Prince William cancels his schedule for Kate & Kate doesn’t want a full-time nanny

Duchess Kate’s morning sickness is back! She’s not back in the hospital (yet), but she’s so sick that William is now canceling his schedule so that he can stay at their Kensington Palace home and look after her. We already knew that Kate’s schedule was going to be very limited for the next few months (cough – YEARS), but it looks like William is going to be canceling appointments right and left too. Meanwhile, the Mail has a bunch of new stories about Will and Kate and what they’re going to be like as parents and how Kate managed to get knocked up at just the right time, etc. Some highlights:

*The Mail says Kate and William have decided to “break with royal tradition” and NOT employ a “full-time nanny”. They are said to be eager to “hands-on parents” although they will probably employ a “babysitter” or part-time help. A source says, “Catherine and William are determined to be hands-on parents. Her parents are very excited about the baby and will help out as much as possible. They will, probably, use a part-time nanny to help them out when they have to attend events and don’t have a babysitter, but they don’t want a full-time nanny.” I imagine this is going to be the same kind of deal as how they don’t have “any staff” helping them, except for all of the staff they employ but not technically because Charles is paying for them.

*Kate and William prepared for her pregnancy for months. Kate’s “last hurrah” was in June, when she was drinking champagne and dancing up a storm at a friend’s wedding. After that, Kate allegedly gave up alcohol and junk food – Kate has never been a “big drinker” (?) but apparently she loves pizza and sweets, and they were hard to give up. And if you believe that…

*Kate stopped going to the gym and stopped playing tennis, and focused on taking leisurely walks with the dog. According to the Mail, “She gave up her habit of smoking the occasional cigarette and stopped drinking coffee at the Starbucks she frequented near Kensington Palace, conveniently close to an expensive maternity-wear shop.” O RLY?!?! She was still smoking when those boob photos were taken in late August, just FYI.

*Kate and William also wanted to have their puppy Lupo for more than a year before giving birth so the dog wouldn’t see a baby as a “rival for attention.” That makes sense. Lupo is still going to get jelly though.

*Kate and William may skip Christmas as Sandringham so they can spend the holidays with Kate’s parents. A source says, “It is being discussed but has not yet been decided. Carole is keen for Kate to spend Christmas with the family. It will be their last Christmas at the family home before the Middletons move house.” Because Carole and Michael Middleton have bought (with their son-in-law’s help) a gigantic mansion. Anyway, the source goes on to say, “At home Kate will be able to relax and put her feet up. Christmas at Sandringham can be very busy and stressful with everyone arriving. There is always lots going on, big dinners and lots of outfit changes to contend with.”

*NO MORE LAVISH VACATIONS!! For now. Kate and William will not make their annual trip to Mustique, not will they make a ski trip to France. Because of Kate’s pregnancy. SOB.

*William’s tour of duty will either come to an end in February or August, depending on a lot of factors. Most people think that by February, William will be out. I say that it looks like he’s ALREADY out of the RAF, mostly because even the Mail says that William hasn’t accumulated enough on-the-job hours this year, what with all of the “royal work” (and by that I mean vacations). But! The RAF insists that William must give them six months’ notice, so even if he’s telling them now that he doesn’t want to stay, he could be there well into the spring or summer. I bet he finds a way to get around that, don’t you?

*Kate really wants to be in London, which is what I’ve always said: ‘They love Wales but William said that he and Kate will not be in Anglesey next spring… They are planning to move into KP in the summer and it is absolutely going to be their full-time home. Kate loves it there, she has the park and the shops. She is really excited about it. Princess Margaret’s apartment is the best in the palace and they are making it look fabulous. Kate really sees it as their family home. She will be pushing the pram in the gardens just like Diana used to do.’

*Kate is an interior decorator now, because an aide told the Mail “she is a keen interior designer and wants to be in charge of all the major decisions in redecorating the 21-room apartment… Kate loves design and she will take a hands-on approach to how she wants it to look.”

So, my take on this is basically that William and Kate are really, really prepared for the baby, at least as far as PR goes. They’ve been thinking up excuses for two years now, making plans and everything has been put into place. We’re now supposed to think that Kate and William are so, so normal and that they work so hard and they don’t even want to employ anyone to help because they’re just like you. Do you believe that?

Photos courtesy of WENN.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

130 Responses to “Prince William cancels his schedule for Kate & Kate doesn’t want a full-time nanny”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. India says:

    I’m sorry but this obvious PR spin is nothing but a crock of BS.

  2. brin says:

    OK, so maybe they will never be “normal” but I do love them a little more for preparing for baby heir.

    • Chatcat says:

      I agree Brin. The jealousy that people spew over this couple is amazing. Here in America, the US tax payers will pay 1.3 BILLION dollars this year on the Obama family (20 times more then the Brits taxes are spent on the Royal fam) and you really here nothing about it. Yet it’s always bitch bitch bitch about the Duke and Duchess. Fact check: There are privileged people on this planet…these two couples/families are two of them. I think that 90% of the people that bitch about it are jealous it’s not them and the other 10% that bitch…bitch about everything anyway! Cheers~

      • GoodCapon says:

        It’s amazing how the word ‘jealousy’ is never applied to those who criticize the Kardashians, the Hiltons and their ilk when they’re 1000x more privileged than anyone here will ever be. I guess the rules for the Cambridges are different because they’re oh-so-royal?

        Also, fact check: Your argument instantly loses credibility when you use the jealousy angle. So I suggest you try again.


      • T.C. says:

        You really want to compare the Royal family to the Obamas? That’s stupid. President Obama is 24/7 in charge of running the free world not being a reality show star whose only job is to look pretty, smile and shake hands. Those grey hairs he and every other president is not for nothing, our lives are in his hands. His wife is responsible for entertaining the wives and families of other world leaders some of them hostile to our country. President Obama gets paid $400,000 a year, gets a house, transportation and security for his family the rest he pays out of pocket. I don’t care what politician party they are all our presidents and their families are a million times more important than any royal.

        I have more respect for Kim Khardian than Kate Middleton. At least Kim works for her money. What the hell does Kate Middleton do?

      • Chatcat says:

        Capon, do you know what jealousy is? Is it envy? Is it resentment?

        I don’t think for a minute that most folks, inside or outside of the UK, are jealous of KardBIGASSian or even the Hilton’s, they are an annoying celebrity entity that titillates petty comments, but no I don’t believe anybody is really jealous (envy and resents) them. Now anything Royal in the UK, and yes I believe anybody who complains about how “privileged” the Royals are, is simply jealous. I am not jealous of the Obama’s because my tax payer dollars let them live bigger than the UK Royals by 20 times as much…I am annoyed and appalled, but not jealous. I don’t cry and whine “they are so privileged” and “the Obama dog has $100,000 of US TAX PAYER DOLLARS spent on it each year” because I am jealous, if I comment/whine/bitch about that is not because I envy the dog or the Obama’s, it’s because it is ridiculous use of tax dollars. So yes, I know what jealousy looks and sounds like compared to other feelings, and I stand by my assessment in my post earlier.

      • Mich says:

        You also lose credibility for:

        1) Equating expenses related to the leader of the free world with the expenses of a Ribbon Cutting Royal.

        2) Using hysterical stats most often seen in such reputable rags as The Daily Caller, Fox News and the Daily Fail. Outside that bubble, you will quickly learn that Obama expenses were LESS than Bush expenses.

        And the ‘jealousy’ card? Really? When you read the often very thoughtful and well substantiated comments on W&K threads, all you come up with is “H8ters!”?

      • berry says:

        Chatcat I get where you are coming from with the jealousy thing, but most people in the uk are not jealous they are mad that there hard earned taxes are spent on people who are unelected. If we had a president I wouldn’t grudge my taxes being spent on them because they would have been elected. I do have a problem with people being given tax money because of the family they were born into.

      • Christina says:

        Do you seriously not see the difference? Obama, whatever one thinks of him, was ELECTED to the Presidency. The people of America chose him to do the job, and when that job is finished in 4 years time, he won’t receive a penny of taxpayers’ money.

        The ‘royals’, by contrast, live lives of immense privilige simply due to an accident of birth. Will and Waity’s baby will live in luxury all his/her life, simply for being born. The two situations aren’t remotely comparable.

      • Chatcat says:

        Of course the POTUS and his family need security and the expense, but does his dog need $100,000 worth of care each year at tax payers expense? Really, you think that is acceptable? Why can’t he pay for his dog’s care out of the $400K a year? Just for arguments sake, what does Mrs. Obama do differntly then Kate? Does she have a job? Does she work outside the home?

        And as far as Mich’s comments are concerned, I will take them as the left wing loonie propoganda that they are. Everything goes back to Bush. I named Obama because he is the President, if the POTUS was a guy or woman named Smith, if they were a Rep or Dem and it cost 1.4 Billion a year I’d say the same thing. But hey, it’s Bush’s fault for everything that has ever happend in the world. LMAO.

      • T.C. says:

        I agree, the Royals are nothing but empty celebrity. Kate Middleton a large Barbie doll for the world to look at. They run nothing, control nothing, are no better than other socialites from wealthy families who do charity and dress up in fancy clothing. They are either born into or marry into the lifestyles of the rich and famous.

        Fans of the royals would like to believe these people are BETTER than the Kardashians, or the Hiltons but it’s the same thing. At least Paris and Kim MAKE money and work some times. It’s fine if you like the Royals but don’t go around pretending they are anything but empty celebrity that are worshipped because the have fancy titles.

      • Mich says:

        @ Chatcat

        I don’t recall assigning blame in my post. The presidency costs money. It is a non-partisan fact, however, that it has cost less under Obama than under the previous president. You opened that door, don’t throw your politics at me because I opened it farther.

        You might be comforted to know that Bo does not have a ‘handler’. The author of the original source material used in the many stories on this subject omitted the fact that the ‘handler’ is actually the White House groundskeeper. I think his duties extend a little farther than walking the dog when the First Lady is out of town.

      • Amelia says:

        Out of interest, is anyone aware that the Royal Family costs the British taxpayer approximately 69 pence a year?
        Yes, a whole 69 pennies.
        I don’t know about anyone else, but I’m fairly content with handing over 69p out of my taxes in exchange for some fun, patriotic days.

      • Mich says:

        @ Amelia

        I’ve read varying reports on this. As I understand it, the figure you are using is based on numbers released by the palace which claimed an annual expense of under £40 million in 2012.

        Anti-monarchy groups put the actual figure as much as five times higher, however, saying that once costs such as round-the-clock security, lavish royal visits and lost revenue from the Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall are added in, the price tag reaches over £200 million. One report I read says the amount is equivalent to 9,560 nurses and 8,200 police officers. It is also equivalent to a number of high profile government cuts, including cuts to the Sure Start programme.

        That said, I also love a good royal parade and wedding!

      • T.C. says:

        You really don’t know what the difference is between a First Lady (or even Prime Minister’s wife) and Kate Middleton? Well what the first lady does has consequences on her husband’s presidency and could impact world politics. What Kate Middleton does impacts the gossip pages. No one is going to war because Kate Middleton dissed a leader’s wife, the first lady on the other hand is a more important and a more powerful position. She is always entertaining families of world leaders, doing some social campaign, helping military families and taking care of the leader of the free world and his two children. She had a job before her husband was elected but had to give it up because we can’t handle a First Lady who eorks. Hiliary Clinton was given such a hard time when she wanted to work and not hust be a first lady. After her husband leaves office unlike Kate Middleton, Mrs.Obama will probably go back to work, publish a book, etc.

        You are just a worshipper of empty celebrity. No I’m not jealous of Kate. I don’t get jealous of reality show stars. I am jealous of people who invent things, make things or have unique talents to contribute to the world. Not a wealthy socialite who is an oversized Barbie doll. I would never ask to be in Kate’s shoes because I’m not lazy.

      • LAK says:

        @Amelia – that figure isn’t actually true. The calculation that makes that figure doesn’t include extras like travel and security, and tax rebates from The Duchy of Cornwall and Lancaster. It uses the civil list as it’s base figure, without the extras.

        The pro-monarchists like to bandy about that it costs 69p complete with a plausible financial calculation, but that is as true as Gordon Brown’s financial reports.

      • Val says:

        Chatcat the difference here also is that Michelle Obama is not allowed to work. Do you think someone like her wouldn’t WANT to work? Of course not. Her job is to be the first lady and she doesn’t get paid for the work she has to do as a first lady. But she had a job and will have to work once this is over. Kate will never have to work. She never worked and she never will. And her lifestyle is even more lavish than Michelle’s will ever be.

        Yes, all presidents live large. But they still work for the people. Kate and Will do absolutely nothing.

      • Angelic 20 says:

        Chat cat

        You are missing a very important and crucial point that rf is privileged because of tax payers money, not on their personal wealth or merit. The money and privilege is given to them so they work on our behalf which WK don’t do. We have a right to criticise them because we pay them like you have a right to criticise you’re persistent without being called jealous or hater. At the end of the day rf cares about what british and commonwealth nations think about them not Americans because they need is for their privileges and wealth just like Obama needed Americans to support him and not the rest of the world where he is probably most popular and well liked president.


        I am on phone so i am responding to you here. The 69p cost is not correct,rf costs way more then that. Most newspaper s in England are royalists, so they twist and turn that cost around. The real breakdown of their cost is given on republican Web site , there you can see how much media together with rf hides their expenses. Also their security and travel cost is never talked and discussed openly. Rf do not provide patriotic days,imo they represent the existence of class system in England not patriotism. After Queen we will see the ultimate downfall of monarchy because both Charles and William do not have the respect required to hold the position of a monarch.

      • JenD says:

        Actually, the President receives staff, a pension, benefits, and Secret Service protection after he leaves office.

      • Alexandra Bananarama says:

        JenD No. Your information is quite old and a bit wrong. Clinton was the last president to receive SS detail after presidency. Bush, Obama, and anyone after only receive SS out of their own money and they can only have access for a transitional period.. 4 or 6 years i believe.

        As far as benefits the job entails many extreme situations to stress the body and shorten life expectancy. These are people that continue to hold national secrets and gave sacrifice so it’s earned. Same goes for staff.

        As of now, FLOTUS restricts the help from doing dishes,picking up after the girls, and making their beds. She wants them to maintain a humble attitude and that’s also for a transition out of the WH in 3+ years.

      • anne_000 says:

        The US doesn’t spend $1.3 billion on the Obama Family nor $100k on Bo. Even the cost of the food they eat comes from their own expenses (if you don’t count ‘business’ meals and such) and it’s nowhere near a billion dollars. Geez, if you’re going to include in your estimate the salaries of WH gardeners, electric/water/gas bill, security, and whatever else, you have to acknowledge that these expenses are NOT SPECIFIC to just one family, but the cost of maintenance of the White House & its occupants REGARDLESS of who is currently the president. And no, I sincerely doubt the amount spent on the Obamas that is specific solely to them is anywhere near $1.3 billion. That number sounds to me like a ridiculous number made up by some r/w media shock jock. This reminds me of the false news story by Fox News that the president’s India trip cost nearly $1 billion/several $100s of millions of dollars per day. And no, taxpayers aren’t paying for Bo’s dog food, which sure isn’t $100k/year.

      • JenD says:

        All presidents receive SS detail for 10 years after office (for all presidents elected after 1997). I never said for life. I was just responding to someone who said they received nothing after the president left office. But good for you for knowing part of the law.

      • Selena says:

        T.C. You are kidding right? Obama is busy running the free world????? Is that like when you have a football league only played in one country and call it the world cup or whatever? Obama is the President of the United States of America. Not the free world, that is why we are called the free world because we vote for our own governments. This is the sort of comment that infuriates people outside of America and fuels anti-American sentiment.

      • Alexandra Bananarama says:

        Oh jend. I hadn’t the time or interest to look up exact numbers for you. Your statement was much too broad and sounded like you were taking the extreme side of lifetime service to make your point. I doubt you would have corrected anyone for thinking such until i typed it out. But congrats to you for knowing the law or owning a smart phone. You bested someone online. Go you!

  3. mk yarwood says:

    ugh, hyperemesis. You are all about to crucify me, but, at my fifth month of puking every single day, at least three times a day, I started to smoke a little pot to help with the nausea. As soon as it was quelled, I was able to eat like a normal pregnant lady. In the end, I still only manage to put on 19 lbs because I lost about that much in the first trimester. Get yourself some London kush, queenie, and all will be well. (p.s. yes, my kid is fine)

    • Amelia says:

      Well, I suppose if it worked for you :)
      That’s quite interesting actually. I’ve never smoked myself (cigarettes or pot) but I knew someone in my anthropology class at Uni who couldn’t get through a splif without being violently, violently sick.
      Hmm. The body is a strange, strange thing.

      • mkyarwood says:

        Most studies not funded by lobbyists, show that THC doesn’t pass through the womb. However, that says nothing about the smoking part. The stuff I got was from a family friend: her brother started growing it when he was in treatment for cancer. He’s in 10 year remission now, and he makes a tincture sort of thing. I took small amounts of this, after talking to my doctor about it (yes! you can talk to your doctor about things!) and figuring out which had the best chance of working/least downsides. To me, smoking was not a good idea as it also makes me sick.

    • Sarah says:

      eh, you do what you need to do to get through stuff, don’t beat yourself up about it.

      • mkyarwood says:

        100% serious, and after several other therapies failed. I tried diclectin three times, and it made the puking worse. I tried aromatherapy, massage therapy, walking for hours, acupuncture, different diet setups and meditation. It was my (medical) doctor who mentioned it to me, after watching me miserably try to get myself from place to place. He is 75 years old, has 6 children himself, and delivered three of my sisters. I was at the end of my rope, and my husband was working across the country, a six hour plane ride away. In the end that’s what it took for me to eat, gain weight, gain vitality and end the stress (the hormones of which, by the way, are very toxic for a developing baby). I have decided not to carry any more babies, also. If we have more children, they will be adopted.

    • lady X says:

      Would never crucify you for smoking weed… smoke on … i bet you baby is well relaxed and not over hyper like these other kids who’s mothers stuffed their faces with sugar the whole 9 months

  4. Angelic 20 says:

    Oh I wish my friend’s husband can also just get of from his tour of duty while she was suffering morning sickness all day long and so other devise men but no they don’t because they are normal not these two. why exactly William canceling 2 or 3 hrs maximum engagement for military officers who actually risk their lives to keep I us safe because Kate is pregnant? Is he a doctor? If he be there 24/7 Kate will not get sick’ is he the only one who is taking care of her and there is no staff at her disposal to get her absolutely everything she needs to make herself as comfortable as possible? Can’t she survive being away from him for 3 hours? Is this what we should expect from him, whenever she is getting really sick he will not work even if his work consists only few hours not 9 to 5 job? Respect is earned not given by tabloids or title, written’s elderly husband was really sick and admitted to a hospital and still she never canceled her engagements, airports o in England were closed because of snow and yet 90 yeas old doe did not cancel his engagements, millions of people go to work while they have their wives in hospitals. There is no reason for him to cancel a3 hours maximum engagement because Kate is suffering through morning sickness, she is not admitted to hospital so it’s not worse. Kate needs all the rest, she is sick throwing up, she have an army of people to take care of her while he it’s absent for few hours . He is now using his wife’s pregnancy to get out of work, earlier it was dead Mummy. I dislike him even more then Kate.

    As far as no nannies are concerned, well they are breaking traditions by not working full time like all the other royals have hired nannies in the past, so why should they hire full time nannies of they are not working full time? By don’t believe for even a second that they will not hire full time nannies and I nor saying that it is a bad thing.

    • Angelic 20 says:

      They will hire full time nannies and them anyone who will point out will be called jealous or hater or that it is not a bad thing to hire a nanny (which is not) but they will forget that the whole not hiring nanny angle was used as apr ploy to make them popular. this article is pr ground work for the fact that neither one of them will be working any time soon in the future.

      Dm just outed Kate as a smoker which is a common fact but she always lies about it, recently at a school visit in Cambridge.

      Okay rant over and I wish media just leave these 2 alone (Kate and the baby) for their and as well as for our sake and William stop using his mother’s death or Diana’s son and pregnant Kate angle to avoid his duties while living off public funds directly or indirectly. Plus they stop this false we are just like normal people crap because it is a lie, normal people work 10 times harder then him with one 10 sources then him and it sounds very condescending and disrespectful to actual normal people. You are leaving the life of immense privilege of a royal with less then minimum responsibility and work load, be grateful and honest about it. Is this too much to ask from an unelected future state head, I don’t think so. Okay now really rant over.

      On a positive note I wish Kate feels better and have a healthy baby. I hope exactly what I hoped at the time time of their wedding, that she matures after this huge life event and inspirer to do more for others and give back a little of the good will she is receiving.

      • JulieM says:

        Yeah, I’m not buying the no nannies garbage either. As for Willy working; he cost the government how much to train him to fly helicopters, and then he only flies on occasion. I guarantee you, his squadron mates, who have to pick up his slack, will not be sorry to see him go. What a show pony.

      • Christina says:

        Of course they will hire nannies. And what’s wrong with that anyway? Since when has having a nanny (along with about a hundred million other ‘staff’) become a form of child abuse? All this holier-than-thou celeb stuff about not having nannies is very annoying.

      • Alexandra Bananarama says:

        Angelic That’s not fair. How else is the world to know that this beautiful future queen that’s carrying a beautiful heir and she’s having a difficult time! All this criticizing of her work ethic and now that she’s working we can not turn a blind eye!

        She’s being so brave and her wonderful husband that never leaves her to party or vacation alone is helping her deal by quitting work he’s promised others, to stay and take care of this fragile woman. These are 2 hard working royals and they must rest now to keep up their strength!

        I hear they will be at the hobbit premiere! That will be quite a trying time for them.

      • JulieM says:

        Christina: There is absolutely nothing wrong with having nannies. The Cambridges can have a whole squadron of nannies. Just don’t try to BS the public about it.

      • LAK says:

        @JulieM – i think the obvious disparity in the fetish to appear normal is what WK don’t get.

        It’s like a ‘normal’ crib sheet that someone has made for them [and or their Spin team] to sprout every chance they get even if the reality doesn’t match up.

      • Dena says:

        You all are reacting. You aren’t thinking. (Smile).

        Let me tell you what this p/t nanny business is really about. It plays right into William’s fantasy of having this “normal middle-class life.” That’s how she, in part, hooked him and keeps him. He is the little bitty boy with divorced/estranged parents and who just wanted some warm cookies and milk served by mommy when he came home from school and the witty bitty boy who wanted to go camping with dad and to sit around the house with the family playing monopoly. The Middletons fulfill that fantasy for him. They always have and will continue to.

        So . . . her ringing a little bell for the nanny to come get the little princeling doesn’t jive with the psychological game they play. In order for this whole thing to stay together she needs to be the docile, stay at home-hands on mom-close-knit family that he always yearned for. Hence, a p/t nanny (and only then when they go to functions/premieres like the Hobbit). I mean . . . it’s not like they will ever need someone to keep the baby when they are working. You know . . .

        No. I am not saying that there is anything inherently wrong with a docile, stay at home-hands on mom-close-knit family.

    • Liza Jane says:

      You know what? They are a young couple in love and I would hope that my husband would want to be with me when I was that sick! This child is vitally important to the 900 year old direct succession of the throne! It is a big deal! William has proved himself to be brave,to do hard work ( and given that a huge percentage of young people lie around,on the dole, taking government money,boozing and smoking their days away watching crap like ‘Towie’ and revering the dumb creatures on it whilst bitching about ‘privileged’ Royals that is a big plus) and to get a degree,marry a girl who will be able to support him and carry on the line! The British Monarchy brings in Millions to England,has been proven to be the biggest draw with all it’s panoply for tourism..the only reason that Britain remains relevant in the World….if you are too stupid or anti- royalist to understand this at least have the decency not to spew out the hateful things you do! As to the idolisation of the Kardashians who are laughing all the way to the bank whilst people watch and pay for their spurious and useless antics and lifestyles, How on earth can they be exonerated from all this hatred??? It is not spin about how much the Royals actually cost the is fact,from a fact finding committee set up to answer once and for all those naysayers who continuously bitch about this! Given the huge return for the country that that small amount costs, it is a minimal cost!
      I read this rubbish with a sad heart for all the judgemental people out there!!

  5. Amelia says:

    Ooh. That’s interesting. I didn’t really know that you should have a dog for X months/years before having a kid.
    Makes sense though. I’m going to have to bear that in mind. I don’t know why but I’ve been getting so broody lately . . .
    SHUT UP womb. You can sit tight for another 5 years or so. Ain’t nothing going on in there, yet.

    • Micki says:

      But how do you know that you’re a dog-person? You may prefer cats after all and the horror of it-Taxoplasmosis! And you have to give them up just like your pizza!Shudder…
      Or you may fall for a budgie or even worse-fishes! THEN you must practise with adopting a 3 world orphan to make up for the missing dog experience….Ah, having kids is so trying…

  6. Christina says:

    These people are surrounded by an army of minions every hour and minute of the day. So it’s kind of beside the point whether or not they employ a ‘full-time nanny’ as there will ALWAYS be a team of people on hand to cater to their every little whim. It’s not like they’ll be anything like normal parents, who have to cook, clean, shop and probably work full-time in addition to caring for their kid(s).

    So spare me the ‘ordinary parents’ spiel. Willie Wales wouldn’t know the meaning of ‘ordinary’ if it hit him on his balding head.

    • Liza Jane says:

      Sorry but ‘Willie Wales’ ( how disrespectful of you by the way) lived at University ,in a flat ,cooked for himself, works at an extremely worthwhile job,not an easy one,the training is very hard!…lives in a cottage in Wales where he and his wife,shop and cook for themselves and are endeavouring to live their lives as normally as he has often said he craves..I have no doubt they want to bring up their child as normally as possible, and if that means no full time Nanny but help when royal Duties are pressing,then good for them!! Incidentally, I know of a rich spoilt ‘ Texan princess’ who has 2 nannies,one for night so she doesn’t miss her sleep, plenty of spoilt privileged people out there who do not give back!

  7. inthekitchen says:

    Er…cancel their schedules? Not when it comes to movie premieres, which they are supposedly STILL attending on Wednesday.

    I love how she is too sick to do regular/boring work, but hobnobbing with celebrities at movie premieres? Voila, she is magically feeling better! I really hope they do not end up going.

    Also, the picture of her coming out of Starbucks in the DM article was taken a few weeks ago…so, already given up coffee? NOT.

    These two are just a phony, palace PR creation. Nothing that they say they are doing is true (the whole no staff baloney, Willy “deciding” he will leave RAF of his own volition rather then being asked to leave, etc).

  8. Meerkat says:

    He pulled out of attending the British Military Tournament, so “he could spend time with his wife”. Put his feet up and watch telly, more like. Remember when Philip was in hospital this year and QE2 carried out all her duties?

  9. GoodCapon says:

    Emotional support is all fine and good, but there comes a time that William won’t be able to do anything more other than hope that Kate gets better from whatever sickness she’s dealing with.

    He has to get on with his life and that means doing his royal duties and playing at being an SAR pilot. It seems like he’s using Kate’s pregnancy as an excuse not to work.

    He sure doesn’t have a patch on his granny. When Prince Philip was hospitalized, did the Queen cancel her engagements? No. The Queen visited him at the hospital and moved on with her duties. And this is an 86-year old woman we are talking about. Suck it up William!

  10. CC says:

    Tabloid spin. It’s not even the type of PR the royal family aims for and Kate seems to be compliant to the Roya; family’s ways. If they were to decide on any of that (which I doubt) why would the Mail have the scoop? lol

  11. Carolin says:

    Nobody will believe this. No full-time nannies? Surely not.

  12. lin234 says:

    Perhaps I’m being a complete bitch by thinking this but when I first read that story in the dailymail (pretty hard to miss), my first thought was that this is a genius pr play concocted by mother and daughter.

    She was visiting her mother ALONE when she got sick. Isn’t Will’s and Kate’s excuse for their endless vacations because they hardly get to spend time together since Wills is in the military? Why was Will off at some estate shooting party with his pals if his wife was planning to break the news of her pregnancy to her parents? You’d think as a loving couple, he’d want to be there with her.

    By being hospitalized, she was able to announce her news to the world (grab as much attention as possible) and also let the world know how delicate and fragile she is – which pretty much means she won’t have to do much in the coming years. No one will be allowed to complain about Kate’s lack of everything without seeming like a complete a-hole since Kate has established her delicate nature. Not to mention, Kate now has Will’s undivided attention. She may have morning sickness, but I have a feeling it’s greatly exaggerated to further her own plans. Let’s not forget this is the same girl who used the media when Will broke up with her.

    I believe these two won’t have a full-time nanny outside the palace when being photographed. Just like they don’t have a whole staff of people working for them right now.

    Kate would have been better off marrying a rich man instead of trying to go for the crown. It’s more work than she can handle. At least she’s playing the pr game like a pro.

    • Alexandra Bananarama says:

      Your comment made me think of a few things…

      Kate has focused so much of her years on will and has really built this image of being too fragile to work. If she keeps this up what happens when/if they split? She will crumble having forgotten how to work or breath without william there.

      And William is always away from her except on vacations. Even then they’re not always alone. They’re often with her family. It is nice to be close with family, but on a romantic and relaxing vacation… no. So.. he probably won’t be spending much time with her and this was an excuse to get out of duty and also where are Kate’s friends? If i was pregnant i would be having lunch with my friends. She’s only with pippa and her mom. No females outside of that.

      Bit of a run on, but you get the point.

  13. littlemissnaughty says:

    I’m already tired of the baby stories, I’ll wait until he/she is born. Then I’ll pay attention again.

    But … she wants to decorate the Kensington apartment? The hell? And WHAT do you do with 21 frickin’ rooms? I would go insane trying to decorate that. Girl, give it a rest. You’re not a photographer and you’re not an interior designer. As IF she even styles herself. Just grow that baby, that’s all they expect you to do.

  14. emmie_a says:

    Why would you have to give up pizza and sweets?? Not that I think she eats *junk food*. Coffee and cigarettes I can believe but not junk food.

  15. Cathy says:

    I feel bad for her. She can’t win no matter what she does. Neither can William. People just want to tear them up. I hope she gets better soon. William should do what he feels is best for him and his wife.

  16. Micki says:

    “They are said to be eager to “hands-on parents”
    Sure, as long as the twins have no colic, sleep obediently when needed, drink and burp cutely…If they repeate it daily till THE DAY people may even believe it. Snort

    RF has changed a lot. From the Queen, who’s left her children for months when on visits abroad through Diana and Charles, who took them along to now William, dropping everything(in comming decades -the nation) because the wife feels nauseous…what can he do? Keep the bucket under her chin? With this “too normal to be true” attitude I’ll start asking myself why do I need Royalty…

  17. Elise says:

    Any chance that before and after photos of the Kensington Palace renovation will be published? I would LOVE to see what she does with the place.

  18. Kellie says:

    “Sigh” Its media times like this I really miss Enclave 24….RIP

  19. JonahT says:

    OK, I’m no royal apologist. I’m genuinely indifferent towards them – like the weather, they’re just a fact of life here in the UK. But, I think this “work shy” snark is getting out of hand. Yes, they don’t work in an office every day, but frankly being a royal is a job in itself. I wouldn’t want to for it, having effectively to represent an entire nation with everything you say and do. But whatever, no-one can accuse the Queen of having a bad attitude to work, and I’m sure she has more than a little influence over William. But the main thing that irks me is the way everyone accuses Catherine of shopping and going to the hair salon all the time – when else do you expect to see her? At home? In the palace? Here in the UK there’s an understanding that the press should not bother the royal family in everyday life. Public functions and official engagments are fair game and if they are out in public, who can stop people taking pictures? But they’re not supposed to camp out in front of their homes, take photos of them over hedges or through windows etc. Also, as for the holidays, I have to clarify something – here, people usually get 4 weeks holiday per year, usually not including the week between Christmas and New Year. So that usually means people can go on vacation up to five times per year even in high pressure jobs. I wouldn’t say C&W go on vacation more than that? I work very hard full time and don’t make a lot of money, but I like to travel and try to go away a few times per year for a week. Does that make me lazy?
    Having said all of this, I don’t get the interest in these two (I mean, a baby is always news it otherwise they’re pretty dull). I just want to defend people who go on vacations… We’re not all work shy! People I’m with on vacation take pictures of me and othera and post them on Facebook, but no-one takes pictures of me at my desk or reading the newspaper at home, so does that mean people assume I’m a layabout? I doubt it.

    • Angelic 20 says:

      Jonah, you and I are completely different from W&K. their work is counted as the number of public engagements they do and in case of William his raf job also because unlike you and me they have private secretaries each, a20 Pepe staff plus a number of other staff as royal aides. They are not sitting and making all the plans and calls that go behind a engagement, they have am army of people doing these things for then. there work is to show up and preform, so their work is public engagements. Their vacation days are more then their no of public engagements as counted by many royal blogs and they don’t even do these engagements regularly. So your comparison is not at all valid in their case. Plus I don’t think redding newspaper is considered as work. also their pr promoted her as a house wife living in Wales while she is seen regularly on London doing shopping and other things which sharing contradicts the image that they want us to believe.

      Did you notice William don’t do much public engagements because of raf but raf had made it clear that he has not even completed his minimum flying hours and want him to choose between raf and royal duties, again contradicting from their pr statement that he will not do many public engagements because of raf and yet he is not even doing his raf jo b prop erly.

      Say whatever media wants to say about Harry but army has never complained or asked him to choose between then and royal duties. He had gained the army perso nnel’s respect, support, manages his public duties and army career and charities and started his charities septate from William’s and had won two humanitarian awards for his work while William is caught lying about working and then got caught vacationing in France. I have no doubt in my mind which son of Diana takes after her and which one she will be period of.

  20. JonahT says:

    Firstly, I’m no royal apologist. I’m indifferent – like the weather, they’re just a fact of life here in the UK. But this “work shy” snark is getting out of hand. Yes, they don’t work in an office every day, but frankly being a royal is a job in itself. I wouldn’t want to do it, having effectively to represent an entire nation with everything you say and do. But whatever, no-one can accuse the Queen of having a bad attitude to work, and I’m sure she has more than a little influence over William. What irks me is the way everyone accuses Catherine of shopping and going to the hair salon all the time – when else do you expect to see her? At home? In the palace? In the UK there’s an understanding that the press should not bother the royal family at home or at work unless it’s a public event, fundraiser etc. If they are out in public, who can stop people taking pictures? But they’re not supposed to camp out in front of their homes, shoot through their windows.
    As for the holidays, I have to clarify – here, people usually get 4 weeks holiday per year, usually not including the week between Christmas and New Year. So that means people can go on vacation up to five times per year even in high pressure full time jobs. I wouldn’t say C&W go on vacation more than that? I work very hard full time and don’t make a lot of money, but I like to travel and try to go away a few times per year for a week. Does that make me lazy? People I’m with on vacation take pictures of me and others and post them on Facebook, but no-one takes pictures of me at my desk or reading the newspaper at home, so does that mean people assume I’m a layabout? I doubt it.

  21. JonahT says:

    Firstly, I’m no royal apologist. I’m indifferent – like the weather, they’re just a fact of life here in the UK. But this “work shy” snark is getting out of hand. Yes, they don’t work in an office every day, but frankly being a royal is a job in itself. I wouldn’t want to do it, having effectively to represent an entire nation with everything you say and do. But whatever, no-one can accuse the Queen of having a bad attitude to work, and I’m sure she has more than a little influence over William. What irks me is the way everyone accuses Catherine of shopping and going to the hair salon all the time – when else do you expect to see her? At home? being briefed by endless handlers? In the UK there’s an understanding that the press should not bother the royal family at home or at work unless it’s a public event, fundraiser etc. If they are out in public, who can stop people taking pictures? But they’re not supposed to camp out in front of their homes, shoot through their windows.
    As for the vacations – here, people usually get 4 weeks per year, often not including Christmas and New Year. So that means people go on vacation up to five times per year even in full time jobs. I wouldn’t say C&W go on vacation more than that? I work very hard full time and don’t make a lot of money, but I like to travel and try to go away a few times per year for a week. Does that make me lazy? People I’m with on vacation take pictures of me and others and post them on Facebook, but no-one takes pictures of me at my desk, so does that mean people assume I’m a layabout? I doubt it.

  22. Anon says:

    Thinking this site should be given the same treatment the DJs and their radio station got in Australia, gone too far for hits.
    Having had morning sickness day and night for 9 months with my first son, not even the severest kind that required IVs…I’m wondering if some here have even been pregnant at all.

    • Angelic 20 says:

      No one is saying Abby thing about Kate, we are discussing William and what will happen after the baby is born. Please read carefully and then make such comments.

      • mrsjennyk says:

        @angelic20, perhaps you should also read posts carefully before you jump to comment. I’m aware you are talking about william right now but arent you also slagging Kate in most of your other comments?
        Please don’t tell me to skip your posts if I don’t want to read them, you appear to comment on almost any post that is positive about W&K.
        I’m curious why you spend so much time on stories about them if you have so much disdain for them. Why?

      • Angelic 20 says:

        They public figures of my country,i pay them to do a job that they are not doing. Why does it bother you that I comment on them, as a british citizen I have every right to criticise them and really typing few messages don’t take that much of my time. I don’t get what you are o saying that a site that is not sugary should be treated the way a radio station is because of theirpranks ended up in someone taking their lives.your comment makes no sense what so ever.

      • mrsjennyk says:

        Angelic 20 says:

        December 10, 2012 at 1:44 pm

        They public figures of my country,i pay them to do a job that they are not doing. Why does it bother you that I comment on them, as a british citizen I have every right to criticise them and really typing few messages don’t take that much of my time. I don’t get what you are o saying that a site that is not sugary should be treated the way a radio station is because of theirpranks ended up in someone taking their lives.your comment makes no sense what so ever.

        I don’t understand any of this gibberish. Carry on with the negativity. Cheers

  23. Val says:

    This whole tragedy with the nurse just underlines the fact that it’s time to let go of the monarchy. These are glorified but very useless public figures living off the people of Britain. The fact that a poor disturbed woman was driven over the edge out of the mortification and humiliation of talking to someone about ~Duchess Kate~’s condition shows that it’s just not ok to keep pretending these people’s titles still mean something and that they need to be revered like they actually rule the people and do something for Britain because that messes with people’s heads. Yes, this was an overreaction on her part that nobody saw coming, but she was a sick woman. And yeah, you don’t prank call a hospital, that was a dumb idea. But Kate wasn’t dying or in danger. And there was no security issue or anything. She had FIVE bodyguards to herself and policemen outside of the hospital 24/7. It was just a stupid prank call that nobody thought would succeed. Period. Why does Britain and the rest of the world need to be so concerned about these people or their personal lives? Who CARES? Nothing, NOTHING would’ve happened to anyone as a result of this joke. But the hospital probably mortified the staff and THAT is what drove this woman to suicide. Not the actual call. I don’t care what they say, they probably did consider firing her because that hospital treats the “royals”. Imagine the pressure and fear. Enough is enough with this charade. I hope this makes the media, and rest of the world realize that this is just not ok anymore. These people’s titles mean absolutely nothing and the fascination with them needs to stop!

    Look at Princess Letizia of Spain wearing cotoure to the wedding of other useless royals when people in her country are literally jumping out of buildings because they can’t pay their rent and are being evicted. The fact that she’s still strutting in Chanel shows a total disconnection from her people during their worst economic crisis. What is her point then? That is some Marie Antoinette crap. And look how that turned out.

    • lin234 says:

      I have to wonder if the woman’s racial identity played into her suicide. Meaning, she was originally from India, and the Asian culture tends to place great importance and are very serious regarding their work life. What one culture sees as little importance can be seen as life and death in another culture. Shame, humiliation at work could have distressed her enough to commit suicide. I have a feeling the hospital really gave it to her. I think it’s more of an insult to call her sick when there is a lot more going on at play here. I’m not sure about the culture in India but I know the Chinese have this thing with “saving face”. Meaning, sometimes the tiniest insult may offend some people the wrong way and they may be humiliated over something you may see as an non-issue. It’s why when you’ve heard stories about shady business owners in China caught using poisoned materials or whatnot, they usually commit suicide because it’s seen as the right thing to do. I wonder if the nurse was trying to “save face”.

      I just have a thing where I think psychological terms are overused. For example, I hate the idea that all depressed people are the same. Some people are depressed from growing up in really rough external circumstances that lead to natural bouts of feeling sadder than usual. I find it strange when people who seem to have it all (happy parents, childhood, and whatnot) get depressed for really no reason at all. To me, that has to do with their serotonin balance whereas people who grew up in(or are in) circumstances out of their control have internal issues they need to work out and come to peace about before they can be truly happy. Along the same lines, I don’t think people who commit suicide are all sick people. People forget how much culture plays into this. In Japan, suicide in some instances is seen as honorable.

      But I agree, the monarchy really has no use. Being in the US, I could care less about it, except I was a huge fan of Diana’s growing up (her charitable side)and it’s shame to see Will turn out this way.

      • Val says:

        Right now the hospital is trying to make it seem like they were supportive of the staff. Does a person commit suicide over a prank call? No, it was the pressure, the mortification and the humiliation and WORRY of putting her magesty “in danger” and the hospital must’ve really given it to them. In what danger was Kate? She had a staff of bodyguards and police officers just for her. Nothing was going to happen to her. This doesn’t mean someone could’ve done something to her. It was a dumb joke. And nurses are not trained to deal with the press and attention.

        Now, I do think the DJs should lose their jobs. They caused a huge mess. But they should not feel guilty about someone’s death. Nobody could’ve foreseen this. The palace and the royals should feel guilty. This is what happens when you let your whole existence be agrandized like this. Ultimately you’re fine but a family lost their mom. Was it worth it, chewing some poor nurse?

      • anne_000 says:

        I think any DJ/Shock Jock should be held accountable for the consequences of these types of ‘pranks.’ They’re done to hurt by embarrassment. The victims in this case didn’t know that they were on live radio nor would they have participated in the ongoing promotion of the recorded prank that the radio station kept publicizing. In the US, I think the law is that one would have to get a waiver afterwards in order to air the ‘prank’ or at least let the ‘victim’ know that they are live on air or is being recorded.

        I think this is a form of bullying when the victims don’t have a choice in the public humiliation. In this case, the DJs/radio station knew that there would be someone hurt whether personally and/or professionally. And the nurse had no way or choice to stop these DJs from making this ‘prank’ be known worldwide. She had no choice in whether it aired or not. And no one knows what would be the final straw that broke the camel’s back in someone’s life. In this case, this was it. Some people are more fragile. This is why the people who are pranked should be given a choice on whether they want such a segment aired or not.

        The only way that I would think would lesson the DJs/radio station’s responsibility in all of this would be if that nurse receptionist had signed a waiver allowing for this ‘prank’ to be aired. Then all become fully knowledgeable and responsible for each of their participation in this.

      • Dena says:

        @Lin234 said:

        Meaning, she was originally from India, and the Asian culture tends to place great importance and are very serious regarding their work life. What one culture sees as little importance can be seen as life and death in another culture. Shame, humiliation at work could have distressed her enough to commit suicide.

        Dena says: I had been thinking along those same lines too. My heart goes out for the nurse and her family. My first thought was that althougth I didn’t know/haven’t known the feelings and thoughts that drove her to suicide, it’s a damn shame that this type of BS did it. In the scheme of things, women all over the world (low and high prestige have babies). Therefore, the event (in and of itself) was not worth this woman’s life IMO. It wasn’t worth it to leave her kids and family. And like you, I bet the hospital came down on her like a tone of bricks. It’s just a shame.

    • Sachi says:

      One correction, though:

      Princess Letizia has NEVER worn Chanel. NEVER. Show me one photo of her wearing a Chanel outfit. It’s not a fact that she wears Chanel. It’s a complete lie and it’s absurd to use her as an analogy to Marie-Antoinette when there are other Princesses who actually fit the bill. Letizia is even criticized for only wearing cheap clothes all the time and “not looking the part of a Princess”, meaning expensive clothes and jewelry…

      Letizia wore an Armani suit in 2003, something she paid for out of her own pocket, and was criticized by the press for being extravagant. She’s never worn the suit since.

      She’s the only Princess who has the lowest budget when it comes to clothes. The others all wear Elie Saab, Dior, Chanel, Valentino, Pucci, McQueen, etc.

      The most expensive thing Letizia has worn is probably the Armani suit. She mostly wears inexpensive Spanish brands like Mango and ZARA nowadays. She’s only worn Felipe Varela to other royal weddings since 2004, and he’s far from being “couture”. There are more Spanish brands like Lorenzo Caprile that can be described as couture, but not Varela. She hasn’t worn foreign designers since she became Princess, except Hugo Boss on rare occasions, and even that brand isn’t that expensive.

      In terms of the economic crisis in Spain, the entire Spanish royal family asked for their annual income to be frozen and not be given since 2009. Last year they even asked that the money be reduced. They are the cheapest to maintain, only about 11 million euros compared to other royal families that cost upwards of 30 million euros. They are the 2nd busiest (next to the Windsors) when it comes to royal duties: Letizia does about 250 events a year, the highest among the other future Queens in Europe.

      I agree with you that royals are being put in such a high pedestal, but IMO it would be better if you actually have the correct information before trying to accuse one of the more hardworking royals, like Letizia, as being frivolous and insensitive to the economic situation in Spain.

      • Val says:

        You need to check your sources, S. Letizia does wear very expensive clothes and she wore CHANEL this year for a wedding of a fellow “royal”. PROOF:

        Is this ok? A $5,000 suit when Spain is broke? When MILLIONS are unemployed? Is this right? You know what this shows? A total disregard and disconnection to what is happening to her people and her country. She should not be attending lavish weddings, period. Especially not wearing Chanel. People are jumping out of buildings because they’re being evicted. And she’s strutting in couture with a big smile on her face, who’s paying for this crap? Those people. This is just an example of why the monarchy needs to be completely abolished. Now a woman was driven to suicide because she was made to feel worried sick over someone who shouldn’t even be there, holding a title in the year of 2012. Kate was never in danger with that staff of security. A life is lost and everyone who agrandizes these idiots is to blame. Not a prank call.

      • Sachi says:

        That is a Felipe Varela outfit. Not Chanel. Please stop insisting it is because the info is all over the internet and you are wrong.

        I think you need to re-examine where you’re getting your false information from, because Letizia has never worn Chanel to any other royal wedding, let alone worn Chanel in 8 years of being a Princess.

        The royal family of Spain hasn’t hosted a gala dinner for a State Visit since 2010. That means no jewelry, tiaras, and gowns display for 2 years now.

        How is Letizia insensitive to the plight of the Spaniards? I’ve given you information I gleamed from Spanish news sources themselves about the royals curbing their lifestyle since 2009, not some photos of a Princess wearing a suit that looks expensive and then branding it Chanel when it is NOT. A wedding is a happy event. Should she have scowled and frowned and thrown a fit? Going to royal weddings is as much a part of royal duties as is representing the country to Official visits abroad.

        I’ve heard many things said about Letizia but being like Marie-Antoinette is a first. You can’t call someone who continuously wear cheap clothes like ZARA and Mango to official events “Marie-Antoinette”, especially when the info is readily available on the internet. She rarely even wears jewelry anymore. She looks like any other woman working in an office, and that has attracted criticisms from royal watchers who only expect royals to wear fancy clothes all the time.

        The economic situation in Spain is not Letizia’s fault. Neither has she contributed to it or thumbed her nose at it. If you actually read my post, you’d see that the royal family as a whole has taken measures to do their part in order to show that they’re far from being oblivious to the economic situation in Spain.

        Again, please look for correct information before going after Letizia. There are other Princesses who are more frivolous and extravagant than her. I don’t like royals as whole, but I do respect Letizia, her work ethic, and her willingness to adapt to what is expected of her. Since 2004, she has changed her style a lot to suit the public and media’s expectations.

        The Queen and Infanta Elena of Spain are the ones who wear couture most of the time. Queen Sofia wears Oscar de la Renta and Valentino, and Elena often wears Chanel and Dior (most were gifts from her ex-husband) but never Letizia. She’d have been crucified by the press a long time ago if she even dared.

    • lin234 says:

      Oh, I don’t have any issue with your points. I agree with them. I just don’t see the nurse as sick because she committed suicide over this prank.

      I feel bad for the DJ’s in a way. I’ve never listened to Howard Stern but hasn’t he said or played worse jokes than this? This would have been funny and not seen as a big deal if someone hadn’t lost their life over their actions. I think they were just trying to be funny and bring in the ratings that turned into a nightmare for everyone involved.

      Also, NO ONE should lose their life over someone as worthless as Kate. The baby is her biggest achievement in life besides marrying Will. It’s a shame someone who has helped so many people lost her life over this prank. Especially over someone who could give a shit about the little people.

      • Val says:

        Exactly!! These guys should not be feeling like they have blood on their hands. It was a stupid joke. NOBODY could’ve foreseen this tragedy. I mean, do people know the ammount of security around the royals? Nothing could’ve happened to Kate as a result of this call, just like nothing happened to Harry in Afganistan. And yes, Kate is useless and completely worthless. At least Harry is in the military. “She’s carrying the heir!” The heir to what? What throne? They’re not ruling anymore, their titles mean nothing. And they’re not above anyone anymore. Wake up, people. Stop feeing that machine They are not above you. Kate did nothing before Will and does nothing still. At least Diana did a ton of charity work. She got involved, right there with the people. And she had style and grace that people admired. I get why people love her. But kate? Kate is boring and useless and comes from a family of social climbers like Anne Boleynn’s family. Ultimately Diana left the monarchy because even she knew what a fraud they are and when she did she felt free and happy.

        A poor nurse taking her life because oh, no! She passed a call to a radio station and we found out that GASP! *~Duchess Kate was doing better. Complete and utter bullsh*t. Kate is fine at home and a family will never be the same because we are supposed to think these people are super important and worth losing your job over.

  24. Chatcat says:

    @berry. I understand completely, you have had a monarchy (not your choice) for what is probably 1000+ years. I mean the USA was founded on the principals NOT to have that for the exact reasons you claim. But it is part of the fabric of your country and your history, like it or not, and I still don’t understand all the hate and jealousy against these people simply because of whose womb they came out of. No matter what they try to do or not to do they get smashed, bashed, maligned and drug thru the mud. She says she doesn’t want to employ a full time nanny and she is getting cyber bitch slapped for it. I know plenty of folks here in the US, who have full time babysitters/housekeepers…some two working couple and others one working couple? I just can’t wrap my head around all the hate.

    • LAK says:

      Perhaps you should go research how the different royals are treated. To americans ie you, perhaps you only see the wales and the yorks but there are more royals, doing what is requested of them and respected.

      The Kents, the Gloucesters, Princess Royal, the Wessexes, Yorks, the Wales, etc all work, whatever the descriptor of that work is, except the Cambridges. All receive some form of public welfare whether it’s through housing, security, tax rebate etc for that work. The Cambridges are the only ones who don’t work, but employ spin doctors to give the perception that they do. And that is entirely the problem. How many times have we been told that William is very busy with his ‘full time’ RAF career that he can’t carry on his royal duties only to find that he has clocked so few hours that he is in danger of losing his licence. Do you know what the minimum requirement is to maintain a flying licence for the RAF? It’s 15hrs per month. It begs the question, if he isn’t at the RAF and he isn’t doing his duties, what is he doing?

      And why am I paying taxes to maintain him? The other royals do enough to justify their receipt of my tax money and in some cases go further than is required of them and are rightly respected eg Anne.

      • Chatcat says:

        Lak…I hear you and I don’t disagree, but my point is that I assume the direct line of the monarchy has been this way since the beginning to some degree. Not that I agree, but it is your country’s system and why has it not been changed? I am not looking for an answer to that, but rather saying I understand the aggrevation to the taxpayer but I don’t understand the hate. Did people hate Diana this much? Did they malign her and Prince Charles? It seems to me here in the states, that I don’t remember THAT being the case but sure as sh-t Kate and Will get heaped on. And besides, which want of us wouldn’t want to be a Duchess or Princess? LOL

      • Val says:

        Very well said LAK. It’s amazing to me how supportive some people are of the royals, still. Do some thinking, everyone. It’s an old concept that needs to be thrown out the window already. The world can’t afford supporting them. This tragedy just shows how overinvested people are about someone who ultimately just TAKES and gives nothing to their people. Enough is enough. These are nothing but freeloading jerks who think GOD put them where they are and are entitled to wealth and fame just because they were born. If that is the case then embrace your duties too! Your responsabilities, your obligations. What does Will do? He takes but does absolutely nothing. Don’t support that, people. Globe trotting is not being embassadors to Britain. It’s building the same PR machine to make people think the royals work and do something for their country. They do not. And the way the press in Britain is banned from talking about it just shows how they want to control everyone into buying this concept still. Where’s the freedom of press?

        This tragedy angers me so much because if this had been anyone else, another celebrity, nobody would’ve died. But oh no! It was Douchess Kate. Eff OFF.

      • andy says:

        “This tragedy angers me so much because if this had been anyone else, another celebrity, nobody would’ve died. But oh no! It was Douchess Kate. Eff OFF.”

        Are you seriously blaming Kate for this tragedy?

        If this had been another celebrity, nobody would’ve died.

        Please explain how you came to this conclusion, because it doesn’t make sense to me.

      • Angelic 20 says:

        Chat cat,

        My apologies for jumping in a conversation between you and lak. lak is one of the most eloquent commentators here and I am sure she will reply to you again but let me point out that lak said all other royals work for the money they receive and that is why they are respected and loved, example Diana, Anne, Queen,DOE etc while Kate and William do not work and enjoy absolutely all the privileges of a royal and that is why they are criticised not hated. Uk citizens have a right to judge and criticise royals like you have with your president, tha doesn’t make you a hater or jealous. There is a big difference in criticizing your public figures and being accused of hating or being jealous because that is just name calling to people who don’t agree with you or don’t like a particular person that you seems to do. I hope you understand what I am trying to say because I am so tiered of being branded as a jealous or a hate for not liking W&K

      • Chatcat says:

        OK, so what work did Prince Charles and Diana do that Will & Kate are not doing that gets them this much venom? What should they be doing that they are not? Are there a specific set of duties and functions assigned to this Duke and Duchess that other royals don’t have?

        Actually, I just don’t understand the “personal hate”. Maybe I have just misinterpreted it all. It isn’t that people dislike/envy Will and Kate the people but the position of Duke and Duchess of Cambridge…whoever they would be?

      • LAK says:

        @Chatcat – Whether or not the system was one way, it has been moving forward in a way that has made it transparent and made ALL public figures accountable to the people. Charles and Diana were criticised. Charles still gets criticised, he has been called everything from jug ears to plant botherer to out of touch etc. Not to mention the continous breach of their privacy. 1992 was a particularly bad year for the royals when it became a national outcry that they STILL weren’t paying any form of taxes AT ALL. Now they do, but with rebates. Another example is the royal yacht taken away from them because it wasn’t cost effective for public to pay for it. The royals as a whole have to justify their continued public role as well as the money, otherwise what’s the point of them. That’s why we are invited to celebrate things like their weddings with them. In this day and age, we ask for value for money which WK aren’t giving. I can be magnanimous about their private time, but not if they continually lie about it thus abusing our goodwill to do as they like. We don’t live in ye old times anymore.

        As to whether I would want to be a duchess or princess, the Windsors aren’t the only aristocrats with those titles or wealth, in Britain or rest of the world. Plenty of them gadding about. With more money and can do whatever the hell they want, who possess more royal blood than the Windsors. From that perspective I would go after one of those ducal titles because they don’t owe the public a thing unlike the Windsors who do.

    • spinner says:

      @ chatcat

      I totally agree with you.

      • Another K says:

        I agree with Chatcat as well. I really enjoy reading this site because of all the Brits that comment but, being British, they are obviously going to take this much more seriously than we in the US do. Just my opinion, and I’m going to take hell for it, but I think the problem might possibly be that Kate is not an aristocrat or whatever they call their uppa uppa class. When the other royals marry Mr. or Ms. Middle Class, it’s not a worry because they really are not important cogs in the royalty wheel. When William marries someone “outside” so to speak, it cuts too close. Although I personally feel that this monarchy will end when the present Queen passes away, right now Kate is in line to be the Queen to William’s King and since she is not from a titled family, I feel that many taxpayers in Great Britain are thinking along the lines of “Why her? Who does she think she is? She doesn’t deserve to be in her position. She’s nothing special.” Diana was a Spencer, born a member of the accepted group. Kate is not. Kate broke into the Queen Club probably by sheer personality and pleasing looks (although several commenters here think her mother is a master of manipulation). Many people cannot forgive Kate for being so “normal,” if you catch my drift, and so are more than ready to believe all the ridiculous drivel that is put out on the internet and by the grocery store magazines.

        Just an opinion.

      • Angelic 20 says:

        Another K

        That is is a very stereo type opinion about brits, I am not a snob who don’t like Kate because she is not aristocratic and got William. I actually dislike him more then her and used to like her so much when they graduated from university. But then her doing nothing started and I realised the educated pretty girl that I like have only one ambition and that is marrying well,i decided to give her another chance after marriage but still she have me nothing to like about her. People have mentioned many times why they don’t like and yet you assumed it is because of social status but the fact is it’s not. As far as liking someone for their aristocratic status is concerned it’s Kate and pippa who are not friends with or hang out with anybody who is upper class, look at all the weddings they attend they are all aristocratic weddings. So if you are going to accuse people of being snob then maybe you should look a little closer to Kate and her family them other who don’t like her because of her lack of work ethics, personality, for lying and being entitled and spoiled.

      • Another K says:

        @Angelic – I wasn’t aware that I was accusing anyone of anything. Obviously, this is a very sensitive subject for you. We can agree to disagree.

    • Mich says:

      To add to LAK’s response, Charles and Diana worked incredibly hard to serve the people. Despite their many (many) flaws, no-one ever doubted their commitment to crown and country.

      Statements that come out of William’s mouth and from close “sources”, on the other hand, make it clear that he really resents the impositions of his position. He loves the perks (making his own work schedule, landing RAF helicopters on his girlfriend’s lawn, living in palaces, etc.) but not the duty aspects.

      Diana didn’t earn the title “The People’s Princess” by acting like a put-upon prat.

  25. LAK says:

    Has anyone noticed that the entire article is riddled with INTENSIONS??!!!

    Everything about the future is an intention and ground work for nothing to happen at all. Par of the course really for these two.

    Personally, I wait to see what ACTUALLY HAPPENS before I applaud.

  26. Chatcat says:


    “and when that job is finished in 4 years time, he won’t receive a penny of taxpayers’ money.” That is an incorrect/false statement. Every single President leaving office receives transistion funds, guaranteed medical and dental benefits for themselves and their immediate family FOR LIFE, and 30 months of travel and office rental space paid in full…ALL FUNDED BY US TAX PAYER DOLLARS. That is in the immediate after leaving office. That doesn’t include full pension, death benefits and fully paid funeral expense FUNDED BY US TAXPAYER DOLLARS.

    So I’m not saying you were lying when you said ‘he won’t receive a penny of taxpayers’ money’ you are simply misinformed.

    • Christina says:

      Fair enough. But those are still relatively trivial expenses compared to the vast amounts the British tax payers shell out to legions of ‘royals’ whose only ‘achievement’ was, quite frankly, to emerge from the ‘right’ birth canal.

      In just about every country, retired heads of government receive some funding, even when out of office. The same is true in the UK, so British tax-payers have to fund ex-PMs for life, in addition to funding the lavish lifestyle of the ‘royals’. It’s not like one is a substitute for the other, which is the impression your posts seem to be trying to give.

  27. Merritt says:

    I have no doubt that there will be nannies. And several of them.

    However I also think these two will be hands-on parents. Kate comes from a close family. I see no reason to doubt that she would want that same closeness to her own children.

  28. JL says:

    Ok why are people sop down on nannies when most people drop thier kids at daycare for about 10 hours a day?
    I’d have a nanny in a heartbeat and I’d own up to it too. My issue is trying to play the “common man” card when we all know it’s not so.
    Just say, we’re getting a nanny, we have many obligations and this allows the child to go with us rather than be shuffled to daycare.

  29. Mrs.Krabapple says:

    What’s wrong with a full-time nanny? Can you imagine how badly the kids would have turned out if that racist s.o.b. Prince Phillip had actually raised his kids himself? As much as I dislike the current 2nd-generation of royals, they COULD have turned out much, much worse. I think the nannies must have done a pretty good job raising Ann and her brothers.

    I don’t think William is like Phillip. But still, he and Kate aren’t exactly perfect role models for a future monarch – they both come across as spoiled, self-entitled, lazy (and not too bright), freeloaders. Whatever work ethic the Queen has seems to have been watered down through each generation. Maybe a full-time nanny would be good thing for William’s heir?

    • Jo 'Mama' Besser says:

      Re: Queenie’s Consort:

      I just called to say I love you. I love sumptuous idolatry as much as the next goldigger but for all of the perks I still can’t understand why any women would want to marry into the family. I don’t know if I could be trusted to single-handedly force a family tree to fork while enduring Philip’s ‘The jokes are only racist because you proles can’t handle my live wire acerbic wit’ nonsense. No, we get it, but I suppose we fundamentally part on our personal definitions of a ‘joke’.

      Behold: Jokes are funny.

      Understand? Or maybe he doesn’t understand my point of view because no one in my immediate of extended family have ever consorted with Nazis. If any of the younger set are whiny, they learned it from this dude who hasn’t stopped bitching about his gilded gelded position in lo, these 60 years.

      But at least he gets some work done for all of his odious comments, Wills hasn’t got a cousin to stand on. There’s no reason as to why he shouldn’t come into his own, so why not let positive deeds silence critical words? He’s had a ton of good will bestowed upon him because the traumas of his boyhood and I do think that should he try to build it up again he can get it back.

  30. LooseSeal says:

    Good lord, the comments today are all TL;DR.

  31. rae says:

    i love coming on here and reading all the drama. Every time i read articles on prince william and kate on here i make sure to make myself a snack. lol

  32. Belle says:

    Why does William have to cancel any of his engagements again? Sorry, I’m not getting it. Who wants someone around when they are sick?? Yes, it is helpful to have someone to prepare some sort of food for you to attempt to eat… or wait on you a bit, but Kate has plenty of people who can do this. Yes, it is nice to have your hubby there to try to be encouraging and comforting, but NOT all the time! My first pregnancy was the worst of the two I had… and while it was nice when my husband was able to ‘be around’, I certainly didn’t want him sitting there watching me be sick, or trying to talk to me… or touching me! LOL

    Second pregnancy, also with HG, but not quite as bad. My husband has to travel for his job, and this was more difficult on me the second time around, but mainly because I had another child to care for. I would have wanted my husband around 24/7 for that reason alone, if I had my way… but not to comfort me and care for me… rather to take care of our firstborn!

    So, while I can see William checking in on Kate… and spending more lengthy visits with her if/when she is up to it, there is no way he can’t manage his rather light schedule of royal ‘duties’. Kate has plenty of people to wait on her, if she needs it… and if she is still very sick, then I can’t imagine her wanting William hovering (which he doesn’t seem the type to do anyway).

    Seriously, this seems… odd. If his schedule were taking him on lengthy trips, I would understand. But, a party here and there? Please. Definite PR spin. Either they are trying to paint Wills as the most loving, caring, sympathetic husband on the planet… or want to be sure the public doesn’t forget how horribly ill Kate is… or both.

  33. Angelic 20 says:

    Chat cat
    this will be my last comment for today, so I hope you understand what I am trying to say. Media, palace,wk pr always try to make then popular as normal hard working, frugal couple. Kate is the frugal, charitable, hard working house wife and William is araf pilot who can’t do many public engagements because of his raf job while Kate is seen doing shopping and other things in London regularly. The fact is they are not normal, she is not frugal, he is close to lo because he has not even covered his minimum flying hours. There is no specific duties assigned to any rf member but they all do hundreds of engagements while these two do bare minimum engagements while enjoying all the perks of being a royal . Months age bbc was trying to write a article about how the charities Kate is supporting has changed since her involvement and the person running the charity said clearly that there is no increase in funding and it is getting really difficult to run the charity. Another example the hospital where Kate made her first speech said on their website that it will need some millions in donations to run their services, Kate’s job was to spread awareness, help them raise fund, increase their profile, make them visible and a talking topic in media and she failed in all these aspects (i am taking about before the pregnancy). Their pr image is a lie, they do bare minimum engagements and they fail to successfully support and raise awareness for their charities and yet media loves them and force their sugary drivel on us. Look at Harry, he is a younger royal like William, he has made documentaries for his military charities, raised awareness for them while carrying out his royal duties and army career and yet media treats him like crap. what I don’t understand is why media worship these 2 even though they do bare minimum were caught lying about working when they were actually vacationing. I don’t personally hate neither one of them nor the duke and duchess of Cambridge but imo they are spoiled, liars, lazy, entitled and the most overrated couple in the world and I have explained my reasons behind my opinions.

    • BeccaZ says:

      “Months age bbc was trying to write a article about how the charities Kate is supporting has changed since her involvement and the person running the charity said clearly that there is no increase in funding and it is getting really difficult to run the charity.”

      Now this irritates me. Angelic 20, where did you see this? I tried to google it but found nothing. I’d like to read about it if there’s a link.

      I don’t think William is the man Diana wanted him to be. I kind of wonder if Charles is somewhat fine with it because it makes him and his own future as king look better? Those royals, they’re not above going after each other in their own sly, pr ways.

    • Chatcat says:

      Angelic…your explanation is enough for me. I may not totally get it but I do appreciate that you have put a lot of thought and conviction of your feelings into this. That is what I was trying to get at in people. What is it that drives the individuals who malign Kate & Will to do so.

      None of us should ever worship anybody…we are all flawed in degrees and if that is what happens with this couple, particulary in the media, well then it is sad. But it is also sad that people worship the Kardashians, Hiltons, RiRi’s etc…I mean, they are just entertainers non? They aren’t making a real positive difference in people’s lives everyday are they? But people worship and idolize for all the wrong reasons. Not me, I just like to gossip about it all! :)

  34. Kat says:

    Gosh, if you can afford a nanny, just take the nanny. Babies are such hard work.

  35. flower says:

    If I had HG, I’d want the hubby well out of the way to let me get on with the puking, after all what can he do about it, he’s not a medical professional. He’s shown he’s sympathetic by spending most of the 3 days with her at the hospital. Go and do your job Wills, Kate is surrounded by people in London, family and staff so no need for him to hover about. Or maybe Kate is guilting William into holding her hand 24/7. Is William turning into Katies lap dog, do I see shades of Edward and Wallis Simpson.

    • jess says:

      when i’m sick, i’d much rather have my significant other around to comfort me than a bunch of random palace aides.

      • flower says:

        Each to his own Jess, I’m the kind of person who would rather visitors stay away if I’m in hospital, pay a visit when I get home if you like but leave me alone when I’m sick. I’m sure her mother and/or sister are there with her or would jump right in if asked, plus the random palace aids are nothing of the sort they are her staff, though she pretends not to have any, there basic job in life is to fetch and carry for her. Kensington Palace isn’t a real Palace like Bucking Palace with hundreds of faceless staff, its just a series of smallish houses and large appartments in a gated compound. There was an article just the otherday in a newspaper describing them as friends, the article also oddly mentioned she has no close female friends other than her sister, which I thought was an interesting statement.

        William has a job to do, with many people depending on him to come through, these cancelled jobs are in London, he would only be gone from her side for a matter of hours but he cannot manage to drag himself away for a brief charity event very, very odd. Not to mention he has been totally skiving on his Helicopter Rescue job since June.

        Kate gets a free pass for the duration because she is very ill but William does not, to whom much is given much is expected.

  36. the original liv says:

    no full time nannies? sure, like they don’t have any help in that little “cottage” up there in angsley (oh, but they do have household staff there). the whole thing reminds me of my cousin. she recently had a daughter (who’s a cutie and will turn 2 in february). anyways, my cousin is working on her masters and she is constantly asking me for help, even though our fields of study are very different. and in the past, i’ve helped her A LOT – it got to the point where i couldn’t do it anymore because i felt like she was just taking advantage. one of her excuses for not having time was that she had to take care of her daughter, to which i pointed out that she has help, a lot of it actually. she informed me that she didn’t employ a nanny. the thing is though, she does have a housekeeper and she lives next door to her parents who have three more housekeepers as well as three drivers. so it’s not like she doesn’t have any help, even though she likes to tell everyone that she doesn’t have a nanny. it’s not like she has to cook, clean, go the store, etc. last summer, while i was visiting some family, i was staying at uncle’s house (my cousin’s dad) and saw first hand how one of the housekeeper was for all intent and purposes was my cousin’s daughter’s nanny despite not being called a nanny. i just didn’t want to be the bitch who pointed that out. in addition, during my visit, my cousin was suppose to go visit her in-laws during my visit, but she cancel (not to spend time with me or my sister during our visit or anything like that) because one of her in-laws’ housekeeper was sick (the housekeeper was the one that took care of my cousin’s daughter while they’re at the in-laws’). so yeah, i’m sure wk won’t have a nanny, just like my cousin doesn’t have nanny. i don’t get what’s so bad about having a nanny? i had one when i was younger. my sister had one as well. in addition, my grandma (and various aunts) helped raised me as well. but my parents were still hands-on. having a nanny, babysitter, or help isn’t a bad thing.

  37. Mrs.Krabapple says:

    Re: the “jealousy” claims, I am a critic of William and Kate, and I’m not jealous. Yes, they have more money than I do, but I’m not automatically jealous of every one who is that wealthy. I think their lifestyle is difficult, and I would never change places with Kate. My own husband is great guy, who doesn’t treat me like a doormat. My in-laws don’t dictate my life, including when/how many children I am to have. They don’t try to marginalize my family out of my life or look down on them as not good enough. I control my own life, and the fact that I don’t have an eating disorder demonstrates that I am happier than Kate.

    That doesn’t mean I have to blindly support them. William is lazy, and LIED to the public about how much he works. Remember when his spokesperson said he couldn’t attend all of the Paralympics because of his RAF duties? Turns out he was vacationing in France. Remember when Kate made a PLANNED visit to a tea shop and didn’t prepare AT ALL? (“Can you, . . . um . . . test the, um . . . smell of the tea . . . by smelling it?”). Yet, their public relations machine thinks we will admire them because they dress nicely. That is insulting to the rest of us, expecting us to be as dumb and as shallow as William and Kate. It’s not easy to like people who think you are as dumb, shallow, and lazy, as they are.

    But back to the “jealous” aspect. I think it’s the very people who claim others are jealous that are the ones who fantasize about being Kate, or about being noticed by William or Kate. That’s why they don’t like criticism, because to criticize Kate or William is to criticize their own fantasy.

    Sorry, but there are much better people for me to fantasize about.

  38. Mrs.Krabapple says:

    Oh, and by the way, the Queen has much more power and public support than William will ever have, and I don’t criticize her (out of supposed jealousy). That’s because the Queen is a hard worker, dedicated to her duty, and gives back, or tries to give back, as much to her country as she can.

    Crown Princess Victoria will have more power than Kate will ever have. Victoria never has to worry about losing her royal status the way Kate does, because SHE will be the sovereign, not just a spouse. Yet, I don’t criticize Victoria. That’s because she is well educated, and takes her duties serious, and because she seems like a genuinely caring person who married for love and not position.

    The dislike of Kate has nothing to do with her title, money, or whatever people think I’m jealous of.

  39. Zombie Shortcake says:

    I bet they don’t skip Xmas with the Queen, unless Kate is barfing her guts out. I remember reading some story that Diana stood her and the other Royals up for dinner once and the Queen’s face starting twitching uncontrollably or something because apparently no one was ever a no show to dinner before unless they were very ill or very strange. Something like that. Like it was totally taboo.

    Found the link, it was lunch at Balmoral, not dinner