Duchess Kate ‘will go back to her public duties in a very short time’: really?

As reported and predicted, Duchess Kate, Prince William and Baby George left London yesterday for Berkshire, where they will spend the rest of the summer (probably). That was always the plan, from what I can tell. Months before Kate gave birth, The Mail and other UK papers reported that she and the baby (and William, for a time) would spend the summer at Kate’s parents’ home, partly because the $1 million renovation on their Kensington Palace apartment isn’t finished yet, and partly because Kate wants to be around her mom after she gave birth. The only surprise (for me) was how quickly the family decamped from London. The Queen came by to visit HRH Prince George Alexander Louis for about 30 minutes, then Will, Kate and George were like “smell ya later!” an hour later. You can see a photo of their London exit here.

Also as predicted, William is taking two weeks of paternity leave from the RAF. What he does after the paternity leave is what’s in the air. I figured by now that William would have made a formal announcement either way if he was going to stay in the RAF after his contract is up (in September I think), and it’s believed that William has already made a decision not to stay in Wales. So, what else is going on?

After a busy Wednesday that included a visit from his paternal great-grandmother, the Queen, and a road trip to the Bucklebury home of his maternal grandparents, the Middletons, William and Kate’s new arrival can now focus on his next official duty: becoming the center of attention for his parents.

“There’ll be a little bit of time when they get to know the baby. A little bit of downtime,” an aide tells PEOPLE.

But the new mom and dad aren’t facing their new roles alone – Pippa Middleton and boyfriend Nico Jackson have already been to Kensington Palace to help take care of the newborn and help the Duke and Duchess settle in, the aide adds.

And while there is currently no nanny in the household (a housekeeper and an orderly who helps with driving and general duties are the only domestic staff), “[Their] families will help them and the excellent advice they’ve had at the hospital,” a royal source says.

But a friend says that will likely change. “It goes with the territory as it’ll be a very short time before [Kate] goes back to her public duties,” a friend tells PEOPLE.

Meanwhile, the couple have asked the public, in lieu of gifts, to donate to the charity of the hospital where Baby Cambridge was born.

In a message on their website, the Duke and Duchess thank well-wishers for their generosity and suggest “you could look to support Imperial College Healthcare Charity … [helping] women, their newborn babies and young families from London, across the U.K. and beyond to benefit from the latest research to ensure they receive the best possible care.”

[From People]

“It goes with the territory as it’ll be a very short time before [Kate] goes back to her public duties.” Yeah. I’ll believe it when I see it. That’s not really shade, by the way. I think Kate should take the summer and just chill out with the baby. But I just think that it’s going to be a long time before Kate picks up her “royal duties” and a public schedule again.

As for HRH Prince George, formerly Baby Crumpets (I’m sad to see that name go!), royal sources are trying to tamp down some expectations/rumors/whatever about the name. I guess people heard the name and thought, “Oh, he’ll be King George VII, obviously, and that’s why they named him that.” Which is exactly why they did name him that, only now the sources are saying not so fast! A source tells Us Weekly, “Don’t read into [the names] too much. They are not meant to be symbolic; they are just names the couple like.” Um, why is this a thing? I don’t understand why it would be ZOMG scandalous for people to think that Will and Kate named their baby significant names pertaining to William’s family. What’s the big deal?

Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet.

 

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

96 Responses to “Duchess Kate ‘will go back to her public duties in a very short time’: really?”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Rux says:

    Uhhhhh what “duties”, vacation?

  2. blue marie says:

    which means, she will be seen shopping in just a few short weeks..

  3. DanaG says:

    I think Diana was back at work about 6 weeks after William everyone talked about how thin she was again already. Kate could do a royal duty in 6 to 8 weeks neither her or William are fulltime workers for the Royal Family with her baby she won’t be doing too many.Of course the names are all from his side he is a future King there are rules. The next one should do a little better. I do like George though.

  4. Shelley says:

    Shade must be thrown. Kate is lazy…always has been. I will not hold my breath for her to do something meaningful with her life and taxpayer’s money.
    In other news….Wills can still get it. Every time I look at him I see the teenage him, so beautiful and carefree *sigh*

  5. Anna says:

    SIGH. I don’t know why they pay their PR people. Kate totally could have taken a few months to chill out, no one would have expected different. But now that they are pushing the ‘she’ll go back to work so soon’ angle, they’ve SET EXPECTATIONS. So if for some reason she doesn’t go back to engagements soon – or soon enough, or frequently enough – it will be a letdown and a side-eye to her. Sigh. Sometimes I feel like I should hand those people my business card ;-)

    • T.fanty says:

      We should start a CB image consultant service. They all need us.

      And side eye to the “no nanny” bit.

    • garvels says:

      I agree,they should fire their PR people. Their PR team’s endless attempts to convey that these two are just a modern average couple are ridiculous and actually somewhat insulting to the average person. They are royal billionaires who will never want for anything…to continually push that they live modestly without any creature comforts always backfires. They are royal and they are incredibly wealthy,so they should own it!

      • Anna says:

        Well, I don’t know if they COULD win this one. It’s delicate (and even my PR genius might be stumped). We’d deride them for being posh and snobby is they rode around in Bentleys followed by a dozen staff, esp bc they receive public money. At the same time, even if they really do like to do their own grocery shopping/ cooking/ cleaning (before the baby), we never ‘buy it’ because they still have all that money and privilege.

      • garvels says:

        Anna-You don’t have to be snobby to be real. They just need to stop their people from promoting and pushing the image that Kate is an ambitious civil servant and that they live their lives as modestly as everyone else. That’s all.

      • m says:

        Garvels… I pretty much agree. But let’s take it one further, do they not believe in their own “Divine Right of Kings”? If they truly believe that they are chosen to lead and have their rule on god’s authority then they are nothing like the rest of us and should not try.

        This is my problem with Prince William, he seems so unwilling to take on his responsibility. And he picked a wife without any ambition which only makes him look worse. That said, she needs time with the baby… and not just 6 weeks.

      • Anna says:

        @Garvels –

        I really dont think anyone, at least among Euro royals, really believes that. But then again, who knows how corruptive that upbringing might have been.

      • Thinker says:

        Yeah, it was a bad idea for the Palace to announce that Kate would be back to “work” shortly. Let her bask in her glory right now, she’s just had the hardest week of her life, I am sure.

        Setting expectations for a quick return to public life are 1.) Probably False Hopes, 2.) Unnecessary, 3.) Unhelpful.

      • Kitten Mittens says:

        Anna
        I lived over there during that newlywed time and it was only for photo ops. Stories would get released how Kate was so domestic yet she was physically seen in london shopping and then straight to her parents home. I saw her on a number of occasions shopping with men and women carrying bags while she walked with 2 older women several strides ahead.
        The 2 grocery store photo ops and the stories or Kate cooking for william were set up since she was always seen at her parent’s.

  6. MissMary says:

    Work as in…photo ops? Making an appearance at a royal event/charity function where all she needs to do is lend face time?

    I don’t hate the woman but I have a hard time calling photo ops and walking around an event “work”. If she was running a charity or heavily involved with projects, maybe I’d be less catty about it.

    • Merritt says:

      How is that any different than what other royals do? Most of their work seems to be photo-ops and visiting their charities, and talking to those served by the charity.

      • Anna says:

        The difference is that those other royals do several appearances per week, every week (the Spanish, Dutch, Danish, Belgian, Norwegian etc). When Kate attended 4 public events in one month, everyone saw it as a windfall. More ‘experienced’ young royals actually chair some organizations or forums, speak at conferences. I think Prince Charles carried out something like 600 official engagements in 2012, while Will struggled to break 100, despite his RAF commitments looking increasingly sporadic.

      • Merritt says:

        @Anna

        I find it problematic when people compare her to the 1st in line or the spouse of the 1st in a line to a throne.

        Prince Charles is 1st in line. He has also been doing this his entire life. Is it fair to compare the two? No.

      • blue marie says:

        @ Merritt.. you could compare her to practically ANY other royal and she still does substantially less.

    • Lauren says:

      @Merrit we could compare her to the Princess Royal or the Queen’s cousin the Duke of Gloucester (an old man) who still manages to way more engagements on behalf of the RF. Both these individuals are no close in line to the throne as William/ Kate as a consort.

      • Merritt says:

        But again those people have been doing this for decades.

        And when she is somewhere at an event the same people who complain that she doesn’t do anything, still complain. At this point I don’t think it matters what she does, since the people who dislike her are determined to find fault with it.

      • bluhare says:

        Merrit, generally you’re right. People who don’t like her usually have nothing nice to say. (Want some entertainment? Read a “hater” blog!) However, Kate makes herself a target by saying this and that is going to happen, and then nothing or the bare minimum. She’d be much better off if their office didn’t say anything. I don’t think anyone was expecting to see her any time soon after the baby.

      • MavenTheFirst says:

        @Merritt,

        But “the others have been doing this for decades”.

        How does that excuse her? Diana was 19 and she hit the ground running. Yes, you are correct in your implication though- this grown 30 year old woman is infantilized and that’s the way she and many others like it.

      • Merritt says:

        @MaventheFirst

        I think most observers agree there was too much too soon for Diana. It was heavily implied at the time William and Kate married that they would not be full time royals yet. And that due to the backlash over how Diana was treated, the Royal family was wary of looking like they were making the same mistakes all over again.

        I suspect now that they have had a baby we will be seeing more of them, even if it is only photo-ops. The Royal family has an interest in playing the “happy young family” card for all it is worth.

  7. CarrieUK says:

    I’ve never understood this ‘lazy Kate’ thing, I’m pregnant with my first child and I plan on being a stay at home mum supported by my husband, am I lazy?

    May be I’m just soft but I like the Royal family *shrug* good for tourism

    • Lisa says:

      Are you supported by the taxpayer?

      • hadleyb says:

        I see many single mothers being supported by tax payers so I don’t get this hate on Kate.

        I’d rather support ( because there is just no way around it when you pay taxes, you are supporting, helping, someone) a classy looking lady like Kate than so many in my state who refuse to get married to get aid, or keep having kids to never go back to work.

      • Mitch Buchanan Rocks! says:

        It is interesting that we used to be citizens of our countries and now we are ‘taxpayers’ which reflects that we are slaves. The tax monies are not being used to help the citizens, instead they are used to create bloated beaurocracies who create more stupid rules for us ‘taxpayers’ to follow blindly.

      • bluhare says:

        Mitch: We’re not slaves, we’re drones.

      • Merritt says:

        @hadleyb

        Marital status is not a determining factor in all types of government aid. There are plenty of married couples receiving food stamps.

        Not to mention if a woman is not married to the father of her child, there is often a reason for it. Like he is a terrible abusive person. And married or not he should still be held accountable financially. However custodial parents, usually spend more on the kids even if they are getting child support.

      • SamiHami says:

        You are conveniently forgetting how much money is generated by these two, as well. Estimates that I’ve read state that since their marriage they have generated roughly $400 million (not sure if that’s dollars or pounds), and that the new little prince/the pregnancy have likely generated another $250 million.

        So while they do get taxpayer money, they are not exactly a drain on society. Like them or not, they generate a very large amount of money for the British economy. To compare them to welfare queens is disingenuous and an entirely unfair comparison.

      • bluhare says:

        SamiHami: That’s a really valid point. However, appearances do count, and sitting around eating cake while the peasants mill around the gates isn’t very good PR.

      • MavenTheFirst says:

        @hadleyb,

        “I see many single mothers being supported by taxpayers”, so why not Kate?

        You are correct. She is living off state welfare. And this is something the wife of a millionaire should be doing???

      • Kitten Mittens says:

        Samihami
        I do not wish to make this a pile on, but i have a few questions/points….
        Kate is kind of equivalent to a welfare mother, but most welfare mother are not caught living in several palaces, while shopping every other day. That will lose you your check very quickly!
        And where are you getting these numbers about the amount of money generated since these 2 have wed? I need links please.
        I only ask because Viewing both pro and anti royal sites neither of them have those numbers. The wedding only bolstered the revenue from tourist slightly, but the UK was still far, far behind dollar-wise from many castles around the world that were easily raking in 65% more on any given year. And these castles have not housed a living royal family in some time.

        Truth is they do not cover the debt they create annually with tourism revenue. Not even within 365 days of their wedding. They live in too many tax payer supported homes and are renovating all of those abodes with tax payer pounds. The painful truth is that before they visit half those homes the never used nurseries will have to be redone for a growing toddler george at tax payers expense.

        So if the average woman on welfare did that there would be a storm in the media about abuse of the system. And please provide links that they personally bring in enough tourism to cover their end. I will seek out balanced links for my claims. In the time I do know that Neuschwanstein is amazing and does bring in more dollars annually that Buckingham.

      • Suze says:

        Where are these figures coming from?

        Estimates that I’ve read state that since their marriage they have generated roughly $400 million (not sure if that’s dollars or pounds), and that the new little prince/the pregnancy have likely generated another $250 million.

        Is this revenue from all those tourists shops that sell overpriced mugs with Will/Kate/George’s faces on them? Or tea towels? Because I find that figure a bit high.

        And last I checked, the Cambridge family wasn’t running a factory or a software firm that was pumping a bunch of investment into the economy.

        I would be very interested in where that type of estimate comes from.

    • HappyMom says:

      I totally agree with you.

      • Mary says:

        I agree with you. Here in Ireland you get six months maternity leave, with some of the maternity pay paid by the taxpayer. Nobody throws the mums here any shade for not working for that time as I’m sure looking after a new born baby is not exactly a walk in the park. I don’t have any children myself but i imagine that time is important for bonding etc.

    • Sloane Wyatt says:

      @CarrieUK – No, you’re not Lazy Mom! Maybe you are Privileged Mom or perhaps really good at Household Economics Mom. I’m glad for you to have choices.

      However, when taxes are paying your way in the world, at the very least you should use your platform to raise substantial money and to focus attention on climate change, food scarcity, overpopulation, or any other cause that contributes to those taxpayers’ well being.

    • FLORC says:

      Carrie
      What you’re missing here is she is a public servant. She gets all these perks and never has to pay a dime because she is a public servant. If she wanted to be a stay at home mom she could have married anyone else. And certainly a man that didn’t publicly humiliate her and her family for years.

      And the worst part of this whole thing is they should stop selling Kate like she wants to work. They keep printing these stories about how eager she is to work. If she does attend an appointment (because often she cancels last minute) she spends an hour, looks painfully bored and then spends the rest of the day shopping. They’re setting the bar higher than she’s willing to reach and when she fails to it’s bad for her image.
      I guess in all fairness should couldn’t even work if she wanted to. She can’t work more than William to make him look bad.

    • kibbles says:

      Are you a princess or a queen or the First Lady of a country? Is your husband a public servant making hundreds of thousands of dollars or millions of dollars from taxpayers? If not, then you are just a “commoner” who is free to do whatever you want during your free time although I do believe the world would be a better place if everyone did a little bit of charity or volunteer work from time to time. The royal family as well as the politicians who work in Washington are not the average Jane or Joe. Their privilege as well as their family members who benefit immensly from their power and wealth have a responsibility to the public to work (or at least pretend to) for the public good. I don’t even consider dressing up in designer gowns for some fancy charity dinner as real work. Most of us would gladly do this just to wear the designer clothes and have a nice evening out of the home. Kate has lived a life of luxury and set her sights on becoming royalty for all of her adult life. This is the life she chose so there is no excuse. She can still show up to a few charity events each month and have plenty of time with her baby, it’s not like she’s expected to have a 9 to 5 job like most people.

      • MademoiselleRose says:

        I agree with you totally, although as an Australian I don’t much care. They are pretty irrelevant to us even though we are part of the Commonwealth.

        The thing is though the royal family is becoming more and more irrelevant as time goes on. They seem to have consolidated since the Diana days when the royal institution became very precarious and even the Queen was worried. If the average joe perceives they do nothing, don’t contribute workwise, their position could become precarious again. Kate needs to work towards keeping them relevant, not just by spitting out heirs, otherwise there will be problems for the whole family in the future. A lot of people didn’t like Diana (not me, I thought she was great) but I don’t think they could say she was lazy, and the Queen and the Queen Mother before her worked hard all their adult lives. To my mind, Kate is very lazy and disrespecting of the position she holds. It seems to me the only hard work she’s ever done was catching and landing the future King.

        William and Kate are expecting to be King and Queen at some stage, so they do need to show they care for the people by working alongside them. Photo ops aren’t enough.

    • m says:

      I love the Royal Family. The issue is that if you are supported in a life of luxury by the working class you have to show that you are trying to earn your keep. Especially when you see the schedules of the rest of the hard-working royals compared to Kate.

    • audrey says:

      I agree with you. I think people underestimate how much tourism $$ comes in from the royals. a big part of england’s appeal is that they have royals and the palace etc

      I’m a new mom to a 4 month old so i’m sympathetic to kate. being a mom is harder than any full time job i’ve had. i’m on call 24/7. i’m always with ella or pumping milk or cleaning or cooking or reading up on parenting issues. i don’t have time to be lazy

      my free time is right now, posting on CB while typing with one hand cause the babe is sleeping on my other arm lol

      and yes, i am supported by tax payers, i’m on 1 year paid maternity leave(thank you canada!). not sure if i’ll go back to work or rely on my husband

      • Suze says:

        I’ve never bought the argument that royalty = big tourism draw at all. I have visited the UK several times, and although the palaces and the jewels at the Tower were a big reason to go, I wasn’t there to see the royals at all.

        I think you’ll find most tourists are interested in the trappings of royalty and not in the royals themeelves. Most tourists never see a living royal and don’t really care about them at all.

        The royals don’t draw in tourists by mere virtue of their existence. People go to see the palaces, the changing of the guard, the Tower, but they don’t hop over to London to see Will and Kate – or the queen.

        What the royals do well, I think, is promote their country’s industries, charities and culture, both to their own citizens and to the world at large. They can be excellent ambassadors when deployed correctly.

        But to do that they have to be out and about , making speeches, cutting ribbons, shaking hands and just being the public face of the kingdom.

        That’s why the best royal bang for the buck is when the family is all productive and working.

        Congratulations to all of you on your babies. You are all in a very different situation from any royal, you don’t have provide a service to your country (unless you are in some government/military role) to justify your lifestyle.

        I am sure that you have made the best choices for you and your families.

    • bluhare says:

      “Lazy” started way before this baby. Her visibility was so low her staff started adding internal meetings to her calendar so it looked like she did more. The rest of the royals have them too; they aren’t listed on their calendars though.

    • Ravensdaughter says:

      Bravo Carrie! What if she has post-partum depression like Diana did? Is she supposed to paste a smile on and shake hands? Her health and the baby’s health are directly linked.
      I don’t know why the Firm even bothers to justify what should be considered maternity leave-up to 6 months-unpaid- in the US due to FMLA, much longer in civilized countries. .
      I have been reading a lot about the Tudors lately, and her most important job is to provide a (preferably male) heir! The nobles would have drowned girl children like extra kittens if they could have, and we all know why Anne Boleyn lost her head!
      Kate has done her duty, Now her job is to raise a happy and healthy heir-that should take priority.
      These are modern times, but I know that the Windsors are so relieved it’s a boy and not a girl. No change from tradition now-if the baby had been a girl, uh-oh, the new succession law would have kicked in. Better still, no worrying about having-God forbid!-a Queen Diana.
      If Brits want to pay to keep the Royals, it’s their choice. My ancestors didn’t like that so much-that’s why they became colonists, then citizens of the US, and that may be partially why the Scots decide to divorce the UK in a year or so…

      • Kitten Mittens says:

        Ravensdaughter
        It’s truly not Kate’s job to raise her child. That is the job of the many nannies that we’ll find out about in time just as we did with Diana. Kate’s job was to gestate. It’s horribly archaic, but true.
        If Kate has postpartum depression I sincerely hope it’s addressed early on and she receives help.
        Yes, these are modern times, but how does that change anything? Kate is not some woman who had a career before William. She waited for him t propose and only took job tailor made to her leaving at his request.
        And many, many UK citizens do not wish to pay for their lifestyle, but it’s not easy for them to pick up their whole lives and ship off to another country that might also be in a recession.

      • dena says:

        Long post. Sorry.

        I would definitely fire her PR Team. They are a bunch of rank amateurs.

        Women all over the world work after having babies and many don’t have the luxury of long maternity or paid leaves, especially in the US. I know women who have returned to work within 2 weeks of having had a baby simply because they didn’t have the sick or vacation time and/or simply couldn’t afford the extended leave. So, Kate (of course) is in a privileged class there.

        Now here is why I would fire the PR Team. With that statement re: a quick return to work/duties, they’ve just poked a stick at a sleeping giant cause:

        #1: it raises the question of “what work / what duties” and “how strenuous were they.” That statement now reopens the conversations about her lazy azz work habits.

        #2: She only had the baby 2 or 3 days ago. Although all women aren’t privileged enough to be able to stay at home with their newborn for an extensive period of time, I don’t think it occurred to any reasonable person that she wouldn’t take a few weeks off (6-8) to “nurse” the baby, with perhaps making official visits here and there toward the 8-week mark. So now, the PR Team has spoken when they didn’t have to do so. Thereby, creating expectations where there were none.

        #3: As a continuation of #2, the more cynical-minded are probably thinking something like “Oh, there must be an upcoming vacation to Mustique (sp), etc, etc., because her PR Team seems to be making a bumbling attempt to get out front and ahead of potential bad press.”

        #4: She’s privileged. Highly privileged. As a matter of fact, in terms of privilege and deference, she is standing near or at the top of the rock in terms of British society. So far, her privilege has done most of the talking. She needs to be seen as a willing public servant (as mentioned up thread). Instead of all the false modesty-1950s sensibility sh*t that her PR Team has been spraying the lawn with they should be quietly (yet frantically) looking for some sort of “baby” or children’s charity to hook Kate’s wagon to. They haven’t succeeded yet. So, fire them. They have been fumbling is the dark for too long and the miscues have been too many.

        Most people know and accept that in terms of wealth and privilege, Kate is not one of them. Her parents made sure of that and her marriage to Prince Williams ensures it. Despite that AND because of the tradition of duty and public service set in place by the current monarch, Kate cannot blithely fall back on that privilege. She needs to find “work” and an “acceptable level of work” that’s “palatable” to the people. Children’s charities would be just the thing. Why? Because in referencing her own son and experience as a parent, she can go for the emotional ploy of playing on the near universal experience of motherhood/parenthood, etc. Most people believe in supporting children in need. Therefore, even her critics (like me) would give Work-shy Waity a pass, if only grudgingly.

        Last thing: Her PR Team (the new team) needs to do all of that quickly because she cannot drag out her maternity leave forever and the time is just going to fly by. And, in truth, she really doesn’t have the work ethic of a Princess Anne or a Prince Charles. More than likely, she will spend most of her time shopping, doing Bald Billy’s bidding, with the baby, or in her parent’s bolt hole in Buckleberry/Berkshire (or wherever live). So, the team has to find her something that keeps her in sympathy with the people.

        Unrelated: I hope she/they won’t dress the baby like Little Lord Fauntleroy.

      • Suze says:

        Exactly Dena – that PR team of hers is making her image worse, not better.

        Hopefully they’ll pick up the pace once the Cambridge ‘s settle in as a family of three. Having a cute baby in the mix can only help things.

  8. Tina says:

    Last night I was watching CNN and the show was called William and Kate Plus One, and they say Kate had an ambitious work schedule during her pregnancy.

  9. Rachel says:

    What’s the big deal about William Kate and their baby? Why do ppl care so much about them?

  10. Magarq says:

    I read somewhere that Charles is thinking about taking the name George when he begins his reign, so he would then become George VII. That may be the reason they’re squelching the talk of Prince George becoming George VII.

  11. Liberty says:

    @Anna — exactly!! Please send them your card.

    So while I am grinning at the idea of little HRH George being diapered by a stockbroker named Nico, I am already imagining Pippa’s next book: How To Raise A Baby King. Which she might be writing already at a little desk out in Bucklebury… while Kate works on keeping her shopping hand muscles limber between feedings.

    Of course, to be fair, having a baby of her own might tweak Kate’s “laziness” brain chip, and she will now actively care about getting out there to help children’s orgs and other charities.

  12. HH says:

    My feelings are split on this one. Part of me says take a nice summer break, especially because you had to parade yourself and your baby less than 24 hours after giving birth. The other half of me feels that this is what comes with the territory. You live an extraordinary life funded by taxpayers (directly or indirectly) and this is what’s expected.

    As far the name goes, I think it’s far better that the name have significance. I mean, why else would you like the name George?! :P JK.

  13. Bucky says:

    I thought Charles is going to be King George VII? Which would make Baby George King George VIII?

  14. Holden says:

    Her public duties are going on vacation and waving, its not that big of a deal.

  15. Karen says:

    her first public duties will be family activities in the fall. The queens vacation is about to start so I’m seeing Sept. Prob a dinner event or gala at BP. Just short events. Similar to her past record. busy week here and there but mostly not working. At least with a newborn this schedule makes sense

  16. Christin says:

    Surprising that they mentioned the work duties so quickly. I was expecting a round of how incredibly brave she was during the birthing process.

  17. Beatrice says:

    Resuming her former (infrequent)pace of public duties shouldn’t be a hardship. Yeah–she could do that pretty quickly.

  18. Thinker says:

    I think it’s good Kate had a son to be heir. To this day, a royal boy has more opportunities to do substantive work than a royal girl.

    Hear me out. Either gender can carry out charitable patronages, but a daughter would not enter Sandringham. Especially, a daughter of Kate’s. Boys enter the military, which is by definition a life of service.

    Harry and William have performed well in their military roles. Its an appropriate place for imperial leadership and I reckon that having a Prince in your regiment provides at least a touch of inspiration. George will be able to carry on that tradition, and he will be able represent the commitment of the monarchy to the empire and to the soldiers who protect that empire.

  19. bujalnorski says:

    “”Don’t read into [the names] too much,” a source close to the Duke and Duchess tells Us Weekly. “They are not meant to be symbolic; they are just names the couple like.” george alexander louis anagrams to “relaxed gorgeous alien”. The anagram of relaxed gorgeous alien is “large or de luxe agonise” dont be so dense

  20. audrey says:

    I can’t believe they’re allowed to spend so much time with her “commoner” family.

    I really thought the queen would pressure them to keep the baby mostly around royals, even as a newborn

    • bluhare says:

      And she’ll rein them in when they go too far. She’s got the ultimate say-so for little Crumpets, not William and certainly not Kate.

      • Another K says:

        I don’t think that reasoning flies in the 21st century. The baby is Kate and William’s and not the state’s as so many people here seem to think. I doubt if the queen will take much interest, anyway. She’s 87 with an ailing husband and probably has other things on her mind than a third great grandchild that may or may not become king. I’m guessing that even she thinks that this royal stuff isn’t going to go on much past her death. And I’ll betcha William and Harry hope it doesn’t! I get the feeling from their actions that they just want to fly helicopters and be done with the family circus. And who can blame them? Anyway, that’s just my opinion.

  21. Stephanie says:

    I wonder if the Spencer family will get to see the baby.

  22. Suse says:

    haha as if…
    the baby is the perfect excuse for both of them

  23. Mia says:

    I just think Kate should take as much time as she needs to recover from childbirth and spend time with her baby. Who would really expect her to be back to her duties in a short time?

  24. Charlie Canada says:

    Somebody has to say it. That baby is sure not the cutest baby I have ever seen. Scowl on his face that makes him look a bit like his great-grandma in some of her off moments.

  25. Charlie Canada says:

    Does Kate have grandparents? We never, ever hear about them. Surely they’d want to see the baby.

  26. Suze says:

    I wonder if the royal PR machine reads blogs? Because this seems to be a direct response to the the lazy Katie and Wills stories that were circulating prior to the birth.

    I agree, they shouldn’t have bothered to issue a statement – let her get used to being a mother. She, like all mothers, deserves time with her baby.

    They could have eased her back into royal duties in the fall.

    • MavenTheFirst says:

      I’m glad you said this! Their appearance at the hospital was carefully orchestrated, IMO. The internet has been aflame with rumours that they had used a surrogate. What better way to scupper the rumours than to appear in that dress? All based on having a PR company that trawls the net to see which way the wind blows for the Dolittles. IMO.

  27. Nancy Blue says:

    Perhaps willy should give it all up for Harry as he obviously wants to act out the ‘being normal’ scenario and not fulfil his duties.

    http://www.stirringtroubleinternationally.com/2013/07/24/a-word-of-advice-to-prince-william-if-you-want-to-be-normal-skip-you-turn-on-the-throne/

  28. susan says:

    hi waity is LAZY and always will. European royals some have four kids and they work very hard. Willy married the wrong woman she adds nothing to his life, any woman can make five kids for willy for that lavish life, and she is not even beautiful the truth hurts but waity is an embarrassment to britain , hope harry does it better!

  29. Anne says:

    We discuss a lot about how hard duchess works, but is it really relevant? Is it about how “hard” her work is? I think the relevant point here is her lack of substance. And no matter how much we criticize her for that, substance will not magically appear in her because it is a quality of nature not nurture. At least she seems to make her husband happy which is also a big deal. And their baby is adorable:)