William and Kate: engagement and relationship rumours and musings 2009

[Lighthouse]

(unfortually) that is how the monarchy works, the (in this case future) king needs a heir. Quite oldfashion but the monarchy is built like that

Not necessarily from his own body though because there are several relatives in line to the British throne.

 

[zembla]

Actually, most of current European Crown Princesses had their first kids at or after the age of 30, so I don't think Kate has to worry about her 'clock' yet. And don't forget that Kate (or whoever William marries) will have access to best medical services in the world.

That's interesting, I wonder if any of them have gone on the record about having fertility issues. I mean the sad thing is, none of them could ever adopt, right?

 

[Patra]

Well, in the states, one must take a blood test to get a marriage license. With blood, you can tell almost everything. (DNA, Genetic abnormalities, etc.) A way to test William's fertility would be sperm count. Kate would have sonograms w/ die tests to detect any irregularities, and verify the "normal reproductive functions" were in tact. What a strange discussion....but I presume alot is at stake.

 

[Lighthouse]

I find it all very elitist and intrusive. If Kate is infertile then the throne should pass from William to Prince Andrew or his eldest daughter. I dread the thought of Kate being subjected to humiliating and invasive tests all for the sake of determining she could produce an heir from William's body.

OOps I forgot about Prince Harry.

 

[Sonjapearl]

Wouldn't the throne go to Harry or his eldest child if William and Kate can't have children?

 

[Lighthouse]

Yes I forgot about Harry.

 

[Iluvbertie]

One thing I think we are overlooking is not only the issue of whether or not Kate is infertile but more importantly what are the chances that she carries some sore of genetic defect that could lead to a disabled child. That would create many additional problems as, if a boy, that child would have to be the King and a Regency established so it would be better to avoid that possibility if at all possible.

 

[Roslyn]

You raise a good point. I still don't like it though. "Could lead", does not equal "will lead". I'd better shut up about it because the whole thing really rankles me and I'll harp on and on unless restrained, and it's better I'm restrained by myself.

 

[udyusa]

Good thinking, Roslyn. What if, God forbid, William was found to have a genetic defect that would lead to a disabled child? It isn't all on the woman's shoulders.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Good thinking, Roslyn. What if, God forbid, William was found to have a genetic defect that would lead to a disabled child? It isn't all on the woman's shoulders.

I never meant to suggest that it was all on the woman's shoulders but William is non-negotiable in this equation but the woman he marries is as she isn't the one onto whom the throne will descend in time. William is the one whose position can't change but the position of his wife-to-be and therefore the mother of his children can and therefore he will need to be sure that she can carry out number one duty - bear a healthy child (in the views of those who will be advising him anyway)

 

[udyusa]

Of course you are correct, Bertie. I never meant to suggest otherwise. My apologies if it was taken in the wrong context.

 

[Lighthouse]

One thing I think we are overlooking is not only the issue of whether or not Kate is infertile but more importantly what are the chances that she carries some sore of genetic defect that could lead to a disabled child. That would create many additional problems as, if a boy, that child would have to be the King and a Regency established so it would be better to avoid that possibility if at all possible.

Well given the royal family's past inbreeding and rumors of disabled children going way back + current disabilities including dyslexia (Beatrice & even King of Sweden) and eye problems (Edward & Sophie's daughter), perhaps William should be tested instead of Kate.

Seriously, if an heir is born a severe intellectual disability then that would need to be taken into account at the time. Stephen Hawking is physically dependent yet a genius.

 

[Ella Kay]

Isn't that a situation in which a regency might be deemed the best option? For example, if William had been born with such a disability, the next in line (Harry) might have been named regent for his brother?

ETA: I see Iluvbertie suggested the same above -- it seems logical. I can't think of any examples offhand, but I'm sure it's happened before.

 

[Saragli]

That's interesting, I wonder if any of them have gone on the record about having fertility issues. I mean the sad thing is, none of them could ever adopt, right?

O they could still adopt and raise of family. The children just wouldnt be heirs to the throne. There titles would also be tricky. But I dont think there is much precedent really in this area. William could either still become King and adopt Harrys child as his heir, or renounce his rights to the throne and let Harry become King. King Henry VIIII, that would be intresting. Mind you, what would williams numbering be?

 

[Iluvbertie]

Isn't that a situation in which a regency might be deemed the best option? For example, if William had been born with such a disability, the next in line (Harry) might have been named regent for his brother?

ETA: I see Iluvbertie suggested the same above -- it seems logical. I can't think of any examples offhand, but I'm sure it's happened before.

Knowing from Day 1 or thereabouts that a Regency would be needed raises the issue of the siutability of an heriditary Head of State when those sorts of contingencies could arise and would allow for a detailed debate in the Parliament which could even result in a debate about keeping the monarchy at all. With say the present government it could easily turn into a parliamentary decision to do away with the monarchy altogether. The Royal Family will do all it can to avoid that sort of issue so I suspect that the will check carefully future children in utero or in the case of future brides before engagement with the intention of preventing the ending of the dynasty.

For instance, if the government is rabibly Labour there is a greater chance of them seizing the opportunity than a Conservative government but it could easily go that way. Prevention is always better the cure so stopping a potential situation from arising is better than trying to deal with it once it has as there is no guarantee how the solution might turn out.

 

[Lady Ann]

O Mind you, what would williams numbering be?

William V, I believe

 

[Marsel]

If Prince William uses his first given name as his Regnal name, he will be known as William V.
Should Prince Harry eventually succeed to the Throne, he would be Henry IX (if he used his first given name).

 

[Lighthouse]

Isn't that a situation in which a regency might be deemed the best option? For example, if William had been born with such a disability, the next in line (Harry) might have been named regent for his brother?

ETA: I see Iluvbertie suggested the same above -- it seems logical. I can't think of any examples offhand, but I'm sure it's happened before.

Sorry, when I read Iluvbertie's comment I thought the suggestion was that the royal family would want to avoid a regency, hence my comment about William (not necessarily Kate) being tested.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Sorry, when I read Iluvbertie's comment I thought the suggestion was that the royal family would want to avoid a regency, hence my comment about William (not necessarily Kate) being tested.

I do think that the Royal Family would like to avoid a regency due to a known mental or physical disability that made it impossible for that person actually carry on the duties as Head of State as that immediately allows the parliament to debate the whole idea of an inherited Head of State.

 

[Patra]

King William V, It has such a nice ring to it, doesnt it?

(side note: Wouldnt Willem-Alexander be king around the same time too?, wonder what his number would be?....)

 

[Lumutqueen]

King William V, It has such a nice ring to it, doesnt it?

(side note: Wouldnt Willem-Alexander be king around the same time too?, wonder what his number would be?....)

It depends. Willem might be King before William.
He would be King Willem-Alexander, or he could be King William IV, 3 of his ancestors chose King William instead of King Willem.

To be honest I don't think that William has a serious hereditary defect, and I doubt Kate does. However I do think the tests are neccesary, they need to check if Kate can have or bear children.

A regency has it's ups and downs, but I think as iluvbertie says the monarchy would try to avoid one. It would damage the monarchy, in quite a few ways. Things could go wrong with that regency.

Seeing as the tour thread is closed.
KATIE NICHOLL: Prince William won¿t be disappointing birthday girl Kate Middleton this time | Mail Online

He organised a state event around his girlfriend, somehow hard to believe.

 

[Marsel]

I find it hard to believe in as well. But then, it's a Katie Nicholl article - it's not supposed to be reliable, is it?

 

[Ella Kay]

Not to mention that William didn't miss Kate's birthday last year -- and I believe it was the Mail that published the photos of his car outside the Middleton house on the day!

 

[BritishRoyals]

Katie Nicholl is hilarious. SHE was the one who wrote that article with pictures of William driving out of the Middleton home after an overnight birthday stay this January.

 

[Connie Cutmantle]

I have been musing and find it is quite interesting to compare William's position to those of other heirs to thrones and the ages at which they became engaged/got married!

Prince Philippe, Duke of Brabant - 39 years old
Felipe, Prince of Austurias - 36 years old
Crown Prince Frederick of Denmark - 35 years old
Willem-Alexander, Crown Prince of the Netherlands - almost 35 years old
Crown Prince Naruhito of Japan - 33 years old
Crown Princess Victoria of Sweden - Was 31 years old at the time of her engagement being announced.
Crown Prince Haakon of Norway - 28 years old.
Hereditary Prince Alois of Lichtenstein - 25 years old.

Prince William is in a slightly different position to the above as he is not the immediate heir apparent but is presently second in line.....and thus the pressure on him to marry is not immediately necessary nor pressing IMHO!

It is interesting to note that the heirs apparent listed above with the exceptions of Crown Prince Haakon and Hereditary Prince Alois waited until they were in their thirties before settling down! Then again, look at Prince Albert II of Monaco.......goodness could you imagine Prince William following his example in being so acutely altar-shy??!!!!

 

[Lady Ann]

Don't forget William's own father, 32 when he tied the knot......

 

[Saragli]

I think the general trend is that people in the UK get married at a younger age compared to the continent. But I really dont see William marrying into his 30's. There really isnt a pressing need for him to settle down and produce heirs at the mo.

 

[Lumutqueen]

And don't forget that Prince William is the heir to the heir. He's like Prince Chrisitian of Denmark.
I could imagine him being a Prince Albert type because i don't see why he should get married, the monarchy is secure for now, theres a present heir Charles and he has an heir William.

 

[muriel]

That's interesting, I wonder if any of them have gone on the record about having fertility issues. I mean the sad thing is, none of them could ever adopt, right?

Fertility issues is hardly the sort of thing I would expect any of the European princesses to be discussing publicly.

 

[Zonk]

An American morning show, Today, did a 2 minute snippet regarding William and Kate getting engaged. And you know what it told me NOTHING! NOTHING that I hadn't read on this board.

They talked about the usual: how long they have dated, all the royal experts agree that when broke up and got back together it was for good, the year (2012), and how busy a year it will be: his RAF training, the London Olympics and the Queen's Jubilee. They also mentioned the length of an engagement but nothing hard...they said it could be from two to six months. When its announced, all the plans would have been set.

Again, this is getting rather tiresome. I am rather angry at myself that I took the time to watch it.