Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Denmark’s Queen just stripped 4 of her grandchildren of their royal titles so that they can ‘shape their own existence.’ The kids and their parents aren’t happy
Newsbreak ^ | 9/29 | Alice Hearing

Posted on 09/29/2022 6:00:23 PM PDT by nickcarraway

Only four of eight grandchildren will retain their royal titles.

Royalty in Europe is declining ever further as princes and princesses across the continent are losing their official statuses.

In a bid to protect the youngest royals from the pressures of public life, the Queen of Denmark has stripped four of her grandchildren of their royal titles.

Queen Magrethe, now Europe’s only reigning Queen and longest-serving monarch, has decided that the children of her youngest son, Prince Joachim, should be able to “shape their own existence” instead of having to perform the official duties required of them if they kept the titles.

Instead, Nikolai, Felix, Henrik and Athena, aged between 10 and 23, will only be known as counts and countesses from next year.

“As of January 1 2023, the descendants of His Royal Highness Prince Joachim will only be able to use their titles of Count and Countess of Monpezat, their previous titles of Prince and Princess of Denmark ceasing to exist,” the palace said in a statement.

“With her decision, Her Majesty the Queen wants to create a framework for the four grandchildren, to a much greater degree, to be able to shape their own existence without being limited by the special considerations and obligations that a formal affiliation with the Royal House as an institution implies.”

Meanwhile, the Queen’s other four grandchildren—the children of Crown Prince Frederik—will retain their titles, although they won’t maintain all of the benefits of royalty; only the the eldest (and future king) Prince Christian will receive an appanage (a grant of land or revenue) when they come of age.

“The children feel excluded”

Not everyone is happy about it. The mother of Prince Joachim’s two eldest sons told Danish newspaper the Daily BT that she was “shocked” by the decision.

“This came out of the blue. The children feel excluded,” she said. “They can’t understand why their identity is being taken from them.”

“My children are sad. My kids don’t know which leg to stand on,” Prince Joachim told BT. “Why should their identity be removed? Why must they be punished in that way?”

It follows a trend of European royals seeking to slim down their monarchies; in 2019 the king of Sweden removed titles from five of his grandchildren, meaning that they did not have to perform official duties but would still be part of the royal family.

“The queen’s decision is in line with similar changes that other royal houses have carried out in recent years in different ways,” the Danish palace’s statement confirmed.

It is also widely reported that King Charles is expected to present a “slimmed down” monarchy in the near future with a potential plan for only seven working royals to remain.

Sign up for the Fortune Features email list so you don’t miss our biggest features, exclusive interviews, and investigations.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: demark; monarchy; royalty
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-62 next last
To: Dr. Sivana
If the people under a monarchy want a monarchy, let them have one.

If they want to have it in United Kingdom, more power to them. It's a big moneymaker anyway. Tourism.

But I want none of that crap here in the States. This isn't Camelot.

41 posted on 09/29/2022 8:16:43 PM PDT by MinorityRepublican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

They do have this rule. It is the law. I don’t think Charles can change it. Has to be done by parliament going back to the presumptive heir Sophie back in the 1700s. Also I think parents still must be married to be in line of succession for the Crown. Probably applies to Titles as well.


42 posted on 09/29/2022 8:22:19 PM PDT by RummyChick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican
But I want none of that crap here in the States. This isn't Camelot.

Nor should we have one. We don't want one. But I wouldn't dream of telling Britain to dismantle theirs. Not my business.

If Great Britain cares about her Monarchy, she can deny Archie and Lilly that they get no titles, as it would be ridiculous to be the Duke of Dumbarton (or wherever) when they live in California. The working royals really do work, and their lives and schedules are largely dictated by Buckingham Palace. Meghan wants the luxury and fame without the work, and without having to follow protocol, and she wants to describe herself as the Duchess of Sussex without yielding U.S. citizenship. No Sale.
43 posted on 09/29/2022 8:22:52 PM PDT by Dr. Sivana (What was 35% of the Rep. Party is now 85%. And it’s too late to turn back—Mac Stipanovich )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

So they has surrogacy technology and IVF in the U.K. back then? I find that hard to believe.


44 posted on 09/29/2022 8:25:28 PM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Sivana
Meghan wants the luxury and fame without the work, and without having to follow protocol, and she wants to describe herself as the Duchess of Sussex without yielding U.S. citizenship. No Sale.

It's pretty simple to me. Meghan is an American. She wants to remain an American. The Royal Family should have given Harry their blessing. But that he will have to retire from the Royal Family once he marries Meghan. Unless Meghan decide to renounce American citizenship. We know that she will never do that.

King Edward VIII abdicated his throne to marry Wallis Simpson. He was in love with her so he moved to America. He knew the rules.

45 posted on 09/29/2022 8:27:56 PM PDT by MinorityRepublican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick
For those that have been pregnant..perhaps you can tell us if you were able to squat like Markle did here, get back up with no help...

I could do what she did very easily, even in the third trimester. But, every woman is different, and so is every pregnancy, so other women might've had a different experience.

I'm not a fan of MM, but I see nothing concerning in that video. If they really did fake her pregnancy, that video isn't evidence of it.

46 posted on 09/29/2022 8:42:23 PM PDT by Tired of Taxes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: x

She is a wonderful Queen whom I sure made this decision very thoughtfully.


47 posted on 09/29/2022 8:44:30 PM PDT by ruthles (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

It used to be that someone official actually had to be in attendance when a royal child was born, to verify.

I think they gave that up quite a while ago...


48 posted on 09/29/2022 8:44:42 PM PDT by Jamestown1630 ("A Republic, if you can keep it.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

I’m a longtime fan of Queen Margrethe. I’m sure she had good reasons.


49 posted on 09/29/2022 8:49:10 PM PDT by Jamestown1630 ("A Republic, if you can keep it.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: seowulf

I’ve wondered when the last time was that Harry and Meghan visited Sussex...


50 posted on 09/29/2022 8:52:12 PM PDT by Jamestown1630 ("A Republic, if you can keep it.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

It doesn’t matter what was available. It is the current law. Parliament would have to change the law.


51 posted on 09/29/2022 11:17:26 PM PDT by RummyChick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

Since you seem to have a problem grasping the concept...new technology doesn’t trump peerage law

https://www.tatler.com/article/surrogacy-and-peerages-legal-issues-family-law-marchioness-of-bath

It may well be the everyone involved in Archie’s titles puts it on a back burner until such time as everyone in Williams family dies in a plane crash and suddenly Archie could be King.

But he is still not yet a Prince...Charles is holding off..perhaps as blackmail to get Harry to straighten up


52 posted on 09/29/2022 11:33:21 PM PDT by RummyChick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

In trying to think of a way to get you to understand this try the following example

William freezes his sperm or takes Kate’s eggs and creates a frozen embryo. Then his entire family gets wiped out by a plague or car crash etc.

Now can Charles go create a new heir with Williams sperm. no.

If Kate is still alive but William and children are dead can she create a new heir with his sperm. No...could they do something hinky and secretly impregnate her with her claiming she was already pregnant..sure but..if nothing underhanded happens..

Harry is the new King when Charles dies

When Harry dies with no children born of the body..assuming that happened..can Archie be King.

Not if he was born from a surrogate.

Will all the rules change in the future..it’s possible. They changed the rule about the first born daughter being eligible to rule .but as it stands today..the law is the law.

Born of a surrogate means no King and no peerage


53 posted on 09/30/2022 12:15:04 AM PDT by RummyChick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

What makes you think Harry & MM faked her pregnancy and Archie was born from a surrogate?


54 posted on 09/30/2022 1:39:27 AM PDT by Tired of Taxes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

Are you the same woman who posts endlessly about Meghan’s stomach on Twitter?


55 posted on 09/30/2022 2:49:58 AM PDT by ottbmare (the OTTB mare)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: SmokingJoe

I think King Chuck placed them at the low end of the royal list Harry is thinking of editing the program he and the gold digger made for release next year.


56 posted on 09/30/2022 9:24:21 AM PDT by Vaduz ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick
And do you agree with that policy?

If you study history, the British royalty and the Hanovers have done much worse.

57 posted on 09/30/2022 6:31:06 PM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican
King Edward VIII abdicated his throne to marry Wallis Simpson. He was in love with her so he moved to America. He knew the rules.

No, he actually tried to remain king and marry her, but he was rebuffed. And, he didn't, "move to America." He moved to France, from when he visited Hitler. Then he was forced to move to Spain, then he moved to Portugal, where he lived in the villa of a suspected German spy. He only moved to the Bahamas when Churchill threatened to court martial him.

58 posted on 09/30/2022 6:38:40 PM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick; SmokingJoe; MinorityRepublican; Dr. Sivana; Jamestown1630
I don't agree with a lot that Megan Markle says and does, but whatever she did, she wasn't involved in the Rotherham child exploitation scandal, like the British royal family was. From the 1980s to the 2010s at least 1,400 children were sexually abused (by Muslims). I looked, and I can't find any evidence that Queen Elizabeth, (then) Prince Charles, or any other member of the royal family commented on it publicly, or lifted a finger to help. These are their subjects! I regard their failure to mention it, I regard as them covering it up. As the the royal family, this was definitely something they could have done. They viewed protecting Muslims as more important than protecting children. 4


Besides that, Queen Elizabeth bestowed the OBE and KCSG on Jimmy Saville. He was a friend and advisor to Prince Charles, and his advice extended to Queen Elizabeth. And they were privy to all kinds of rumors about him.

As the monarch and royal family of the U.K., they had absolutely no interest in protecting the children of the U.K.

So, whatever Megan Markle did, she is light years better than the royal family.

59 posted on 09/30/2022 6:57:50 PM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick; SmokingJoe; MinorityRepublican; Dr. Sivana; Jamestown1630
Rotherham whistleblower's horror at police treatment of CSE allegations Don't "rock the multicultural boat."
60 posted on 09/30/2022 6:59:33 PM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-62 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson