Friday, July 27, 2012

Not For Love or Money

Hey Humble Readers...

There is someone who I would not wish to be for all the money in the world, nor for all the tea in China. 

That person is Kate Middleton, Duchess of Cambridge.

I have to back up a little here.  I am a life long royalist.  I love that the Queen is my country's figurehead, and that the actual head of our government isn't the Prime Minister, but the Governor General who serves as the Queen's representative in Canada.  (I am not at all saying that I wish to go back to a time before democracy or our right to exist as a sovereign nation.)  I love the history and the larger global connection that we have to the royal family and to the Commonwealth.  I'm proud of the fact that our country began as a Dominion rather than a Republic. 

Princess Kate is, undeniably, one of the world's most famous women, and married to a man who for many years was considered the world's most eligible bachelor.  Heck, when I was younger (even though I'm several years older than the Prince) I confess to succumbing to a few daydreams about what it would be like to be married to William.  And like millions of others around the world, I stayed up all night to watch their fairytale wedding.  I drank tea, ate scones with marmalade, and Cadbury chocolate to commemorate the occasion.

And besides her impeccable and budget-conscious fashion sense, the one thing about Kate that seems to pop up in headlines is whether or not she's pregnant.  Did she avoid the fish course at last night's state dinner because of morning sickness?  Is that the beginnings of a baby bump? 

And most recently, a member of the British Parliament was quoted as saying she thinks that 'Kate is pregnant -- and that would be good for the economy.'

Excuse me? 

Talk about ridiculous, nosy, and not to mention the pressure that puts on Kate.  Could you imagine being told that your pregnancy would be good for the economy???  Isn't it enough that her child will be someday be a monarch?

As someone who dealt with years of questions, even before I was married, about when I would begin having children, I take offence on the Duchess' behalf.  She has only been married for a year and a bit, and she's still adjusting to her new role within the royal family.  Cut the woman some slack!

Later in the article I linked to above, a 'royal insider' claims that Will and Kate plan to conceive by the end of next summer.  If that is the case, I certainly wish them well and pray that they are able to do so 'the old fashioned way'. 

But what if they can't? 

What if Kate and William have to deal with some form of infertility?  What if they have to resort to ART in order to build their family? 

With parliamentarians already sticking their noses into Will and Kate's reproductive future, what will happen, God forbid, if they have to go through IVF?  How will the government deal with the creation of multiple embryos?  As some would see it, of multiple heirs to the throne?  And what if they choose to freeze some viable embryos?  What if they have frozen embryos left over after they are done with their family building?  How will the government deal? 

Of course, I have my own opinion.  As I'm sure you do.  The government shouldn't have any input whatsoever into what happens with regard to their family building, and decisions about remaining embryos should be, obviously, Will and Kate's.

What I'm pondering tonight is how would this be handled in light of the Rule of Succession.  Given that any child of the royal couple could potentially end up on the throne (particularly now that the British government and the Commonwealth are on the road to making changes to the Rule of Succession so that a first-born daughter would be heir over any sons who come after), just imagine the potential hub-bub!

Honestly, I have no clue about the laws around assisted reproduction in the UK or how they might or might not pertain to the royal family, but these are the things that were going through my head today as I watched the Olympic Opening Ceremonies in London, and reading Yahoo headlines. 

What are your thoughts on this crazy hypothetical?


  1. I'm glad you wrote about this, I often think the same thing as I'm reading speculation about their family building in my People Magazine. LEAVE THEM ALONE!!

  2. Hi from ICLW. Seriously I do not know how any woman copes. I am child free by choice, and never ceased to be amazed at the way people (some of who do not even know me) choose to ask, PRESS even in earnest - don't you have any children, don't you want any, you don't know what your missing etc etc. On and on they go. I cannot imagine how much that must shatter the hearts of women who have fertility issues. I never ask another woman anything to do with if she wants/needs/has children. It is none of my business and a little tact goes a long way.

  3. Wow - I never thought about that - the rules of succession aspect. I know that Princess Masako of Japan had what might have been a nervous breakdown in 2002, after a miscarriage in 1999 and a baby girl in 2001 - and no male heir. The pressure must be just unbearable.

  4. I was going to mention Masako, but Project Progeny beat me to it. ; )

    Rumour has it that Sophie, the Countess of Wessex (wife of Prince Edward) had both her children, Louise & James, via IVF. Her first pregnancy was ectopic, and Louise was born prematurely.


Hobbits are social creatures, and love hearing from friends old and new. Pull up a comfy chair and let's get to know one another.