The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family, May 7, 2025--

[Tatiana Maria]

Why was there such a rush to obtain passports. They obviously already had some.

According to the Guardian's anonymous "source close to the Sussexes", because they wanted "legal proof" of their children's title upgrade after the death of Queen Elizabeth II.

The source claimed that “the king hadn’t wanted Archie and Lili to carry the titles, most of all the HRH, and the British passports, once created, would be the first and perhaps the only legal proof of their names”.

[...] Buckingham Palace made clear it would not be commenting on any personal matters relating to members of the royal family. But it denied making any suggestions or objections to the passports being issued with HRH in the titles.

Harry and Meghan explored changing surname to Spencer amid children’s passport delays

Exclusive: source says couple feared unexplained wait was due to king’s opposition to their children bearing HRH title

www.theguardian.com

 

[Kenya]

It's ridiculous for Harry to think his children might be working royals when he has the clear example of his cousins Beatrice and Eugenie, who are the children of "the spare," and are not working royals. I hope that when William becomes king we might see them more often, but if we do, it will be because William feels familial bonds with them and trusts them. AFAWK, he's never even met Lili and hasn't seen Archie since he was an infant. There's no reason for him to call upon Archie and Lili to be working royals, and delusional Harry should know it's William's choice, not the kids'.

It will be interesting to see with As Ever seeming to have become As Just For a Little Bit and the possibility of her Netflix series being cancelled after the second series, whether she stays on Instagram. I believe she will because she loves talking about herself and all the attention it gets.

She will absolutely stick around. I'm actually surprised she waited as long to get back on Instagram as she did. Remember in the August 2022 article in The Cut where she hinted to the the author that she would be rejoining Instagram soon? She's been dying to be back on it.

Funnily enough, last night Instagram suggested her as someone I might want to follow. I had to quickly disabuse my algorithm of that mistaken assumption!

 

[Hallo girl]

I started to write a response to this, and do you know I couldn't be bothered, this is not directed at yourself , Tatiana Maria, but the story. It is just more pot stirring from Harry and Meghan. They are not worth wasting energy over. This is all nonsense, it all started the day she met Harry, one thing after another, playing victim, confused stories ( I am being polite ). Why do they need proof!!!!!!

 

[taogg]

According to the Guardian's anonymous "source close to the Sussexes", because they wanted "legal proof" of their children's title upgrade after the death of Queen Elizabeth II.

The source claimed that “the king hadn’t wanted Archie and Lili to carry the titles, most of all the HRH, and the British passports, once created, would be the first and perhaps the only legal proof of their names”.

Styles and titles can be removed at the monarch’s discretion. Just look at Prince Nikolai and Prince Felix of Denmark. They were born princes, styled as His Highness, later elevated to His Royal Highness, and now are simply counts with the style of His Excellency.

Even if a Danish passport once reflected their HRH status (I'm not sure about this), it didn’t stop the monarchy from changing it later. And if Harry’s so worried about “legal proof,” he could always submit a deed naming his children HRH Prince/Princess as their given names—problem solved, right?

Harry has been a prince his entire life—yet he still seems to have no grasp of how titles, styles, or constitutional monarchy actually work.

 

[wbenson]

According to the Guardian's anonymous "source close to the Sussexes", because they wanted "legal proof" of their children's title upgrade after the death of Queen Elizabeth II.

The source claimed that “the king hadn’t wanted Archie and Lili to carry the titles, most of all the HRH, and the British passports, once created, would be the first and perhaps the only legal proof of their names”.

[...] Buckingham Palace made clear it would not be commenting on any personal matters relating to members of the royal family. But it denied making any suggestions or objections to the passports being issued with HRH in the titles.

Harry and Meghan explored changing surname to Spencer amid children’s passport delays

Exclusive: source says couple feared unexplained wait was due to king’s opposition to their children bearing HRH title

www.theguardian.com

The Palace "denied making any suggestions or objections to the passports being issued with HRH in the titles," but I would imagine the Passport Office needing affirmative consent from the Palace for that, and I wonder if there was simply nobody with the ability to give that, so the application languished until someone, somewhere, was willing to actually say yes.

The article says that the issue took over five months to resolve, which I'll note is about the time that elapsed between the Sunday Times reporting that the King had made no decision on the title issue and the Sussexes forcing the issue to a head via their announcement of the christening of "Princess Lilibet Diana."

 

[Hallo girl]

Styles and titles can be removed at the monarch’s discretion. Just look at Prince Nikolai and Prince Felix of Denmark. They were born princes, styled as His Highness, later elevated to His Royal Highness, and now are simply counts with the style of His Excellency.

Even if a Danish passport once reflected their HRH status (I'm not sure about this), it didn’t stop the monarchy from changing it later. And if Harry’s so worried about “legal proof,” he could always submit a deed naming his children HRH Prince/Princess as their given names—problem solved, right?

Harry has been a prince his entire life—yet he still seems to have no grasp of how titles, styles, or constitutional monarchy actually work.

It is all smoke and mirrors, game playing of the highest order. Karma will survive

 

[shady lady]

I started to write a response to this, and do you know I couldn't be bothered, this is not directed at yourself , Tatiana Maria, but the story. It is just more pot stirring from Harry and Meghan. They are not worth wasting energy over. This is all nonsense, it all started the day she met Harry, one thing after another, playing victim, confused stories ( I am being polite ). Why do they need proof!!!!!!

Spot on. Were it not for my interests in British royal history and psychology I would have stopped paying attention a long time ago. I have a close relative who behaves like this, and like the BRF I made the decision to distance myself completely and let them get on with it.

 

[hereditarytitles]

Please forgive me if I am wrong and maybe didn't understand every bit of the ongoing discussion.
Once again, there is endless discussion about the name change, which is increasingly confusing me. Who officially applied for Harry's name change, and how? And why? Didn't the whole discussion originate from a rumor that he wanted to take the name “Spencer”? That was probably just an idea born out of frustration that was never pursued further.
Next comes a rumor, again launched by unknown sources. This one concerns the issuance of passports for the children. No government agency or official body has commented on this yet and no newspaper presented proof.

All the information comes from newspapers quoting certain informants. Some of it may be true, but perhaps it's all just a lot of fuss about nothing.

Why did Harry want to apply for passports for his young children in the first place? Was he planning to take them to the UK? He has always claimed that he does not want to do so because he fears for their safety. Given the family situation, Meghan will not want to travel there with her children at the moment either.
Passports for minor children are usually only applied for if you want to travel abroad with them, where it is required.
I can't remember Harry and Meghan expressing such intentions in recent years.
Unless they do another interview on a famous US talk show and comment on it, we're left in the dark. And even if that happens, we would only see their version again.
No matter what happens, they will remain in the focus of people who are interested in their fate. And I am still not sure, if that attention seeking about passports, titles etc. are their personal concern or are made up by the press.

They certainly do want to be relevant, otherwise they would have retired to a happy affluent life in California. We will learn most about them from her Instagram, podcasts and netflix presence. At least those who are interested.

I very much agree with @shady lady and @hello girl comments above!

 

[Hallo girl]

A great deal of the sources are from the team that wants to benefit from the story. All this about passports etc etc is to show Harry as a victim and the RF as the bad cop trying to put them down. There is more to all these stories and instagram posts. Watch this space.

 

[Ghost]

They took a few holidays abroad with the children, that’s sure.

 

[Somebody]

Styles and titles can be removed at the monarch’s discretion. Just look at Prince Nikolai and Prince Felix of Denmark. They were born princes, styled as His Highness, later elevated to His Royal Highness, and now are simply counts with the style of His Excellency.

Even if a Danish passport once reflected their HRH status (I'm not sure about this), it didn’t stop the monarchy from changing it later. And if Harry’s so worried about “legal proof,” he could always submit a deed naming his children HRH Prince/Princess as their given names—problem solved, right?

Harry has been a prince his entire life—yet he still seems to have no grasp of how titles, styles, or constitutional monarchy actually work.

A small correction: Nikolai and Felix were never royal highnesses. They were only highnesses - at a later point in life also got the title of Count of Monpezat and when their grandmother took their title of prince and style of Highness away, that was the title that remained.

Nonetheless, it still proofs your point that Sovereigns can remove titles and styles (although not peerages).

 

[tommy100]

Seems to me Harry and Meghan really like to make a drama over everything. They say it was said all along Archie was never going to be a Prince then take the weeks after Queen Elizabeth II's death to apply for passports for their children to have legal proof of their titles being HRH. Why? Being royal made Harry's life miserable and made Meghan suicidal, why force your children into that situation? Equally, who has the time or energy for the main thing after your grandmother's death to be making sure your children have "proof" of their HRH, Prince/Princess title (which actually means very little as others have pointed out Charles could / can remove them at any point he wants).

I don't think the fact the passports were delayed shows any issue going on:

a) applying overseas always adds time on
b) applying for a child' first passport always takes more time
c)putting anything unusual on your application - which I imagine adding HRH Prince/ss would count as- always delays it
d) it is likely someone would want to check with BP/ the government etc that the titles are right and legally the children's - probably running it further and further up the chain from embassy - government - Palace - Charles which would take time no matter how much Charles would want the children to have the title

Harry and Meghan seem to just take offence to everything IMO. They knew it had been said Archie might not have a title and were trying to play the BRF by getting a title on his passport so they could either use it as proof or cry to the media that Charles had been mean and taken it away. The fact not everyone jumped at their demand is not a bad thing IMO.

 

[hereditarytitles]

Thank you for this explanation; it makes some facts easier for me to understand.

 

[tommy100]

Just for info - this was on the government's own website 5 months before the late Queen's death (around which time the passports seem to have been applied for from what I understand)

Passport processing times and unprecedented levels of demand

There has recently been considerable press coverage of people facing holiday cancellations or travel disruption due to waiting times for passports.

www.gov.uk

Passport processing times and unprecedented levels of demand​

There has recently been considerable press coverage of people facing holiday cancellations or travel disruption due to waiting times for passports.

There is no backlog in passport processing as a result of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. However, we are now seeing unprecedented demand as more than 5 million people delayed applying for passports during COVID-19 because of restrictions in international travel. Her Majesty’s Passport Office (HMPO) anticipate 9.5 million British passport applications will be made this year and in March 2022 alone, HMPO processed more than one million new passport applications, the highest output on record.

In preparation for the demand for international travel returning, since April 2021 HMPO have been advising people to allow up to 10 weeks when applying for their British passport. This remains the case.

The vast majority of all passport applications are being dealt with well within 10 weeks. However, a passport can only be issued once all the checks have been completed satisfactorily and will take longer if applications are submitted with missing or incomplete information.

 

[hereditarytitles]

Passport matters are regulated by bureaucracy in every country in the world, and everyone must abide by these rules.
However, I don't believe that PH and his wife ever considered that these rules also apply to them.
I also think that different rules apply to members of the royal family and, for example, diplomats and high-ranking politicians. It must be the case in all countries, because some diplomats /politicians might have to travel immediately to some important event and need a passport right then, (in case they forgot to have it renewed or prolonged).

The only delay probably was caused by their fussing about titles or not correct titles. They probably caused the confusion themselves.

I cannot remember that any other member of the extended royal family in GB ever had a problem like that.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

This quote perplexes me:

“The Guardian understands that Prince Harry wants to keep the HRH titles for his children so that when they grow older they can decide for themselves whether they want to become working royals, or stay out of public life.”

Surely Prince Harry knows that decision will not be for his children to make? That it will be shaped by first his father and then his brother? Additionally, even if his father and brother thought it would be beneficial, it would be quite a hard adjustment for kids raised in the U.S. entirely separate from any royal customs or traditions.

If that quote came from Harry, I’m not sure he is thinking about this realistically.

Even with how delusional Harry has sometimes sounded over the past several years I find it hard to believe he really thinks Charles or William would ever give Archie and Lilibet the option of becoming working royals. Even if the two of them somehow turned out to be the most responsible, level headed, discreet and hardworking young adults possible the fact remains that their parents took that option away from them in a way that’s irrevocable.

Another possible interpretation of the anonymous comment is that (according to this source) the Duke of Sussex believes his children have the right to become working royals, whether King Charles or King William like it or not.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have, in public statements, denied that the monarch has the right to withhold princely titles from the Sussex children (“it’s not their right to take it away”), challenged the right of the government to deny the Sussexes guaranteed full-time police security, and made similar statements about other issues (such as the monarch’s jurisdiction over the word “Royal”).

Given these precedents, it is not implausible if the source is suggesting the couple also believe that the monarch has no right to deny working royal status to the Sussex children.

Why did Harry want to apply for passports for his young children in the first place? Was he planning to take them to the UK? He has always claimed that he does not want to do so because he fears for their safety. Given the family situation, Meghan will not want to travel there with her children at the moment either.

See here:

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family, May 7, 2025--

Why was there such a rush to obtain passports. They obviously already had some. According to the Guardian's anonymous "source close to the Sussexes", because they wanted "legal proof" of their children's title upgrade after the death of Queen Elizabeth II. The source claimed that “the king...

www.theroyalforums.com

 

[Alison H]

I also think that different rules apply to members of the royal family and, for example, diplomats and high-ranking politicians. It must be the case in all countries, because some diplomats /politicians might have to travel immediately to some important event and need a passport right then, (in case they forgot to have it renewed or prolonged).

Obviously we can't be sure, but, yes, I find it hard to believe that Harry just filled in the forms, sent them off and waited to hear back, like the average person in the street.

Apologies for being pedantic, but HRH is a style, not a title. And it doesn't automatically entitle anyone to be a working royal - ask Beatrice and Eugenie - but Harry is possibly too stupid to realise that.

And these are the same parents who insisted that Archie, who was (and is) entitled to be called the Earl of Dumbarton, was just going to be plain Master Mountbatten-Windsor.

 

[Hallo girl]

Another possible interpretation of the anonymous comment is that (according to this source) the Duke of Sussex believes his children have the right to become working royals, whether King Charles or King William like it or not.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have, in public statements, denied that the monarch has the right to withhold princely titles from the Sussex children (“it’s not their right to take it away”), challenged the right of the government to deny the Sussexes guaranteed full-time police security, and made similar statements about other issues (such as the monarch’s jurisdiction over the word “Royal”).

Given these precedents, it is not implausible if the source is suggesting the couple also believe that the monarch has no right to deny working royal status to the Sussex children.




See here:

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family, May 7, 2025--

Why was there such a rush to obtain passports. They obviously already had some. According to the Guardian's anonymous "source close to the Sussexes", because they wanted "legal proof" of their children's title upgrade after the death of Queen Elizabeth II. The source claimed that “the king...

www.theroyalforums.com

The only reason that the Late Queen found it necessary to use phrases like working royals was because of Harry and Andrew. It was never really required, the whole world knew who did Royal duties and as a result received money from the Sovereign Grant, one or two others did some ad hoc duties as well as their own personal charity work.
I do not recall ' working royals ' being discussed like this until the last 5 years or so. If the monarch does not ask Archie and Lily to do royal duties ,well, they will not be doing them.

There was so much privacy in the early days because the children were private citizens and as a result there was no obligation to provide any detail or photographs. I wonder what has changed.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Apologies for being pedantic, but HRH is a style, not a title.

To be pedantic (which I am certainly in favor of ), HRH is both a "style" and a "title", as well as an "attribute".

Quoting the famous 1917 letters patent:

the children of any Sovereign of these Realms and the children of the sons of any such Sovereign and the eldest living son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales shall have and at all times hold and enjoy the style title or attribute of Royal Highness with their titular dignity of Prince or Princess prefixed to their respective Christian names or with their other titles of honour​

 

[tommy100]

The only reason that the Late Queen found it necessary to use phrases like working royals was because of Harry and Andrew. It was never really required, the whole world knew who did Royal duties and as a result received money from the Sovereign Grant, one or two others did some ad hoc duties as well as their own personal charity work.
I do not recall ' working royals ' being discussed like this until the last 5 years or so. If the monarch does not ask Archie and Lily to do royal duties ,well, they will not be doing them.

There was so much privacy in the early days because the children were private citizens and as a result there was no obligation to provide any detail or photographs. I wonder what has changed.

TBF it was often said Charles infamous "slimmed down monarchy" idea was based on the fact at Trooping the Colour some people though the dozens of royals, many unknown to the general public, were all funded by the taxpayers.

Of course they weren't, we know that, a lot of other people know that, but not everyone knew that.

But yes, "working royal" is a new phenomenon to distinguish between those who have royal style and titles but don't do royal duties and has only really become needed since Harry and Andrew both became former working royals who stopped doing official duties.

 

[victor1319]

I do not want to disturb the discussion about the Sussex children, which might be working Royals , but ....

if I were a parent of them, I would wonder, what chances they will have in life.

And I think everybody has seen the pic of the Kennedy kid playing under the President's desk. This kid was of Archie's age! So, if the Sussexeses keep their kids out of the spotlight for longer and plan to introduce them to the public later... - it might be too late. Archie, Earl of Dumbarton, Who?

Make hay, while the sun shines... And I feel the sun is going down on the Sussex clan already.

 

[Toledo]

It's ridiculous for Harry to think his children might be working royals when he has the clear example of his cousins Beatrice and Eugenie, who are the children of "the spare," and are not working royals...

My take on what he said was it's up the children to go back to the UK as adults and tell Grandpa king Charles or possibly Uncle King William they want to report to royal duties, expect a salary and they'll select the charities assigned to them after they consult with mom. Guess what, Harry, it doesn't work like that. Once you left royal duties with Meghan the other family members had to pick up your royal assignments. Meghan didn't stay behind to produce another cookbook for victims of a tragedy, she left them all behind.
As I see it, Harry used that mention, that his kids might be working royals therefore they need to stay HRH/Prince and Princess in California only by someone with a bit more brains and marketing ambitions than him. They need UK titles to brag about and market in the USA so the lady in question can always be presented as Meghan, Duchess of Sussex on every interview show she gets on.

Correct me if I'm wrong but Harry was never Spencer by name, as the father's last name-mother's last name order is mostly Spanish and the UK/US follow mother's maiden last name as middle name tradition, though this is optional.
Don't forget to wear an all-white ensemble while gardening!

And lots of expensive jewelry!

My Instagram photographer was a no show, so I did my shores on cargo pants, crocs and a T-shirt...As Ever!

...You can’t keep your children hidden away, shielded from the very public whose support underpins the institution, and then turn around and expect (or demand, because this is Harry and Meghan, after all) that they be granted honors rooted in public service. It's been said here many times before but if they want to reject the royal system, then they need to do so completely instead of continuing to demand privileges after having rejected the responsibilities that come with royal life...

@moby That was the best line of the week for me! Wow, you hit the nail on the head with that one.

 

[Queen Claude]

George V was monarch from 1910 to 1936. The British monarchy (arguably) goes back to 1066, so the fact that George V could implement a regulation 900 years into the British monarchy, then of course Charles III can as well. So it is more of a matter of will he than can he. IMO if Charles was going to implement a rule that reversed George V's 1917 Letters Patent for existing royals, he would have done so by now. My take is that the George V's 1917 Letters Patent will get changed by Charles III or his successor, but I think that it will apply to royals who are not yet born.

 

[TLLK]

Meghan has added photos from the family's recent two day visit to the Disneyland and California Adventure theme parks.
Due to the absence of other guests in line with the photos, I'm speculating that they had a VIP tour that allowed them to bypass lines. Yes, Disney theme parks will provide that for certain guests. One of my best friends is a former Guest Relations cast member and had Sweden's Queen Silvia and her three children plus their security team on tour in the 1980's.

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry enjoy Disneyland trip with their kids

Meghan Markle and husband Prince Harry whisked themselves and their two kids away for a memorable family trip to Disneyland after her twerking video controversy.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[Kenya]

How much extra do you have to pay to have someone follow you around to record and take pictures of your visit?

 

[Lady M]

I'm glad they went to Disneyland and had fun. That's a really great memory for the kids. But I do have to say, I'm getting really tired of pictures of their butts. And when we do get a front-side photo, Meg is right in the middle.

 

[iceflower]

The Disneyland post:

Meghan, Duchess of Sussex on Instagram: "Thank you @disneyland for giving our family two days of pure joy!"

meghan on June 6, 2025: "Thank you @disneyland for giving our family two days of pure joy!".

www.instagram.com

 

[kalnel]

The Disneyland post:

Meghan, Duchess of Sussex on Instagram: "Thank you @disneyland for giving our family two days of pure joy!"

meghan on June 6, 2025: "Thank you @disneyland for giving our family two days of pure joy!".

www.instagram.com

The nice thing is, even if they don't get to see Windsor Castle, at least they saw Cinderella's castle.

 

[Queen Claude]

How much extra do you have to pay to have someone follow you around to record and take pictures of your visit?

If it is a promotional deal, although I do not see that tagged, they may not have paid, or they paid but were willing to incur the cost because they think the costs will be recouped in some form or fashion

 

[shady lady]

If it is a promotional deal, although I do not see that tagged, they may not have paid, or they paid but were willing to incur the cost because they think the costs will be recouped in some form or fashion

Yikes. What a way to live. So very complicated! Nothing is straightforward with this pair.