Did Duchess Kate originally want to give birth to her second child at home?


It’s startling to realize that Duchess Kate is probably due in less than two months. Kensington Palace has maintained that Kate is due in April, and various sources claim that she’s only got seven weeks left. Kate is winding down her schedule too, after what can only be described as a “flurry” of public engagements in January and February. To her credit, I will say. She finally realize that she should do work ahead of her annual family vacay to Mustique. It was just announced that Kate will likely do her last public appearance – before giving birth – on March 11, in Margate. Go here to read more about that.

This week’s issues of Star Magazine and the National Enquirer have stories about Kate’s pregnancy and birth plan. Star’s story bothered me, mostly because I feel like it’s bad karma to start a rumor or gossip about the potential for pregnancy complications. Star says that Kate was secretly rushed to the hospital in mid-February because she thought she was going into labor. She allegedly stayed in the hospital overnight and she was fine. Perhaps Braxton-Hicks contractions? Meanwhile, the Enquirer says that the Queen yelled at Kate and ordered her NOT to do a home birth:

The Duchess of Cambridge was determined to break with tradition and deliver her first daughter in a maternity unit set up in the family apartment in Kensington Palace, royal sources told The National ENQUIRER. But when word reached Queen Elizabeth that a guest bedroom was to be equipped with every device that might be needed in an emergency, the monarch put her foot down.

“Kate was determined to have the baby in the comfort of [her] home with William present,” the palace insider said. “She consulted medical experts and they drew up plans to install all the equipment in a room close to William and Kate’s master bedroom. But they didn’t anticipate the Queen’s reaction.”

“The Queen was horrified and pointed out they must not take risks with a baby who one day will be second in line to the throne,” the source added. “It was a shock to Kate that the Queen was so concerned. Her message left Kate in no doubt that this wasn’t so much a request, but an order!”

The little princess will now come into the world in the Lindo Wing of London’s St. Mary’s Hospital in Paddington, under the care of surgeon and gynecologist Dr. Alan Farthing. After that, Kate will take charge.

“She’ll look after the baby herself without the aid of maternity nurses or nannies for at least six months,” revealed the insider. “She and William have vowed that the baby will be raised by Mom and Pop – just like any regular couple.”

[From The National Enquirer]

It was said that when Kate gave birth to George, she did it without drugs or an epidural or anything. She was doing prenatal yoga and she apparently had a relatively easy, uncomplicated natural birth. I would think that she’s probably doing the same this time around – staying fit, watching her diet, doing yoga, etc. And yes, Kate probably knew that having a home birth wasn’t an option for her in this day and age.

Last story – Radar says that Anna Wintour really, really wants Kate for the September issue of Vogue this year. A source told Radar:

“Anna knows landing Kate for the September issue would be a huge coup, especially since Prince William’s wife has never done a magazine feature for a US publication. The focus of Kate’s feature would be her numerous charity endeavors, which Anna has conveyed to Kate’s staff. Anna has offered Kate full control over the accompanying photo shoot” and would let her pick the photographer, journalist and location for the piece. “Anna has been trying for the last two years to get Kate to agree and she’s always refused.”

[From Express]

I have no doubt that Wintour would love Kate on the cover for any month. But Kate is pretty prohibited in what she can agree to do – she didn’t even appear on British Vogue ahead of her wedding. I seriously doubt Kate would agree to an American Vogue cover under any circumstance. Which is too bad, because I bet the article and editorial would be hugely gossip-worthy.


Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet and WENN.

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

133 Responses to “Did Duchess Kate originally want to give birth to her second child at home?”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. PHD Gossip says:

    At least she distracts from Uncle Andrew’s headlines. Any news about Kate is better than pedophelia stories.

  2. 30winks says:

    She has a lot of gray.

    • Antonym says:

      Fifty shades?

    • FLORC says:

      She’s nearly completely gray, but has color treatments.
      I’m a fan of going gray. I understand why some dye, but imo gray looks great on women as they age. And it’s a gradual change. you get use to it as it goes.

      • bettyrose says:

        I honestly don’t see the grey but isn’t she far too young to be completely grey? My mom’s just getting her first grey strands in her 60s.

      • LAK says:

        Bettyrose: unfortunately it’s hard to find unphotoshopped pictures otherwise I’d direct you to one. Even the famous DM poppy pic where they first showed her greys in all their glory is photoshopped in the re-posting.

        The one from an engagement last week might still be up and unphotoshopped. Again DM took far too much pleasure pointing out the grey where she’d tied her hair back. Shoddy hairdresser given how much grey was exposed.

        If she didn’t dye her hair, she’d have a curtain of steel grey hair.

        On the subject of premature aging, I think it’s the stress of public life. She’s aging like every POTUS/PM ages.

      • FLORC says:

        I had a friend at 15 that went completely silver.
        I got my 1st gray at 19or 20. Now a few years later I have a solid skunk streak that I adore while keeping the rest of my hair original color.

        2 things
        1. I saved a few of those listing with the unphotoshopped versions and the links are dead (whitewash conspiracy!).
        2. What is with the love hate coverage the DM gives Kate? I can’t figure out what side they’re on?

        And much of early gray is genetics. Kate’s 1st grays started popping upin her early to mid 20’s. Maybe the stress of William? I’m leaning to genetics since Carole and Pippa both dye as well. Same with the wrinkles. The lines are in her family traits. And I think her low weight plays a big role since when she gains a little they smooth out.

      • bluhare says:

        I started going grey in high school, colored it and finally said forget it in my late 30’s.

      • bettyrose says:

        Google gave me this, but it could just as easily be ‘Shopped as her non-grey hair pics, so I dunno any more: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/kate-middleton-grey-hair-pictures-2686790

      • LAK says:

        BettyRose: those are the infamous poppy pictures and they are photoshopped. It’s quite shocking to realise how grey she is because her ‘dark, glossy’ hair is a trademark at this point.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Poor diet (not enough protein and certain vitamins) decreases melanin production in hair follicles, which increases grays as well.

      • FLORC says:

        You’re not wrong. A lot of factors can contribute and/or speed up our road to grays. I tend to lean more towards genetics as the most common component. Though, that doesn’t rule out anything else. I have a bias.

        Even with proper health, nutrition, minimal stress, and hydration many of us could still gray early.

      • homegrrrl says:

        My friends and I have healthy self esteem etc. But grey is the I’m giving up beacon. I’m not ready to surrender.

    • PipaMid says:

      That will be corrected soon. Wm transformation to look like PWills first love – Jecca is amazinga. From dieting to Jecca’s size to glossy hair and length leading up to the wedding just to look like Jecca.

      Past articles and sources, wm was around jeccaan and waity was fatter and rough looking – like that of someone smoking, tanning, drinking much (as paped)..

      Back then jEcca seem a natural classy and regal lady.

  3. Amelia says:

    Hell will freeze over and become an ice-skating rink for Lucifer’s homegirl before Anna gets Kate on the cover of Vogue.
    The only possible scenario where that would happen is if they divorce (hopefully not) and Kate goes on a media rampage.

    • Loopy says:

      Yeah like Diana, she was featured in mags after the divorce.

      • LAK says:

        Diana was in British Vogue early in her marriage. Infact, she went to them for help with her clothing and general styling which turned her from ‘shy di’ to ‘dynasty Di’

  4. Anastasia says:

    The one story calls the baby a girl. Surely they don’t know that, right? Just speculation?

    • Not Orangina says:

      It’s already well known that the surrogate is East European this time and a blue-eyed girl was ordered.

      Also, the suggestion of a home birth gives credence to the rumours that Ma Middleton and friends are onto another farce.

  5. Chrissy says:

    OMG. Can you just imagine The Duchess of Cambridge being on the cover of a magazine that just recently had the Princess of Pee, Kim Kardashian on the cover? I seriously doubt that this will ever happen. If this is true, Anna Wintour is as delusional as Kanye. I guess it’s rubbing off.

  6. aang says:

    I had both mine at home. With no special equipment and a midwife, no doctor. If you are young and healthy with proper prenatal care it should be no big deal. Pregnancy is not an illness so unless there are complications a hospital in not really necessary.

    • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

      I’m glad it worked out for you, but I think you were very lucky. It’s not an illness, but so many things can go wrong that have nothing to do with your general health.

      • Cel says:

        I agree. Also homebirth in the US is surprisingly risky, even for low-risk mothers.

        It is safer in the UK and I’d guess that if anyone could have a “home” situation where they could have a full OR staff at the ready, in the next room, in case there are complications, it would be her.

      • FLORC says:

        Right GNAT
        It comes down to this. You can’t predict the future and no 2 women are the same.

        I remember a woman in the metaernity wing was complaining about her friend or relative bailing on the home birth plans and coming to the hospital. She went on the normal rant of women having been giving birth fine for centuries and they were all fine, etc.. Then a doctor took her aside and told her to essentially shut up. And that the birth complication rate and infantand/or mother death rate were quite high.
        The doctor shocked her on purpose to get her to be quiet, but a point is made.

    • aang says:

      The stats in the US include planned and unplanned home births. No way to get a real picture from the stats. But what we can see is that the risk of c-section is ridiculously high in hospital. Doctors don’t feel like waiting so they give drugs to speed things up then go with surgery when that causes problems.

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        Yes, and there’s risk of infection from other patients, I would assume. It’s not perfect, and I didn’t mean to sound so bossy. I had a bad experience with my niece in a birthing center many years ago, so I would choose a hospital, but you did what felt right for you, and that’s good.

      • DaysAndNightsOnAir says:

        Money issues causing trouble, I would say. The faster the birth the less expensive for the hospital.
        Sad but true.

    • Kimble says:

      I had both of mine with a midwife – although both in birthing units. I think there is a big cultural difference between the UK and US (I had one in each country). My grandson is due in 4 weeks and I hope to be there – hopefully without my head exploding (I am a trained midwife) or having to wrestle the episiotomy scissors from an OB with a tee time!

    • FLORC says:

      It was easy for you, but you are not the rule. You are the exception.
      So many things ranging from extremely minor to extremely high risk can occur in a situation where a woman who is young, healthy, and has so far had an easy pregnancy.

      You had an easy time. Good. That does not mean it’s the same for everyone or even the majority of women in similar circumstances.

      • StormsMama says:

        Well I agree and disagree. I had my daughter “naturally” in a birthing center with my best friend as my doula (bc in MA she legally couldn’t be my midwife) and I had a midwife and OB too. But my bestie is a home birth midwife in SF and has caught more than 300 babies in SF at home. Additionally she has trained midwives and caught hundreds of babies in Sierra Leone (pre recent Ebola outbreak) and Haiti.
        As Aang noted it is not an illness and IF you have proper prenatal care and are healthy and have a great midwife you absolutely can have a great and successful experience birthing at home.
        It is NOT for everyone. But the presumption that a hospital is ALWAYS best or that a strange doctor at the hospital (bc maybe yours isn’t on call or available) is better than a midwife who has been with you every step of the way…well that is just wrong.
        I’ve found that generally people know what they know and are afraid of what they don’t know! It’s absolutely not crazy to be afraid of home birth but if you do research and open your mind (try watching the business of being born) you *might* change your mind. OR YOU MIGHT NOT. No biggie. You do you.
        As long as you are happy with your birth story and of course you have your happy healthy baby— it’s good.
        Women deserve to be empowered with information so they can make the best medical choices for themselves, for their babies, for their families.

      • FLORC says:

        I don’t disagree with you. What i’m against is the stance that nothing can go wrong in a home birth. That’s simply not true. You can be in good health and have had a healthy pregnancy and still have complications in a hospital, birthing center, or at home.
        Pregnancy is not an illness. It is a massive event on the body where things can go wrong without warning.
        And i’m not saying homebirths are bad or leaving you open to higher risk. It’s really case by case.

        In my career as a nurse over 9 years my primary employment has been at private practice obgyn and a private hospital. Also for 4 years I was qualified as a midwife in my current state. 2 of those years perioperative during those cases where labor had complications. I’ve finished up my masters and 4 out of 7 days a week delivering. At this point I would really have to sit down and tally up births i’ve assisted in or did the delivering. I would say it’s over 300 though. Some went flawlessly and some have made me want to quit my job. And I rarely lay out my experience, but I want you to understand why i’m saying what i’m saying. Ofcourse, people should educate themselves and it’s ultimately whatever is more comfortable for them with their best interest at heart.

        1 is not better than the other and any nurse, doctor, or midwife worth their salt will agree. You, I, your friend, a doctor. None of us can know the future. So none of us can say without a personal bias one is better. As I said. It’s case by case.

        So, I’m not really disagreeing with you much at all. I just felt I had to clarify my point.

      • DaysAndNightsOnAir says:

        @ Florc

        You ALWAYS feel that you need to clarify minor things and ridiculusly marginal things. We know that 🙂

      • notasugarehere says:

        I don’t considered FLORC’s information about the possible risks of home birth and people assuming “nothing can go wrong with a home birth” to be clarifying “minor things” or “ridiculously marginal things”. We are talking human lives here.

      • FLORC says:

        I feel the need because it doesn’t appear my points were coming across as I wanted them to. If you felt no need to read my clarification then the comment wasn’t intended for you.
        I doubt anyone here can claim they thought they
        It’s also a way for me to work out where I might have gone wrong in stating my case. To see if maybe I missed something and maybe another would point that out to me. Nota and others have. I appreciate that.

        I can’t help but think your comment was taking a shot at me to mock with the caps lock. We all open ourselves up to attacks here though. I’m not going to feel ashamed or poorly that another thinks my post is redundant. Or wonder why another felt the need to point this out in such a way. I’ll leave it at that.

        Thank you. I took Storms comment as pro homebirthing and those who have things go wrong was from a lack of education on the subject. Imo and experience you just can’t know under normal circumstances. The best laid plans of mice and men often go awry.

    • Tessy says:

      They have home births all the time around here. Mostly with a midwife, and more frequently now with a doula to help the mom. Lots use birthing pools too. The nearest hospital has the highest rate of c-sections and otherwise medicalized births in the country so I think many want to avoid it.

      • homegrrrl says:

        There’s no right or wrong with hospital vs home birth. The mother must decide. I labored at home for 36 hrs then delivered naturally in an hospital. I wanted the best chance at a non c section and we rented a house 5 min from hospital. My point is to each her own.

    • Hazel says:

      Didn’t the Queen give birth at ‘home’–i.e., Buckingham Palace, in a specially-equipped suite? No reason they couldn’t do the same for Kate. Anyhoo, Star or Enquirer–take this stuff with a grain of salt (I’m sure I’m not telling anybody anything they don’t already know!)

  7. Talie says:

    I don’t know if it would be that crazy for Kate to do American Vogue since that is the main one to license stories and images worldwide.

  8. anne_000 says:

    “She’ll look after the baby herself without the aid of maternity nurses or nannies for at least six months,” revealed the insider. “She and William have vowed that the baby will be raised by Mom and Pop – just like any regular couple.”

    Yeah sure…

    I don’t know if the home-birth plan is true or not, but if it is true, then that shows how stupid Kate, William, and the Middletons are.

    Wasn’t mid-February about the time that Kate left to go to Mustisque? I dunno.

    • bluhare says:

      I thought it was already reported they’re looking for a second nanny/maternity nurse type person when the baby’s born.

    • LAK says:

      Mom and Pop = Carole and Mike? 😉

      On a serious note…..sure they’ll have no help. As they don’t have and never had help for PGtips.

  9. MinnFinn says:

    An ambulance followed her around NYC. Not a chance she will give birth at home.

    • FLORC says:

      Considering her “home” was an ocean away the ambulance is valid and doesn’t pull away support for this imo.
      I remember with George Kate moved into the Midds. A Midd source stated Kate intended to give birth at her local hospital. The day she went into labor William drives to retrieve her and brings Kate to the hospital where she was intended to give birth. It’s telling the the source gave details only an insider would know.

  10. GoodNamesAllTaken says:

    I think that entire story about the home birth is made up. She was “surprised” that the Queen was concerned? Right.

    • bluhare says:

      Given the fact that the queen had all hers at home (albeit in a specially equipped suite I think), I would be quite surprised to find out she had a problem with it. I remember reporting being “shocked” that Diana wanted to break tradition and have hers in a hospital.

      • Amanda_M87 says:

        Yeah, I thought the royals traditionally did have their children at home (the palace). Only in the last 30 or so years has this changed.

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        Either, way, I think it’s a silly, made up story. Don’t you?

      • m says:

        Diana actually wanted to have William at home but the Queen and Dianas doctors wanted her in a hospital with access to all of the latest equipment. This was in part due to the difficult pregnancy she had (she likely had HG in addition to her bullimia and depression) and it turned out to be a good idea as the birth wasn’t easy.

      • FLORC says:

        Wasn’t Diana induced to fit Charles’s polo schedule?

        Diana had a hormonal imbalance due to her ED and depression. So, it certainly could have been HG since her body was already not well.

    • Green Girl says:

      I realize the Queen had home births herself so I don’t know where this story is coming from.

    • CynicalCeleste says:

      Everything in the National Enquirer story is 100% fiction.

  11. Where was QEII born?

    • Sam says:

      Elizabeth was a C-section, but she was born at the home of her maternal grandfather. It’s on Wikipedia. They basically brought the hospital to her mother.

      And I don’t believe this solely because the Queen had “homebirths” herself. Anne was born in Clarence House and all the boys were born inside Buckingham Palace. She never had a baby inside a hospital, so I doubt she’d react this way to Kate. The Royals can get the best care wherever they are. I don’t doubt somebody was against the homebirth idea, but I’m not sure it was the Queen.

  12. Kori says:

    I doubt the Queen would freak out and make such a comment given that her heirs to the throne were all born at home. I think it was one of the branches like Kent or Princess Anne who went to the hospital first only about a decade or less before William himself was born.

    • Enny says:

      If QEII freaked out, it was probably at the thought of Kate spending inordinate sums to outfit KP with a birthing suite that she would use once, after all the money wasted on the KP apartment and Anmer to begin with…

  13. FLORC says:

    1. This story sounds like BS.

    2. Because a woman doesn’t get an epidural does not mean she didn’t have the pain managed by other means. I can’t even remember how many babies i’ve assisted in deliveries of.
    There’s a laundry list of ways to manage the pain that imo work better than epidurals.

    3. Didn’t Kate have to give birth to George infront of witnesses? That they reportedly were outside looking into the room through a window? If so does that apply to the spare as well?

    4. W&K were said they would raise George quietly without nannies and staff. That was a fib from day 1 as it was later confirmed William was gone and the nannies and staff moved into the Midds residence.
    But as I said. This whole article seems like bs.

    • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

      Agree to 1,2 and 4. Do not know about 3. Interested, though.

      • FLORC says:

        It was something still used and still “in the books” to prove the wife was giving birth to the heir and there wasn’t a baby swap or something.
        Kate was said to say no to them being in the room so they were in a seperate room looking in through a window.

        Anyone remember? I want to say LadySlippers knew all about this. And where did she go btw?

    • Olenna says:

      Agree, and I think that creepy “royal surgeon” who’d worked for the Queen and was said to be the head her ob team was really the “witness”.

    • bettyrose says:

      I totally believe #3. Honestly I wouldn’t be surprised to learn they still witness the consumation of marriage to heirs. Why should they bother changing any 1,000 year old traditions?

    • LAK says:

      Florc: yes she had witnesses and they were said to be in another room looking in who were identified as her 3 doctors later seen walking out of the hospital jubilant.

      The Home secretary, representing the government, also used to witness the birth, but I think that practise was stopped with HM’s generation. I think Alexandra’s birth was the last witnessed by the Home Secretary.

      However, the Home secretary during PGtips’s birth, Theresa May, made a comment along the lines of opting out of attending his birth which implies they are still doing it albight quietly without fanfare.

      • FLORC says:

        Thanks LAK!
        Seems so outdated. Like having members of high standing being in the room on a newlyweds wedding night.

        I wouldn’t blame Kate if she was at her parents hoping to give birth at a place of her choosing to avoid that. Something along the lines of her screaming she’ll keep this baby in if letting it out means letting 3 men witness her in labor for some archaic reason.

      • FLORC says:

        So does the spare need to be witnessed as well?

      • bettyrose says:

        Gah! Why? Why?? She easily could have married a garden variety aristo, maybe even for love, and had total say over her uterus. But she held on for ten years to have her childbirth witnessed by crusty old men? Ugh, solemn pact never to encourage little girls to want to be princesses.

      • LAK says:

        Bettyrose: no wonder she’s going grey!!

        People who encourage their little girls never think about the details of princessing.

      • ArtHistorian says:

        Well, the details of princessing vary from country to country. The BRF appear to be more archaic than the other European RFs. Japan and the RFs in the Middle East and the Far East undoubtedly have other customs as well.

        Frankly, I had never before read that the old custom of having a royal birth witnessed was still practiced in modern times. One would think that the OB and the nurses would be enough for that.

        At least until the 18th century there are documented instances of the witnessing of royal births as “standard procedure”. When it comes to the witnessing of the marriage night, documented evidence is much more scarce. The only instance I can think of on the top of my head, is Lucrezia Borgia’s second marriage, and that had a lot to do with the fact that her first one was annulled on the claim of non-consummation, and annullement that also suited the Borgias politically.

    • DiamondGirl says:

      I highly doubt that with DNA testing etc nowadays that someone would need to witness the birth.

      If there were officials there, they were probably not actually watching but were notified immediately.

      • LAK says:

        Diamondgirl: the birth of royal heirs isn’t simply about DNA. It’s about a legal and constitutional requirement that the baby is born ‘in legal marriage’ and ‘of the body’. In layman’s terms, that means the baby has to be born to someone the royal is legally married to AND come out of the birth canal of same.

        This law renders adoption, unwed baby mamas/papas, surrogacy etc out of the question IF the baby is to be in the line of succession.

        The custom came about because they worried about changlings. DNA is available, but the law still applies and that is why it is witnessed.

    • Paula says:

      It was the norm for centuries for any royal birth to be watched by many people. The infamous birth of James II son was watched by over 20 people and yet still the rumour that he was not the child of the queen went round and is still going round. George V decided to end this procedure when Elizabeth II had her first child in 1948 and its not happened since then.

  14. Ellen says:

    These tabloids are just writing fan fiction, right? Can I have a go?

    “Kate was going to deliver her new son, whom the couple will name Michael for Kate’s father, in a specially equipped trailer on the grounds of the Middleton family estate. Their intention was to keep the birth a secret from the royal family for at least two weeks, allowing William to take revenge on his father for all the bad feelings dredged up by the recent documentary broadcast in the BBC. Carole Middleton will make a special concoction from Kate’s placenta, which the entire family will consume while chanting rituals to ensure that William be required to undertake no more than 25 Royal engagements per year.”

    In all seriousness, Royal reporters have complained about the lack of information coming from W&K’s press office, household, and friends. I guess they figure no one will ever call them on this stuff, so they can make up scenarios out of whole cloth. (Harry is dating Emma Watson AND Taylor Swift! Thy had a threesome after the BRITS!)

  15. Citresse says:

    The Queen must have liked home births. Though, considering all the equipment, docs et al the room was probably set up as a mini-ER, as my guess. It was privacy she wanted.

    • PipaMid says:

      HM is concern for the babies with wm dieting – proper nutrition pre and pst delivery.

      Several reports that HM is against the move to buckleberry with the baby / PG.. There is even reports that ma carole mid is moving in AH – which HM disapprove of.

  16. rachel says:

    “Numerous charity endeavours”????!!!! WTF? What planet is Anna Wintour living on?

  17. Murphy says:

    I doubt any of this has any truth to it-just making up crap to put her on a cover since she hasn’t done anything lately.
    And the Queen doesn’t order her to do anything, if she did she wouldn’t have had so many skirt flip ups.

  18. Gabrielle says:

    Having a healthy pregnancy does not mean an easy delivery. I’m very fit, did pre-natal yoga and ballet and lots of walking during my preganacy. Nothing out of the ordinary happened all throughout, then I wound up with an emergency c-section. Healthy, full-term baby, no complaints, but just saying sometimes unforseen things happen to healthy women during labor.

    Plus, I’m sure Kate will have the fanciest room in the hospital and William won’t have to sleep in a recliner like my husbnad did. The hospital is the best option for her.

    • rachel says:

      Absolutely!!! A person can be in top condition and very healthy but you can’t control unforeseen complications – such as baby positioning (side lying breech for ex.)

    • Lady D says:

      I read an article that stated one in four births were complication free. I was amazed the complication rate was so high in a civilized nation.

      • FLORC says:

        And the severity of the complication can vary.

      • ArtHistorian says:

        Considering that birth complications has been one of the biggest killers of women through out history – from royalty to paupers, I’m not surprised. We simply have better treatments and technology today.

    • Citresse says:

      Yes Gabrielle, quite true. Sometimes baby is very stubborn. It would seem Kate had an easy delivery with George considering he was a large baby and her labour time was relatively short, but it could be a completely different story with next baby in April.

    • Lorzie says:

      So so true! I’ve always been slim, healthy, don’t smoke, etc. and my first pregnancy was perfect. No morning sickness, no discomforts, or anything. Then during the delivery my daughter got stuck and her heart rate started dropping so the doctor grabbed forceps and had to forcefully move her along, I had 3rd degree tears and wouldn’t stop bleeding. My second pregnancy was hell – sick every day, crazy back pain, pre-labor at 27 weeks, then he was born 3 weeks early. His delivery was a piece of cake. A bit of morphine to ease the pain at the end and drove myself home the next day. I don’t intend to find out what a third would be 😉

  19. anne_000 says:

    Regarding the comments upthread that Charles’ siblings and the heirs previous to him weren’t born in a hospital…

    I think I know why the current Royal generation was born in a hospital instead of at home.

    First, there’s the cost of getting all the necessary equipment. Why spend all that money unnecessarily when they could just give birth in a hospital especially in these hard economic times? It would just look really privileged of them and out-of-touch with what ‘regular folk’ have to go through.

    Second, medical technology is so much more evolved than it was since Edward was born. At a hospital, there will be equipment and personnel for every known contingency. And then again, it would be that much more expensive to bring in everything they need to their home.

    • FLORC says:

      Yes Anne!
      1. This is a BS story from the National Enquirer
      2. Kate could want a home birth, but there would still be a crazy amount of secruity, medical professionals and technology there if it was needed. This would only be a simple home birth in a superficial sense.

  20. mar says:

    It is funny how much more puffy you get having a girl. I was huge and puffy. She is plumper this time around too.

    • m says:

      Are you serious? Lol
      Her cheeks were massive when she was pregnant the first time. You can hardly tell anything has changed about her this time around.

      • Citresse says:

        Looked good with “massive cheeks.” Give credit where credit is due. Maybe a girl this time? I hope so.

      • FLORC says:

        You can’t tell. Just as the carry high carry low. You just can’t tell from the outward appearance of the expecting mother. I think it’s silly, but funny all the ways people think they can tell. My favorites are all dream related. A mother to be had 4 children so far (3 sons and a girl) told me she knew her 5th would be a boy because all her boys came with dreaming in black and white. With her girl she dreamed in color. She had a girl. And she was quite shocked at that.

        I’m not hoping for this child to be a girl. Simply because it will be Diana’s Grand daughter. And that will be the albatross around that child’s neck for years to come in the worst way.

      • Citresse says:

        Yes, I understand.
        However, genetics are a funny thing. A daughter may be a mini-me (Kate lookalike) or a real mix, or look much like Diana.
        In any event, I think William really wants a daughter, so if it’s a girl, hopefully his happiness will translate to a better work ethic, then he’ll be remembered as the best King of England. A daughter could save the House of Windsor!

      • FLORC says:

        Oh Citresse. So optimistic! Seriously though…
        That won’t make William work. I doubt he’ll be around anymore for this child than he was for George.

        And it’s not simply genetics. Though a daughter would look like Kate until Windsor genes kick in as usual. Sadly, the females of that family aren’t the most conventional beauties.
        A daughter would be born into high expectations and that’s very much guaranteed. And that’s very unfair. If the child is a girl there will be more put on her head from day 1 than there is of George.

  21. Peggy says:

    So the Queen was born at home and had her four children at home and yet she is upset that Kate want a home birth, I know Tabs don’t do research, but come on.
    In The Netherlands a develop Counrty don’t they give birth at home unless they’re complications with the pregnancy. Plus a mid-wife/nurse for 2-4 weeks, to help the mother.

    • FLORC says:

      This isn’t a real story. None of this is true except the part that Kate is with child.

      And the homebirth discussion is covered above. It’s a tricky topic. There’s no complete answer as it should really be case to case. If you can’t predict the future with the endless amount of variables you can’t say a mother in normal circumstances would be better or worse off with homebirth/hospital.

  22. Meg says:

    kate is looking tired and letting the grey show in her roots-
    this is either out of being to tired as a mom to a young boy full of energy and being so far along in her second pregnancy as she is, or is this a sign that she’s becoming more comfortable being her imperfect self in front of the press? those pictures of her the night before her wedding she looked so thin-I imagine women in her position are really hard on themselves because they’re picked apart for their looks by the press. Good to see she’s letting herself be human-and if she’s tired it means she’s active in parenting her son which is a modern way of doing things like Diana did instead of the traditions of royal families

    • FLORC says:

      Kate appears like this in person. She’s less touched up and also without botox while pregnant.
      Post George around the volleyball article there was a story here of Kate being tired and rundown from George. She looked like hell in the photos.
      On the DM there was a story about how Kate was back in shape and happier than ever. Pictures from the same event too and she looked like a different person. In some cases it was photo to photo and one had Kate looking fine while the other looking worn and exhausted.

      What we see and project onto is simply not the reality. This has been supported by years of her being covered through dating and marriage.
      Ultimately, Kate is fine and has loads of help.

      • Citresse says:

        Also some people look different in every photo. Kate probably is not photogenic like Diana. I never saw Diana in person. Maybe she looked better in photos.

      • FLORC says:

        I never saw Diana in person. From photos I thought she was rather plain, but she did have a spark and glow about her that made some of her photos lovely.

        IMO though I think she’s pretty and is photogenic. Not like Bea is unphotogenic. Kate was a pretty girl. She can take a nice photo. Thing is we’re so used to seeing a doctored image that when we see anything less it looks tragic. Even like her 1st portrait.
        Taking a look back in history even portraits were done like this. Made to look better than the actual image. This is standard. So, we’re all seeing the same photo taken by the same camera in the same light conditions, but as we view it on seperate publications they might touch up the given image to their liking. That means it’s a different image, but the same too. Did I explain that clear enough? I think I rambled.

      • Caroline says:

        I did see Diana in person – once at Wimbledon just before her wedding and once in my home town. She looked exactly the same in person as she did in her photos. When she was in my home town, she visited the ambulance service and my brother-in-law who was also a keen amateur photographer was entrusted to take official photos. He said Diana could have done with more meat on her and that her ankles were like twigs. This was a couple of years before she and Charles officially separated.

      • Citresse says:

        I thought the close up photo of Diana when William turned six months old was the best ever photo of her; truly stunning. She wore a white collar with a tan shade dress or blouse. Other shots included Charles holding William while wearing a yellow vest. I will check Google images.

      • Citresse says:

        Checked- it was while collar with grey dress. Dated FEB 1983.

      • perplexed says:

        I think Diana was unusually photogenic, much more so than most movie stars. I also think her features were more unique than Kate’s, but to be fair, Diana was a rare case of charisma. That level of charisma is unusual.

    • Olenna says:

      DM has recent photos of Kate attending the Goring Hotel’s “birthday” luncheon. She is looking even more tired (and bigger), so I guess it’s about time for her to go into seclusion (nesting) as she did with George.

  23. ArtHistorian says:


    I’m wondering if CB will be covering William’s visit to Japan and China?

  24. seesittellsit says:

    A “flurry” meaning 3-4 days’ work. They took off for Mustique while Britain was suffering horrible winter weather. As for giving birth at home, first, who cares, and second, maybe it was to save the, what was it, $12,000/night cost for that private room at St. Mary’s? Please, spare us – this girl was brought up to believe that if you have to work too hard, it means you’ve failed socially and economically. Her mother worked her ass off to bump the family up the ladder: Carole Middleton saw Kate’s marriage as the culmination of three generations of social climbing, and doesn’t see the point if Kate really has to work hard having achieved – let’s see how did her grandmother put it? – being “the top brick in the chimney”? Kate is about enjoying the life her mother worked so hard to make possible for her: wealthy, sheltered private brilliantly married matron. Not “hard working” royal bearing in mind what could happen if the public realizes just how grand their lives are compared to those who really do work hard.

    • Citresse says:

      I commented late on another thead sp I can’t help but wonder if the MIddleton dodgy dough got its start in middle east when Middleton father worked there.

    • Mika says:

      Actually seesittellsit it would probably be more expensive to give birth at home because of all the medical equipment that would have to be installed in the palace.

  25. Wisteria says:

    My parents are brits and my mum had her 2nd child at home. This was in the 1950’s and was supposed to be somewhat of a tradition to do so at the time. I wonder if that is why Princess Katherine wanted to do the same.

  26. KinChicago says:

    Having Kate on the cover would do a lot to redeem Wintour after putting so much attention on the trashy, porny Kardashians. Not offended but utterly exhausted of seeing them on everything but peanut butter. Enough!

    • Hazel says:

      You know, it’s not just Wintour who’s sucked up to the Kardashians–it’s also Valentino, Balmain, Lagerfeld, etc. To see Lagerfeld & Kim cosying up for a photo–all I could think was, wow, must be a LOT of money involved.

  27. Katie says:

    Am I the only one who thinks her smile when she’s showing all her teeth is weird?

    • FLORC says:

      She has front veneers, but they don’t go all the way back.
      She also has a slight underbite so her bottom jaw comes forward.
      It’s probably these things you’re picking up on.
      Though when she smiles like she is it’s genuine and not a forced smile. So, kudos to her. She’s having a happy pregnancy and during work events.

    • rachel says:

      she either wants to show off her fake teeth (veneers) or they were not placed properly in her mouth and hence the awkward smile..

  28. YankLynn says:

    Does everyone think Kate will decamp to her parents again with baby two and a toddler and the nanny and the cook ? With two beautiful homes complete now wouldn’t this fiction of needing Mom and peace and quiet be laughable ? I suppose a night in Kensington and then they all head to Anmer the next day ? William would have “prior commitments” and enormous amounts of studying that will send him back to London during the week I’d anticipate.

    • FLORC says:

      It’s already been announced by the press office Kate is expected to live at her parents home after she gives birth to the spare. Arrangements are more announced this time since last time was a disaster from a pr perspective. No word on William though. It’s best to let time tell where he goes and what he does.

      They did hurry the renovtions on Anmer so it would be base camp for them as it was closer commute for Williams future job. A closer look though pointed to only a few minutes quicker from there than KP.
      The official story was once Kate William, George, and the baby would live at AH together after the birth.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Have they formally announced this? I can’t see how this can be anything but a PR disaster. People are furious about the amount of money wasted on KP, both taxpayer and Duchy funds. The fact that around $10 million was spent on two homes for Multi Kitchens Kate – and now she’s openly running home to mummy again?

        The Middleton family spent 3 weeks at Anmer at Christmas, so we know the place must be livable. Two key staff walked out soon after, will W&K use that as another excuse? More stories will emerge about how incredibly frustrated the Bucklebury locals are about the security mandates in the area, the road closures and lengthy detours, the increased tax burden on the local constabulary, all of it.

      • FLORC says:

        Yes. It was a small announcement, but it happened. They said basically Kate will move back in with her parents.
        Also in the same reading article/press release it was noted she would have no new nannies and this would happen right after she gives birth.

      • notasugarhere says:

        I don’t see anything in the official press releases from POW. If they announced it, it might have been off the cuff to some reporter. I suspect hell to pay and many more unhappy taxpayers. Republic should post a tally of how much her time in Bucklebury costs annually.

        And no matter what they publicly admit, there will be at least one new nanny – the night nurse – if not a full-time assistant to Maria Teresa at some point. They lied last time, and the one thing W&K are consistent about is the fact that they always lie.

  29. India Andrews says:

    Kate isn’t breaking tradition giving birth at home. Diana was the one who broke tradition by giving birth to the future heir in a hospital. Before Diana the heir and the spare had been born at home, which in their case is whichever royal residence is home. Queen Elizabeth gave birth to Prince Charles in her home, Buckingham Palace.