Ivy.

I wonder if it is no longer true that we will know when Meghan is in labor. There was clearly a reason that information was not shared with the general public, and it may be that when it entered the public domain, arrangements changed. We have no idea why officials did not want us to know this information and it may be that once the information was leaked, they were no longer comfortable moving forward with that original plan. Of course, we would have no way to know this-- just like we weren't supposed to know the original plan.
 
It's only since the birth of Prince William in 1982 that the idea of the new Royal mum appearing freshly made up and blown out less than 24 hours after labor and delivery became "tradition".

Before that it was mostly unheard of in Royal circles, so by refusing to do it, it is Meghan who is reverting to tradition.

Diana and Kate were marvels of nature for doing that so well but I don't fault ANY woman Royal or not for refusing to commit to such a thing.

What if she had a grueling ordeal and is exhausted and unwell? What if she is too emotional?

Is it really so bad to just announce the birth and sex of the newborn and release a few photos later...like it used to be in Britain and still is in other monarchies?
The first royal mother to be photographed coming out of the hospital with her newborn was The Duchess of Kent after the birth of Lord Nicholas Windsor in 1970. The Duchess of Gloucester and The Princess Royal also were photographed leaving hospital with their babies. None of these ladies actually "posed" the way Diana did in 1982, but the media was there to take pictures.
 
I wonder if it is no longer true that we will know when Meghan is in labor. There was clearly a reason that information was not shared with the general public, and it may be that when it entered the public domain, arrangements changed. We have no idea why officials did not want us to know this information and it may be that once the information was leaked, they were no longer comfortable moving forward with that original plan. Of course, we would have no way to know this-- just like we weren't supposed to know the original plan.

We still don't know the 'plan' :ermm:

The palace always releases extra information to the press, besides the press release. They informed the media that the press pen would be set up when Meghan went into labor. Though that was leaked to the public, there was no reason to think that actually changed any plans.

BP further confirmed this was the truth. They could have said the leak was false but they didn't. They have made it known we will know when the baby is coming. No reason to think other then tabloid fodder, they are hiding.
 
Just to be clear, Buckingham Palace has not issued a statement regarding the Sussex baby since April 20, when it suggested that people send gifts to Harry and Meghan's pet charities. Before that, the only other statement was on October 15, when it announced the pregnancy.

The only time the Palace has said the baby has not yet been born was when an unnamed press rep apparently made that comment to E! News, a U.S. entertainment channel related to CBS News. This may be entirely accurate, but it is NOT the same as a statement from the Palace.

The Palace also has not issued statement claiming it will let the world know when Meghan goes into labor. The only suggestion about that came from a comment to Entertainment Tonight Canada. Again, not a statement (or even a named source).

If the Palace press reps have lied to the media about announcing the labor and birth, it will be a huge scandal, with nasty backlash. I don't think they're stupid enough to risk this, but who knows?
 
Actually the German media released by accident an embargoed statement from BP. That's the one that said they would be told when she goes into labor etc.


LaRae
 
Just to be clear, Buckingham Palace has not issued a statement regarding the Sussex baby since April 20, when it suggested that people send gifts to Harry and Meghan's pet charities. Before that, the only other statement was on October 15, when it announced the pregnancy.

The only time the Palace has said the baby has not yet been born was when an unnamed press rep apparently made that comment to E! News, a U.S. entertainment channel related to CBS News. This may be entirely accurate, but it is NOT the same as a statement from the Palace.

The Palace also has not issued statement claiming it will let the world know when Meghan goes into labor. The only suggestion about that came from a comment to Entertainment Tonight Canada. Again, not a statement (or even a named source).

If the Palace press reps have lied to the media about announcing the labor and birth, it will be a huge scandal, with nasty backlash. I don't think they're stupid enough to risk this, but who knows?


The palace didn't make a 'statement'.


What they do is give certain information to the press, in press packages. It allows the press to be prepared for certain things. This information is not intended to be made public, it was let slip by German press long before ET Canada said something. It has been confirmed by other sources since. This was a slip, as it was not meant to be made public.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom