The Duke & Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 5: June-July 2021

[mothrpoet]

He does, that's not in question. Some of us are just baffled that he would give his name as "Duke of Sussex HRH" on a US birth certificate and not even something like "Henry Duke of Sussex" let alone Mountbatten-Windsor which some of his titled relatives have used on their own marriage certificates in the UK.

That's neither how his name or title is used in the UK, on Archie's birth certificate or his own when he was born.

He has four personal names and didn't include any of them. His choice but it seems a baffling one.

I used to be a death certificate clerk in Calif. The state regulations for death certificates clearly prohibit the use of titles. If you use a title such as Captain, Colonel, Father, Sister, Monsignor, Esquire, etc, it is not allowed to be used. Given names only, maiden name for mother or spouse. If your title is “Captain,” for example, that would go under your occupation. I would think the protocol about titles would be the same for birth certificates. Puzzling!

 

[Lucy Scot]

If they're complaining about Archie being treated unequally to his cousins, it means that they do not understand nor really care to understand the legitimate reasoning behind it. If William had 5 siblings and all of them had children, those children would have been treated just as "unequally" as they insinuate that Archie was.

The monarchy is a hereditary one and the changes made were pertinent to the monarchy and Archie doesn't figure into those changes at all.

They are dealing with the here and now; not with the hypothetical if William had 5 siblings...It doesn't matter if they understood "legitimate reasons" behind it. They didn't like it and that is one reason they left.

 

[Osipi]

They are dealing with the here and now; not with the hypothetical if William had 5 siblings...It doesn't matter if they understood "legitimate reasons" behind it. They didn't like it and that is one reason they left.

It's just another whine in a very long list of things they didn't like. They weren't in any position to make demands or change things up in an institution that has existed for over 1,000 years. Bottom line is that they've gotten what they wanted which is away from "royal duties", a beautiful home in California and have financial independence.

I just wish that they'd be happy with what they have and move forward in their new lives and concentrate on what they're going to do rather than complain about what was.

 

[ladyjolene]

Anne's children don't have titles and Wessexes don't use HRH/prince or princess for their children. Andrew is the only one who did that other than Charles who is the future king. None of these grandchildren/great grands have lost their place in the succession.

 

[rominet09]

It's just another whine in a very long list of things they didn't like. They weren't in any position to make demands or change things up in an institution that has existed for over 1,000 years. Bottom line is that they've gotten what they wanted which is away from "royal duties", a beautiful home in California and have financial independence.

I just wish that they'd be happy with what they have and move forward in their new lives and concentrate on what they're going to do rather than complain about what was.

I wish that for them too, but for me, I just wish they disappear from the news.

 

[ACO]

I mean people can also just ignore them. Lol. Not that hard.

 

[US Royal Watcher]

They are dealing with the here and now; not with the hypothetical if William had 5 siblings...It doesn't matter if they understood "legitimate reasons" behind it. They didn't like it and that is one reason they left.

They obviously didn't like it and I support their right to leave and live their lives the way they want to. I don't support them lying by saying that the difference in treatment is due to racism. I also don't support their hypocrisy. They want to completely change the royal family but are fine taking money. They also claim that they care about inequality but insist on royal titles.

 

[Osipi]

They obviously didn't like it and I support their right to leave and live their lives the way they want to. I don't support them lying by saying that the difference in treatment is due to racism. I also don't support their hypocrisy. They want to completely change the royal family but are fine taking money. They also claim that they care about inequality but insist on royal titles.

When things are stated and laid out as you have done here, it becomes more and more obvious to me that this couple is still in "half in, half out" mode. They're half in when it suits them personally (titles, security, discrimination charges) and they're half out when it comes to making money, voicing political views and complaining about the monarchy and the family behind it.

Which is it for them, really? Are they more credible being "in" or are they more credible being "out". Right now it seems there's a lot of flip flopping going on and, to me, that reeks of insecurity.

 

[Royalist.in.NC]

With the bullying excerpt we at least know there's an investigation going on, that JK and Simon Case did email, that staff did leave, that they did split their households and stories were coming out that everyone was at odds. We can discuss his opinions and sources using those as a base. The rest of everything that's coming out is more open to interpretation and shows more of his own opinions on everything that was already on display in the last edition of the book.

I simply don't agree that the BRF "needs" the Sussexes and we've seen in the last year that even if they've been offered and given things (like Charles's money, the opportunity to live in SA, allegedly Dumbarton title) it doesn't stop them complaining about what they don't have or trying to play the race card anyway. e.g. If they do as he suggests and invite them to the Jubilee are they going to complain when the final balcony appearance is just HM/POW,DOC/DDOC and kids? That people weren't constantly asking if they're OK?

Trying to hash out their issues doesn't work if one side is worried everything's going to end up on the next Oprah/podcast/Gayle King report, especially if things get heated.

Appeasement doesn't seem to have worked. On a family level I hope they come to an entente and hopefully one day on a professional level but it's not going to be by inviting them back and giving them everything. HIHO still doesn't work for one thing.

You are right - it will never be enough...

 

[Lucy Scot]

They obviously didn't like it and I support their right to leave and live their lives the way they want to. I don't support them lying by saying that the difference in treatment is due to racism. I also don't support their hypocrisy. They want to completely change the royal family but are fine taking money. They also claim that they care about inequality but insist on royal titles.

You are saying they lied by saying that the difference in treatment is due to racism. Lying is a pretty serious charge to make. I don't think they lied. What they perceived as racism was their interpretation of the events and circumstances that happened to them.

They never said that they wanted to "completely change the royal family", although they do believe that there are some things that should be changed.

The relationship between inequality and royal titles? I think that the Queen, Charles, and William would all say that they care about inequality but I'm pretty sure they would insist on their royal titles. I think it must be ingrained in Harry. I'm an American so I think that the whole idea of royalty and titles doesn't make sense.

 

[Lucy Scot]

When things are stated and laid out as you have done here, it becomes more and more obvious to me that this couple is still in "half in, half out" mode.

That's what they said they wanted from the beginning!

 

[Royalist.in.NC]

BTW, does anyone else remember the Sussex spokesperson claiming that it was the RF who changed Archie's certificate from Rachel Meghan to HRH The Duchess of Sussex? There was even the claim that she wouldn't want to be erased from her child's birth certificate, although I don't remember who made it, the spokesperson or a friend.

Now, they claim HRH The Duke of Sussex is Harry's legal name. And there is no doubt they filled it out so. To me, that means that they were the ones who changed Archie's certificate as well.

I read something that gave both George’s and Harry’s birth certificates. Can’t remember where but you can easily Google an image.

Harry”s mother was listed: HRH The Princess of Wales - No name “Diana”. And father was listed as HRH Prince Charles Philip Arthur George Prince of Wales (no commas, even!)

George’s mother, however, was listed as Catherine Elizabeth Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Cambridge. Father was listed as HRH Prince William Arthur Philip Louis Duke of Cambridge. And George himself was listed as HRH Prince George Alexander Louis of Cambridge.

The thinking was that they wanted to use the form that Charles and Diana used instead of the form William and Catherine used. So that’s why they changed it to: HRH The Duchess of Sussex.

But I don’t get Harry’s bizarre “name” on Lili’s birth certificate at all

BTW: all the HRH’s were written out as His/Her Royal Highness. I am lazy

 

[Royalist.in.NC]

To me, the most noteworthy, albeit jarring, image from the Sussex wedding was the absolute absence of all family from the bride’s side except for her mother. There was no one at all! I understand the situation with her father, and the rancor with Samantha, but what about Doria’s relations, of whom she has expressed warm memories? What about the uncle who secured her that early plum job in the foreign service? What had he done to deserve rebuke? In light of the title of her recent book, I must say that The Bench at her wedding was brutally devoid of any ties to her own ordinary, mixed-race family. Meghan filled her “bench” with glitterati. The optics of that glaring omission is more searing in my mind than all the flowers, the gown, or the fabulous tiara. It spoke volumes about the bride’s character.

I absolutely agree! Welcome to the forum

 

[Osipi]

You are saying they lied by saying that the difference in treatment is due to racism. Lying is a pretty serious charge to make. I don't think they lied. What they perceived as racism was their interpretation of the events and circumstances that happened to them.

They never said that they wanted to "completely change the royal family", although they do believe that there are some things that should be changed.

The relationship between inequality and royal titles? I think that the Queen, Charles, and William would all say that they care about inequality but I'm pretty sure they would insist on their royal titles. I think it must be ingrained in Harry. I'm an American so I think that the whole idea of royalty and titles doesn't make sense.

I do believe they blatantly lied in purporting that racism has anything to do with difference in treatment. Once you know how the titles and styles work in the UK, you'd see this. Archie's cousins weren't treated "differently" but rather, because of an amendment to an Act of Parliament (The Succession to the Crown Act of 2013 which was proposed and goes into effect for those born after October 28, 2011). As this Parliamentary act changed the succession to the Crown, it then, was necessary to change up titles and styles of the Cambridge children as great grandchildren who are also in the main line of succession to the crown. Archie remains (along with Lili) covered by existing letters patent. This link will explain it more to you. There is absolutely *nothing* happening that in any way, shape or form, hint at racism. So yeps... by crying "racism" they were leading a whole lot of people down the wrong path and people believed it. Sad.

https://www.tatler.com/article/geor...y-are-princes-and-princesses-and-some-are-not

As for changing things up in the "Firm" and the monarchy, Harry and Meghan could make suggestions on changes but it's not up to them to change things to suit them. They worked for the "Firm" and the Queen not the other way around.

 

[Moran]

According to Lacey, the Sussexes have written no less than 30 pages of explanation re: their treatment of staff. 30 pages! That's a lot of explaining to do and it makes me think they're quite aware of what these people are going to say even without being given access to the investigation.

30 pages! That's almost 2 for each of the months they spent as working royals.

 

[UglyAmerican]

According to Lacey, the Sussexes have written no less than 30 pages of explanation re: their treatment of staff. 30 pages! That's a lot of explaining to do and it makes me think they're quite aware of what these people are going to say even without being given access to the investigation.

30 pages! That's almost 2 for each of the months they spent as working royals.

On the one hand, I hope we get to see it, because it will surely be entertaining. On the other, that turn of events would be tremendously unfair to the staff members who can't publicly respond without violating an NDA. I hope things are structured in such a way that Harry and Meghan's agreement isn't required to release the affected staff from their NDAs, and that the royals do release them if these detailed claims are made public.

 

[Osipi]

According to Lacey, the Sussexes have written no less than 30 pages of explanation re: their treatment of staff. 30 pages! That's a lot of explaining to do and it makes me think they're quite aware of what these people are going to say even without being given access to the investigation.

30 pages! That's almost 2 for each of the months they spent as working royals.

Me doth think they protest too much. The investigation isn't for the personal reason of bringing Meghan down to size as a boss or whether or not a situation happened but more or less getting a good look into what can be done to make the workspace now a better one for all employees.

After all that work compiling a 30 page manifesto on their behavior with staff, I'd really be doing some chuckling if it was offered to the investigation and they were told "No thank you. Not necessary. We got this".

 

[Curryong]

Is this allegation of ‘30 pages’ even true? And if it is it may very well include some complaints THEY made about staff behaviour at the time to Knauf and to the HR people at KP and the Palace. There is no situation, ever, in which one side is completely blameless and lily white and the other is always evil and power hungry.

And if Lacey is stating that then he has obviously heard from people at KP, who may well have their own particular axe to grind about the Sussexes.


Plus 90% of what we have read on this subject of alleged bullying by Harry and Meghan is given through another lens, that of the British Press who have not been exactly neutral about them for over three years.

 

[Royalist.in.NC]

On the one hand, I hope we get to see it, because it will surely be entertaining. On the other, that turn of events would be tremendously unfair to the staff members who can't publicly respond without violating an NDA. I hope things are structured in such a way that Harry and Meghan's agreement isn't required to release the affected staff from their NDAs, and that the royals do release them if these detailed claims are made public.

My understanding is that staff will be released from their NDA’s to talk to the outside legal firm investigating, none of it will be made public nor shared with the Sussexes, and that it will be used solely to look ahead to improve HR so that if a staff member has a problem with a “principle” there will be crystal clear protocol and support for that staff person. Your thoughts? I would imagine that staff were working for HM or BP - not the Sussexes specifically? But that’s a really good question!

 

[Lucy Scot]

I do believe they blatantly lied in purporting that racism has anything to do with difference in treatment. Once you know how the titles and styles work in the UK, you'd see this. Archie's cousins weren't treated "differently" but rather, because of an amendment to an Act of Parliament (The Succession to the Crown Act of 2013 which was proposed and goes into effect for those born after October 28, 2011). As this Parliamentary act changed the succession to the Crown, it then, was necessary to change up titles and styles of the Cambridge children as great grandchildren who are also in the main line of succession to the crown. Archie remains (along with Lili) covered by existing letters patent. This link will explain it more to you. There is absolutely *nothing* happening that in any way, shape or form, hint at racism. So yeps... by crying "racism" they were leading a whole lot of people down the wrong path and people believed it. Sad.

https://www.tatler.com/article/geor...y-are-princes-and-princesses-and-some-are-not

As for changing things up in the "Firm" and the monarchy, Harry and Meghan could make suggestions on changes but it's not up to them to change things to suit them. They worked for the "Firm" and the Queen not the other way around.

I know about the letters patent. It also has come out in at least one story that Charles is contemplating changing it so that Archie and Lili will not be HRH when he becomes King because he wants a slimmed down monarchy...and that Meghan and Harry were aware of this prior to the Oprah interview. I don't think they were lying during the interview. As I stated in another post, their belief that racism was involved is their perception. I do think that some of the things that were stated were unclear, in part because of Oprah interrupting and not letting them speak in complete sentences and not allowing them to finish their thoughts, and also because she didn't know enough about the subject to ask follow-up questions.

As far as it not being up to Harry and Meghan to make changes in the Firm or monarchy to suit them, I don't think that anyone is saying that it is up to them---only that they believed that there should be changes. And a lot of other people think that, too. They changed what they could, which was their own lives and circumstances.

 

[UglyAmerican]

My understanding is that staff will be released from their NDA’s to talk to the outside legal firm investigating, none of it will be made public nor shared with the Sussexes, and that it will be used solely to look ahead to improve HR so that if a staff member has a problem with a “principle” there will be crystal clear protocol and support for that staff person. Your thoughts? I would imagine that staff were working for HM or BP - not the Sussexes specifically? But that’s a really good question!

Oh, I'm sure they'll be allowed to talk to the investigators - no point doing an investigation if that's not going to be allowed! And the Sussexes have made their opinion of the bullying claims and subsequent investigation pretty clear, so I think we can reasonably conclude that the Sussexes' consent wasn't necessary for the staff to be allowed to talk to the investigators. Hopefully that means it also isn't required for talking to the media, and whether to waive the NDAs will ultimately be up to someone other than the two of them. As long as these supposed 30 pages stay out of the media, then I guess it doesn't matter. But it seems like nothing these two want to say publicly ever goes unsaid for very long, to heck with the consequences, so I'm not optimistic on that score.

 

[Lucy Scot]

My understanding is that staff will be released from their NDA’s to talk to the outside legal firm investigating, none of it will be made public nor shared with the Sussexes, and that it will be used solely to look ahead to improve HR so that if a staff member has a problem with a “principle” there will be crystal clear protocol and support for that staff person. Your thoughts? I would imagine that staff were working for HM or BP - not the Sussexes specifically? But that’s a really good question!

What I would like to see is an investigation into which Palace staff member leaked the email of the bullying allegations to the Times newspaper right before the Oprah interview and what the repercussions to that staff member were. Were they fired? Also, what has the Palace done to deal with the leaks?

 

[Sunnystar]

I know about the letters patent. It also has come out in at least one story that Charles is contemplating changing it so that Archie and Lili will not be HRH when he becomes King because he wants a slimmed down monarchy...and that Meghan and Harry were aware of this prior to the Oprah interview. I don't think they were lying during the interview. As I stated in another post, their belief that racism was involved is their perception.

Stories about Charles wanting a slimmed down monarchy and a rumored new LP to reduce the number of HRHs at the start or shortly into his reign have been floating around for at least 10-15 years, well pre-dating not only Archie's birth but Harry even meeting Meghan. Racism really has nothing to do with it and Meghan flat out implied that any loss of HRH would be "because racism" during the Oprah interview, and Harry did nothing to dispel that. It was gross and completely devalues real incidents of racism and prejudice.

 

[Moran]

Oh, I don't think there's going to be anything troubling in Harry and Meghan's 30 pages of explanation. I'll pass, though, because I have no interest in reading an essay of how everyone else was incompetent and couldn't keep with Meghan's amazing work ethics.

But I do hope the allegations of the staff never make it to the media, especially if proven true. I could have gone without watching that old fellow fall from his horse at Trooping the Colour. It's the same - if someone has suffered something, I could at least avert my eyes. Bullying is a serious issue and Harry and Meghan recognize it when they think it's about them.

 

[UglyAmerican]

What I would like to see is an investigation into which Palace staff member leaked the email of the bullying allegations to the Times newspaper right before the Oprah interview and what the repercussions to that staff member were. Were they fired? Also, what has the Palace done to deal with the leaks?

There's no reason for any of that to be made public. The possible misconduct of some random staff member really isn't newsworthy in its own right.

 

[Sunnystar]

Oh, I'm sure they'll be allowed to talk to the investigators - no point doing an investigation if that's not going to be allowed! And the Sussexes have made their opinion of the bullying claims and subsequent investigation pretty clear, so I think we can reasonably conclude that the Sussexes' consent wasn't necessary for the staff to be allowed to talk to the investigators. Hopefully that means it also isn't required for talking to the media, and whether to waive the NDAs will ultimately be up to someone other than the two of them. As long as these supposed 30 pages stay out of the media, then I guess it doesn't matter. But it seems like nothing these two want to say publicly ever goes unsaid for very long, to heck with the consequences, so I'm not optimistic on that score.

I can't see how the Sussexes can do anything about it if KP/BP voids the NDA of the staff members. The staff members were assigned to work for the Sussex office but they were paid by KP/BP not the Sussexes. At this point, I'm pretty sure KP, CH and BP don't care what sort of noise the Sussexes are trying to make as they defend themselves. They're of no concern for "the Firm" at this point, from an employee/employer POV.

 

[TLLK]

Stories about Charles wanting a slimmed down monarchy and a rumored new LP to reduce the number of HRHs at the start or shortly into his reign have been floating around for at least 10-15 years, well pre-dating not only Archie's birth but Harry even meeting Meghan. Racism really has nothing to do with it and Meghan flat out implied that any loss of HRH would be "because racism" during the Oprah interview, and Harry did nothing to dispel that. It was gross and completely devalues real incidents of racism and prejudice.

Yes they have around for many years. So if Prince Harry had married Chelsey or Cressida, his children still would not have been styled HRH and titled Prince/Princess from birth during QEII's reign.

Many of Europe's constitutional monarchies have been limiting the number of members who are considered to be part of their royal houses. They have reduced the numbers of HRH Prince/Princess for decades now, so it's not surprising that Charles might be ready to do the same.

 

[Osipi]

What I would like to see is an investigation into which Palace staff member leaked the email of the bullying allegations to the Times newspaper right before the Oprah interview and what the repercussions to that staff member were. Were they fired? Also, what has the Palace done to deal with the leaks?

Most likely that would be a situation that is handled internally and not for public consumption. This is the way most businesses and corporations handle things. Frankly, it's none of the public's business to know.

 

[Lucy Scot]

Stories about Charles wanting a slimmed down monarchy and a rumored new LP to reduce the number of HRHs at the start or shortly into his reign have been floating around for at least 10-15 years, well pre-dating not only Archie's birth but Harry even meeting Meghan. Racism really has nothing to do with it and Meghan flat out implied that any loss of HRH would be "because racism" during the Oprah interview, and Harry did nothing to dispel that. It was gross and completely devalues real incidents of racism and prejudice.

The stories may have been floating around for years, but this was a recent story that Meghan and Harry were told of Charles plans. That combined with the questions about Archie's skin color factor into their belief of racism.

 

[Kataryn]

Stories about Charles wanting a slimmed down monarchy and a rumored new LP to reduce the number of HRHs at the start or shortly into his reign have been floating around for at least 10-15 years, well pre-dating not only Archie's birth but Harry even meeting Meghan. Racism really has nothing to do with it and Meghan flat out implied that any loss of HRH would be "because racism" during the Oprah interview, and Harry did nothing to dispel that. It was gross and completely devalues real incidents of racism and prejudice.

She is the one with the biracial ancestry and if she feels treated so much with racism in the Uk that she is suspicious of anything, then we have to accept that, IMHO. How can you say "racism has nothing to do with it" when we all do not know about it apart from Meghan claiming it was racism and she should know and that it was neither the queen or the DoE.

Racism is such a thing in our societies that you don't notice it at first and when you connect the dots, you are ashamed! Just think of the nursery rhyms about how to "fear the black man"... Some white women feel threatened if they are in a situation of being alone with a man with darker shades of skin, we've seen vids about that and their behavior then. Call them "Karens", yes, but the attitude exists!
And prejudice? Just read these forums and think about what we actually know (hard facts) and what is considered to be the truth here because the writer believed the media as if works so well with her own opinion. That's some sort of prejudice as well but one we have to live with.

I just think the British media has given us a somehow distorted image of Meghan & Harry and while a lot is just gossip and hearsay, we all formed our opinions and we are all now prejudiced against Meghan and Harry. People here even would love to call the queen and tell her not to go to see her own grandson because he will blab all she said to the media... They don't see a very old lady, recently widowed, with a government out to destroy her "united kingdom" for the sake of England, who just wants to hear in person of the birth of her latest great-grand-child Lilibet. They see "the queen" whose grandson is out to betray her. But this is not "The Crown", this is family. That's some sort of prejudice as well.
IMHO, of course.