Duchess Kate ‘will find it quite hard’ to leave the kids behind while on tour

wenn23639244

Allegedly, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge will be hosting a pre-tour dinner at Kensington Palace on Wednesday evening. I’m really hoping we get photos from the event, because Kate hasn’t made a public appearance since March 18th. We knew she wasn’t going to work at all ahead of the India-Bhutan trip, because she wanted to spend time with her children before the six-day tour. That was the official excuse given for why Kate went MIA. No word on whether Prince William also wanted to spend time with his children. Anyway, I bring this up because People Magazine had a sugary piece about how Will and Kate are really not happy about leaving Charlotte and George at home for this trip.

How will the royal parents be preparing Prince George, 2, and Princess Charlotte, 11 months, for their seven-night trip to India and Bhutan – the longest stretch of time the family of four have ever been apart?

“It’s often harder on the parents than it is on the children,” Sarah Dixon, a maternity nurse who has worked with friends of the couple, tells PEOPLE, adding that nanny Maria Turrion Borrallo will be there to “keep the stability and keep their routine in place – which is paramount.”

With the couple away for one full week, Dixon says there will be play dates organized and grandma Carole Middleton will no doubt be on speed dial. “I’m sure that Granny is on call as a back up,” says Dixon. “Two under three is incredibly difficult.”

But Maria, who trained at the prestigious Norland College for nannies, will be well-prepared for the busy days ahead and will be in touch with the couple daily.

“They will keep in touch with Skype, and I’m sure Maria will do a diary for them while they are away with pictures and photos, any moments they might have missed,” says Dixon. “She will know that while they are away, the parents need extra reassurance.”

With George now attending preschool, his confidence should only be growing, says Dixon: “He will have been gaining independence, saying goodbye to his parents while knowing they are becoming back every day. And that prevents anxiety.”

“If they had gone much earlier, it would be more difficult,” says Louise Livingston, director of training at the Maria Montessori Institute, where many of George’s teachers studied. “But they have given him three months to settle in, and he should be very much into the rhythm of knowing how school works and what’s expected and what’s not expected.”

The trip is believed to be the first time that both Princess Kate and Prince William have left the nanny in charge of both children for such an extended period of time – in addition to being more than 4,000 miles away.

“I think Kate will find it quite hard,” says Dixon. “It’s the first time she has left Charlotte, and at that age they are doing new things every day. That’s often very difficult for parents because they feel they have missed out on certain milestones.”

[From People]

Not to sound like a judgy non-mother, but would it really have been that big of a deal to bring the kids? I know it would be a big deal to bring your kids on a normal six-day trip, but we’re talking about the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge here – they have tons of resources, baby wranglers, handlers and personnel. They brought George to Australia and New Zealand when he was about nine months old. Charlotte, by that logic, is old enough to travel, especially since Charlotte was fine with going on that ski holiday last month. And once again, not to sound too judgy… but William and Kate dumped a then 8-month old George on Carole Middleton and Nanny Maria (when she was very new to the job), and that was when Will and Kate jetted off to a luxury “second honeymoon” in the Maldives. They were fine spending a week away from George then.

But the point of this story is that William and Kate are just normal parents and didn’t you know? They have terrible jobs and the dastardly queen demands that they spend time away from their beloved children. That’s the overwrought storyline these days.

cambridges1

Photos courtesy of Kensington Royal Twitter, WENN.

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

220 Responses to “Duchess Kate ‘will find it quite hard’ to leave the kids behind while on tour”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Snazzy says:

    Ugh

    • vava says:

      Just wait until you see the blue dot dress she wore to Wednesday night’s KP event. It’s disturbing in so many ways.

  2. LadyJane says:

    Cry me a river.

    • Jib says:

      They act like they’re the first parents to spend time away from their kids – I guess baby vacations to Mustique are different.

      And I called it and I’m still calling it: she is going to bail on this trip. There’s something wrong going on – either her mental health or their marriage. I dont think she’s going.

      • Fallon says:

        I won’t be surprised at all if she suddenly bails. HG announcement coming in 3… 2… 1…

      • Betti says:

        I agree – something is not right in that relationship and yes she will bail out of the trip. Either it will be illness or a pregnancy – he will end up going alone or they both pull out and someone else has to go in their place (Harry).

      • LAK says:

        It does feel rather histrionic this time, doesn’t it?

      • vava says:

        but….but…..but…….
        Isn’t it their plan to “make some new memories”? ;-)

      • LAK says:

        Vava: If she pulls out and he is photographed at the Taj Mahal by himself, she will be toast and it will be open season on their marriage across the media.

        She’ll have to pull a bigger stunt to push back the combined image of solitary Diana and William.

      • hmmm says:

        But, but, but…what about all the new clothes and accessories?!

      • Melly says:

        If she bails on the trip, the press will go nuts. The excuse she made about breaking a 115 year old tradition by not attending St. Patrick’s Day with the Irish Guard so she could spend time with her children ahead of the trip goes up in smoke. I almost hope she doesn’t go, I’m loving this media takedown of these lazy Dolittles.

      • vava says:

        We should take a poll: will she bail out?

        I doubt she will bail. She’ll love all the attention.

      • Katie says:

        I agree she is going to bail. But it won’t be because she announcing a third pregnancy. Something is off between the two of them and they’re not holding it together very well.

      • Hudson Girl says:

        No way she is going to bail on recreating Diana’s Taj Mahal pic.
        It’s an easy and epic PR move which will gain immediate impact around the world. Most people are barely paying attention to these two so, an iconic pic will go a LONG way for them to gloss over any recent backlash.
        3rd pregnancy announcement with HG soonish for same reason.

      • Melly says:

        I don’t think she’ll bail on the trip. It’s the only way for them to get some positive press and compete with all the good press Harry is getting. But @Hudson Girl, are we really thinking that the copying Diana at the Taj Mahal is going to get her/them good press? Am I the only one who thinks that could go horribly wrong?

    • Red Snapper says:

      I disagree. If she were going to bail she would already have announced it.

      • Melly says:

        When she bails, she tends to do it at the last minute.

      • Olenna says:

        I’m with Red Snapper. She ain’t gonna bail. Carole would have a cow if she did.

      • vava says:

        right! I’d bet the Crown Jewels she won’t bail on this trip!!!

      • Reece says:

        She’s not bailing nor is he, for that matter.
        1. The opportunity for some good press right now is far too great, like others have said.
        2. The opportunity to recreate the Diana at the Taj Mahal is too strong to pass up. Heaven forbid they pass up a “historical” recreation moment.
        2a. BUT it won’t be an exact recreation, no no no… because Will and Kate will be there together.
        2b. UNLIKE his parents!
        2c. THEREFORE cleaning up where his parents F’ed up! #mommydaddyissues
        *mic drop*

  3. Astrid says:

    I’m finding it hard to feel sympathetic

  4. Catwoman says:

    Sure, Jan.

  5. Sixer says:

    My estimate is that she spends about ten minutes a day with him when she’s in Norfolk, let alone anywhere else. She’ll probably miss Maria more if this article is anything to go by. How many mothers does Katie Laze Quitter need? That’s what I want to know.

    “I’m sure Maria will do a diary for them while they are away with pictures and photos, any moments they might have missed. She will know that while they are away, the parents need extra reassurance.”

    Earth to satellite station Cambridge: IT’S ONLY SIX DAYS.

    Earth to satellite station #poorjason: do come up with something credible, darling. I know the material is thin, but you need to spin it better than this.

    • BearcatLawyer says:

      Hey, you know who leaves their children for weeks on end to go to some of the least glamourous places on earth? The armed forces. The same people Duchess Laze Quitter snubbed on St. Patrick’s Day so she could…allegedly…spend more time with her children ahead of this 7 day tour.

      Sorry, Jason, but this is getting ridiculous. Why do I have a feeling that someday the Doolittles will be a case study in many, many, many public relations textbooks?

      • Sixer says:

        Exactly. You can take apart any #poorjason effort for contradiction and hypocrisy in about ten seconds flat. Truly, I do appreciate his material is thinner than thin. But his job is conjure a credible narrative from it. Things must be bad if he can’t even manage that for these two dimwits.

      • lower-case deb says:

        as Gordon Ramsay said: you can only do so much with half a can of moldy Spam.

        poor Jason must have a work-shock; after working with prime cut flank that is Harry and Nepal, he has to come back to this. no wonder he’s grasping at straws.

      • Nilber says:

        I will be honest, as I was reading the post my irritation grew because my hubs is currently deployed. He has been deployed since November to Poland till at least December. I’m finding it real hard to find compassion, empathy or much of anything for the spoiled Cambridges. The sad thing is I usually do but this crap is just too far. Ugh… I need coffee. Bless their ignorant, touched lil hearts.

      • BearcatLawyer says:

        @nilber- thank you for your husband’s service. I know deployments are rough on everyone in the family, no matter where they are. Duchess Laze Quitter may not GAF about the people who protect her rights to be a welfare queen, but plenty of us DO appreciate our armed forces and the people who love and support them!

    • Betti says:

      Well she seems happy enough to leave baby George to go off on a secret post baby holiday with Wills when George was only a few months old and Maria was a week into the job. Plus there are all the shopping trips and day long salon trips.

      Considering their lifestyles this ‘excuse’ isn’t going to wash with the plebs.

      I think the person that she will find it hard to be away from is Carole – NOT the kids.

      • Sixer says:

        Also Maria, who, it seems, is as much a nanny to Chutney – who started this name? I like it! – as she is to the children. She’ll make her a diary. For six days. I’ve heard it all now.

      • Betti says:

        The diary thing only confirms that Kate is never around – i used to work with a Nanny who used to do just that for a SAHM who was never at home during the day. She was out at the gym, lunching with friends, spa’s, hair salons etc.. all the things Chutney does.

      • notasugarhere says:

        There’s also her mystery scuba certs. Some timing puts those at a secret Mustique trip when their daughter was two months old. Neither of them appears to have trouble leaving the kids behind, but the PR image of quiet, country, normal parents must be upheld.

    • Magnoliarose says:

      His material is nonexistent. These two are a PR nightmare.

    • Cee says:

      I wish they would stop using their children as an excuse, it’s not working and it’s not something to be sympathetic about. They have left them behind before, even when they were much younger.

      Kate is coming across as very brittle and unable to function correctly.

    • hmmm says:

      I’m beginning to believe that this is all aimed at the sugar crowd. Such tone deafness and pigheadedness and incompetence by the PR team seems to suggest that there is a plan and a target. This fits with aiming said drivel at the American market as well, via People mag, for example.

      I don’t understand why, but it’s the only thing that makes sense to me. The sugar crowd tends to be fanatical and vociferous and probably supplies multiple blogs and online forums/services for the Dolittles’ PR team, in effect, an arm of PR. They are being fed so they can be used to the Dolittles’ advantage, disseminating the fairy tale (there is no greater love and sacrifice, for each other, family, their subjects) PR narrative.

      • BearcatLawyer says:

        I believe you are on to something here. Maybe this is their PR strategy: shore up the base first and then find and exploit the weaknesses and foibles of their critics. Do just enough to to keep the true believers happy and supportive while napalming anyone who dares to oppose them.

        Yeah, sounds about what I would expect from Billy Bucket.

      • Bc says:

        I expect a comment from Maggie any moment, especially when sugars are mentioned

  6. LookyLoo says:

    Oh, give me a break. The more I read about these welfare recipients, the less I like them.

    • Fallon says:

      Welfare recipients! I can’t stop laughing.

    • anne_000 says:

      Yeah, can you imagine how society at large would react if any other welfare recipient getting millions per year just for their family alone chose to stay home with their kids instead of going to a mandated work event which lasted only one to two hours while they have nannies and a grandmother at home to take care of the kids? Like she did with the St. Patrick’s Day ceremony for the Irish Army?

      But nope, Kate and her sugars think they get to use that excuse for her as if she’s that ultra special and entitled. It’s amazing to me that there are people who believe that some in society should be treated as like some kind of deity.

  7. Rae says:

    They wouldn’t take them simply because it would mean the press would have almost unrestricted access to take photos of the children.

    How can they keep their own photos of the children exclusive if they allowed that?

    And it would distract from Kate’s backdrop coordinated clothing.

    Not a chance.

    • Ramona Q. says:

      Ohhhh, it’s about the photos. That makes sense. You are smart!

    • anne_000 says:

      +1

      I think you’re right.

      I also think that they don’t want to spend much time with their kids either. I think they want this trip to be child-free so that they can indulge themselves without being bothered or forced to appear as if they were hands-on parents. That would be double-work for them, rather than this being a semi-vacation.

      Even on that French Alps trip recently, the only interactions they were seen doing with the kids were taking photographs for about 5 – 10 minutes the first morning after they arrived and then they had one meal with them out and about. There’s never any stories about how they spent time playing with them in the snow or building snowmen or William pulling George along on a sled or whatever. Instead, the only photographs of anybody playing around in the snow was of the adults W&K. The kids seemed to be used only as props that were quickly handed back to the nannies after the photo session was finished.

      I think after taking George with them to Oz/NZ, they realized it’s not as fun with child as without child. I think Kate must have been bothered by having to attend that mother-child event in which she had to look as if she’s normally thoroughly engaged with George while having to do small talk with the plebs. If other mothers asked her details about George, she might not have known the answers as these sorts of things are dealt with by the nannies.

  8. Janis says:

    This is a business trip. The kids will be well-cared for. Focus on your job. Jeez
    You’d think that no other parent has ever had to leave their kids behind for a work obligation.
    These twits really think they’re so special, don’t they? Grow up already. SMH (She’s really making me feel stabby lately).

  9. HollyG says:

    I can’t remember if I mentioned this before, but somebody once told me that People magazine has a large focus group of women–the minivan majority–who review all of the potential magazine covers and yea or nay them, including the little article descriptions. This is how you end up with “Princess Kate” and a narrative that bears no resemblance to demonstrated reality….the focus group would miss their children and want to see photos, so People will obligingly provide a story where Princess Kate is just like them.

  10. jb says:

    I’d guess it has to do with issues like malaria — I know even if I could afford a trip to India I’d wait until my kids could handle the meds for malaria, various shots etc. I also think the kids are a great excuse for a shorter trip – don’t Charles & Camilla do much longer trips overseas? Kids are useful….kind of like props in a play.

    • me says:

      Do your research on Malaria pills before you decide to give them to your kids. I have been to India 6 times and just used good old bug spray. I did make sure to stay the hell away from tap water. I even brushed my teeth with bottled water. I didn’t eat any salad or fruit either. They have McDonald’s, KFC, Pizza Hut. They also have Subway but I refused to eat uncooked veggies. I was fine…just got the “runs” which you do from very spicy food as I just had to eat samosas and channa masala ! What I hate is how most people just assume India is a very poor country. Yes, there is poverty there, but there is also riches. Some areas are filled with small villages, fields, and cows. Other areas are filled with luxurious hotels, mega homes and mega malls. It’s a real mixture.

    • Kimble says:

      Didn’t have any shots or malaria pills when I went to New Delhi … bug spray and take care with the food.

      Best country I’ve ever visited and yes, I did the corny pic a la Diana!

  11. GoodNamesAllTaken says:

    I think the article is gag worthy and all, but I believe it would be hard for any mother to leave her very young children for a week. I know I’m in the minority, but I think you can see a real bond between Kate and her children, and I know she has nannies and all that but I still think she will miss them. It’s not like she has friends or anything, right?

    I also disagree with that nanny who said children don’t mind their parents leaving, confidence and all that. I minded my parents leaving very much as a child, or at least my mother. I coped with it, but I clearly remember the feeling that everything wasn’t right until she came home.

    • Magnoliarose says:

      I hate being separated from my littles but I don’t think she’s as much that way. She’s done it before and has good caregivers. She seems to aspire to play Lady of the Manor circa 1895 when children were presented once a day and then disappeared into the nursery rooms for the other 23 hours and 45 minutes.

      • kaiko says:

        Yeah, this, totally…those christening pictures say a thousand words. They looked like a cast photo of some play where everyone was still in costume. They looked ridiculous and phony, especially Kate! Was that the goal? All the photos of her since Charlotte was born have looked…weird. Something’s off.

      • hmmm says:

        The christening was the backdrop. I wonder if she sent out a team to scout out the area.

    • HyacinthBucket says:

      Goodnamesalltaken, where do you see that bond? I can’t recall seeing her with the children all that much, having been treated to maybe five or six very staged pics. I’m not saying she isn’t missing them when away, but deep bond, puleeeze.

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        I haven’t seen many pictures of her with Charlotte, but have seen many pictures and videos of her with George, and it’s clear that he loves her and feels comfortable with her and that she adores him. Honestly, people on here just can’t see anything good when they don’t like like someone. She’s a human being. She’s a mother and she loves her children, but you WANT to believe she is incapable of love or human feelings. I have known women who were shallow and empty headed wastes of space, but they still loved their children and their children loved them. People are complicated. Yes, she’s lazy and shallow. But clearly family is very important to her. I find it baffling that people don’t believe a mother loves her own children and will miss them. What a bleak and negative space to keep your head in.

      • ClaireB says:

        I remember seeing the pictures of Kate playing with George at the polo match(?), and thought they looked very comfortable and bonded with each other. I still think she’s perfectly happy to leave them in the care of their nanny most of the time and that her and William’s real allergy is to work and not being away from their kids, but I’m not going to argue that she doesn’t love her children.

      • notasugarhere says:

        You mean the polo match where KM sat on a hill and watched as he ran into the path used by the horses? KM sat there and waiting while Autumn chased him down and returned him to his seated mother.

      • anne_000 says:

        The times I’ve seen of Kate and George outside of official or staged events was:

        - George trying to get to somebody behind him while Kate tried to move him forward along with her. Must have been Nanny Marie he was trying to get back to.
        - The museum pics where he seems to be interested more in his toy and other things. I’ve never yet seen one photo in an off-work moment in which he and Kate are looking at each other with any real feeling of a bond.
        - The polo match. He was trying to get away from her. She kept holding onto him because it looked like she knew there were photographers. And then the incident that notasugarhere mentioned. Kate couldn’t be bothered to stand up and go get her son herself. Must have been used to having the nannies run around after George.

        I’m not saying W&K don’t have any bond with their kids. But I doubt it’s so much so that Kate can’t take herself away from them to do the St. Patrick’s day ceremony. She was able to do the EACH charity shop event the next day without the kids. She did the Air Force cadet church event without the kids and took the copter to and away from the event. She left her first child at home for a week while she and William went to the Maldives.

      • hmmm says:

        Of course she’s familiar to him, and he may be comfy in her presence. I’m sure he’s comfy with the hired help as well. She’s probably like an auntie whom he occasionally sees.

      • hmmm says:

        Narcissistic women tend to perceive their kids as an extension of themselves. The children are there to meet their mother’s needs. Already, the kids are used as props and excuses.

        Leaving them behind only matters if there is greater benefit than taking them with her. Maldives? Don’t need the little extensions. Ski trip with professional photos: need them for publicity. Holiday in India? Don’t need them for publicity. Australia/NZ- politic to showcase George.

        There’s no question in my mind that both Willy and Waity are narcissistic to the Nth degree. I pity those poor children as they grow, especially Charlotte. After all, Waity is a mere extension of her narcissistic mother.

      • anne_000 says:

        @ hmmm

        + 1

        Now I’m thinking that one reason why they took George to Oz/NZ to ‘debut’ him an extended outing was to stick it to the UK media yet again. I think William thinks that by starving the UK media of exposure to the children will somehow make his standing with them more powerful.

      • Liberty says:

        anne_000, @hmmm, @notasugar…. +1

    • bluhare says:

      I agree, GNAT. I don’t know a mother alive who doesn’t anguish a bit when she leaves the kids when they’re small. I don’t like the fact it’s being spun now when they’re going away for a week for work. I don’t think they’d hesitate to leave them behind for a tropical holiday, though, anguish or not.

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        My parents traveled without us sometimes. It didn’t mean they didn’t love us.

      • LAK says:

        Ummm……….

      • notasugarhere says:

        ” I don’t think they’d hesitate to leave them behind for a tropical holiday,”

        Exactly.

      • Magnoliarose says:

        @GNAT My parents traveled a lot too and loved me. I don’t think anyone thinks she doesn’t love them, but this spin rings false when she has done it before. I also think the Cambridges use their children as excuses so it’s hard to believe them.

    • HappyMom says:

      As a mother, yes-it feels hard to leave them. The anticipation is the worst. The moment you’re on the plane however-you’re golden :) But this article is ridiculous. I mean come on-it’s 6 days, not 6 weeks. They will be fine.

    • INeedANap says:

      OTOH, I had a mom who was very attached to me because she was lonely and didn’t have any friends (she came to the US from Cuba at 18, married at 20, kids at 21 and 23). We have a very stressful and borderline toxic relationship because she sees me as literally the only thing capable of giving her happiness and purpose. That’s a lot of pressure on a kid.

      Also I might be projecting my own issues on Laze Quitter Kate.

      • ClaireB says:

        I think if you moved that projection up a generation to Carole and angled it a bit so that her happiness depended on you pleasing a certain man, the situation would be quite similar!

    • Betsy says:

      Does it make me a a complete monster that I would jump at a week long, mentally stimulating vacation with my children capably cared for? Granted, I SAH with them and haven’t been away from either for longer than a hospital stay.

      • Melly says:

        If you’re horrible, then I am too! I would love, love, LOVE to go on the “work” trip they are going on. A beautiful, culturally rich country that I get to learn more about while having all of the first class accommodations. Most can only dream…

      • Liberty says:

        I have no kids, so asked my friends who have kids under age 6. They said they would miss their kids and would worry terribly, and feel guilty: what if something happened?

        I then said, What if you had a regular royal Nanny and Palace staff to watch them, no expense spared for their needs, doctors at the standby, and doting grandma too, and you were only away 6 days? And the work is attending parties and changes clothes and meeting people and seeing the sights?

        They said, “A nanny AND a staff? just six days? A posh break? Get us a ticket!” (They all work full-time.)

      • Magnoliarose says:

        All of the above. I love my children but 6 days away for work while they are well cared for, is reasonable. It’s not asking too much.

  12. BendyWindy says:

    I must be a terrible mother. It’s only a week. Geeze.

    • kaiko says:

      Oh hell, I’ve had a few people call me a helicopter mom cause I never leave my kids…you just can’t win either way.

    • Susan says:

      Bendy Windy no you are not you are NORMAL. and honest. I work full time and see my kids a lot less than Kate does and do I miss them when I travel for work? Yes. But it’s a good learning experience for all parties involved. Especially my husband! Wicked laugh. ;)

    • Bridget says:

      I personally enjoyed the ’2 children under 3 are incredibly difficult’ part. Um, no.

  13. Runcmc says:

    I had to get a ton of shots when I went to India (beautiful country!!) Maybe the kids aren’t old enough for those yet.

  14. Avox says:

    I’m starting to hate these two so much.

    Also – how are Will and Harry even related?! Harry is such a good egg and Will is a lazy mope…

    • Lindsay says:

      Part of what’s wrong with Will is what’s wrong with Kate. To be told your the most important member of the family and having it constantly drummed in your head the family’s future success depends on you and so everyone around you will prop you up at all costs messes people up. Both were bubble wrapped by their parents and never grew.

      Part of it is the were born with completely different personalities which happens.

      I think Harry also learned while he was young (while Will was cosseted away and had the “golden prince” reputation solely for being Diana’s son) that being a prince didn’t mean he was unaccountable or untouchable and couldn’t make the rules as he went along.

      • lily says:

        I agree with you. Also I think that their personality is totally different, no matter the education they got and the experience they are different persons

    • realitycheck says:

      AVOX I’m with you on this one. I hate these two as well.

  15. Alexa de Vere says:

    Good grief – it’s extraordinary but true: in the midst of this pr meltdown, I’m actually reversing my thinking on these two. William I still think of as entitled and not a natural media talent with no instinct for making good pr. But Kate? Seriously you guys- you all sound waaaaaay to semotionally over invested in this. You absolutely nail her for everything she does, with the scantest of actual evidence beyond mere hearsay – a lot of which is gleaned for that gutterpress rag the DM (that literally no remotely serious person in the uk reads) and then lambast her for not taking her children to India. I lived in India during my twenties for work and almost died from a waterborne virus. There is absolutely no way I would ever take my kids who are the same age at Kate’s. No way ever. If she wants to spend lots of time with them ahead of what will be quite an emotional trip, why is that so bad?

    • BendyWindy says:

      I don’t have a problem with not taking the kids to India. I’m rolling my eyes at the “what will be an emotional trip” part. They’re going to a tropical, exotic locale with some of the most beautiful scenery and architecture in the world (and yes, some of the worst poverty, too) and they’re going for six days.

      They go on vacation alone for that long all. the. time.

      • lily says:

        i agree, it s only 6 days, not 6 weeks, come on! And kate has been off duty at home for a whole month with her kids! she’ s been enjoying them full time since march!
        it s not like normal people working 8/9 hours day in day out! her ( few) engagements last one hour!

    • Thinker says:

      I have also traveled in India, and I agree that I would not feel comfortable bringing my small children. I got very sick while there, many Westerners do, mind you I couldn’t afford the kind of absurdly luxurious accommodations the Cambridges will be staying in.

      However I think that misses point most commenters are making. It is SIX days. Less than a week. Many mothers and fathers have gone on much longer trips for work reasons. These blatant attempts to muster sympathy from an adoring public are falling on deaf ears. It’s a very short trip by royal or regular standards, these two NEVER work by royal or regular standards, they have it easier than 99.99999% of working parents.

      • Ravine says:

        “These blatant attempts to muster sympathy from an adoring public are falling on deaf ears.”

        Why do people in these threads ALWAYS assume that any article about W&K that isn’t critical of them MUST have been strategically engineered by their PR team?

        The article has two sources. Both are named. Neither has ANYTHING to do with W&K or their staff. One of them “has worked” (past tense) for some unspecified “friends” of theirs, while the other is director of an institute “where many of George’s teachers studied”. In other words, neither of them has ever met W&K (otherwise it would have been mentioned) and their speculation means nothing.

        Guys, come on. Someone at People was tasked with writing a new Kate & Her Kids article for the supermarket moms (“–and make it saccharine!”). She emailed a royal-adjacent-adjacent contact with nannying experience (Dixon) and the Montessori institute person (likely after getting nowhere with George’s actual teachers). She then cobbled together a piece out of these two randos’ opinions, a few known facts and a dash of rumour, and lo — tabloid filler was born.

        Where on Earth are people getting the impression that any of this is coming from their PR staff?

      • Magnoliarose says:

        Ravine, because it is. People magazine is where PR teams go to push a naarative with no questions asked. WK’s actions in no way match up to this slant at all. That is the problem.

    • Tina says:

      I’ve travelled to India frequently on business, staying in luxurious hotels, and still got very sick. I don’t blame them at all for not bringing the children.

      But (a) they’ve left George for the same amount of time before without all this ridiculous handwringing; and (b) it’s six days. There is no need for her to give up all work for a month (except this ridiculous pre-tour reception) before leaving the children for six days. No business person gets to do that, and certainly no member of the armed forces.

      But I take greatest umbrage at your suggestion that “you absolutely nail her for everything she does, with the scantest of evidence beyond mere hearsay.” What, precisely, do you think is untrue? This stuff is reported in the most reputable UK papers, the Telegraph, the Guardian and even the Times. It’s on ITV and even the BBC. What more do you want?

    • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

      Thank you, Alexa. It really is just ridiculous.

    • notasugarhere says:

      It is, as others said, the OTT handwringing and remove themselves from work for three weeks prior that is the issue. They have no problem leaving the kids for extended vacations. Being expected to leave them for work? Oh the horror. It is PR PR PR so they can continue their useless, lazy lives in Norfolk for years to come.

      • addie says:

        They are both opportunists. The hand-wringing is just eye-rollingly nauseating. Just grow up, do the job and shut up.

    • Sixer says:

      Alexa – as others have said, if we had been treated to articles detailing how their holidays were super-duper nice and great fun but they had deeply missed their children while away, you might have a point. Since they have taken such holidays without their children, and since they have gone to great lengths to conceal that they have, I’m afraid your point doesn’t stand.

      Unless it’s normal and natural to NOT miss your children while taking a holiday but normal and natural to miss them while taking a work trip? Is that what we are saying?

      And that’s without even going into the amount of time they do have available to spend with their children in comparison to 65 million other Brits, who make do with Saturdays and Sundays, what with working Mondays to Fridays. 6 days away from your children when you work at most one day per fortnight is not at all the same thing as 6 days away from your children when you work 5 days a week.

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        Stretching. The article never said most of those things. People on here are being ridiculous, saying they don’t love their children. That’s a terrible thing to say about someone with very little, actually no evidence to support it.

      • Sixer says:

        I’m sure they love their children, GNAT. I haven’t said otherwise.

        But I’m not stretching. You can’t have a PR article invoking pity for the agony at a 6-day work separation when you’ve been caught out vacationing without the kids on more than one occasion.

        And you can’t expect sympathy for a 6 day separation when your wealth and privileged status confer you with at least quintuple the time the parents paying for you have to spend with their children. Or when you skip off on engagements honouring other state institutions, whose workforce are obliged to spend months away from their own families.

        As I said below, these people are responsible for the maintenance of a state institution. Institutions can, and must, be held to account by the population they serve. It’s not personal. And if they don’t want to uphold this institution, they should leave it.

      • LAK says:

        GNAT: the article is pretending this is the first time they have left their kids behind, and what a wretch that will be.

        This isn’t the first time they have left the kids behind. Every time they go on holiday without the kids, always reported as some sort of couples’ catch up, it’s sold to the public as necessary, never handwringing over the kids left behind. As recently as February when they had a romantic weekend in Scotland ahweekendan engagement -seriously, that’s how the palace sold it to the public, complete with dinner choices at a local eatery that they visited.

        Most egregiously when they left 8mth old baby, with a new nanny starting the same week of holiday, for 10days to the Maldives. New nanny had to figure it out with help from old nanny and possibly Carole, but not the parents.

        Yet every single time they need or want PR or even to cancel work, suddenly they can’t leave their kids, it’s too heartwrenching.

        As recently as last month, William sanctioned an article in which he called working parents bad parents as one of many excuses for not working and thus justifying his stay at home status, only to turn around and go on a 3-4 day jaunt to Africa without said babies.

        Holidays without kids? good and frequently indulged by one or both. Work? never! the kids will be traumatised by parental absence.

        It’s how they operate.

        Personally, wish they didn’t use their kids whilst pretending otherwise, and just buckled down to work without all these histrionics.

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        I said all along that the article was stupid. My objection is to all the comments stating that neither of them love their children. I think that is an atrocious thing to say.

      • Jib says:

        GNAT, I didn’t see anyone say they didn’t love their children. I did see people say that they are hypocrites about their children, using them as excuses when they wanted to get out of something, yet leaving George when he was a baby for a second “honeymoon” and Wills leaving them for Easter, after they both implied that working parents are neglectful parents. Those things are all true. People also said that they didn’t seem to be that close to,their kids, which I can’t judge from what I see, but that they don’t actually seem to spend a lot of time with them. And this article is just PR nonsense, considering they’re going to be away for 6 whole days.
        But not love their kids? I think you and Alexa are criticizing something never said.

    • anne_000 says:

      I’ve never said the kids should go to India and Bhutan with them. I think they’d much prefer not being around with the kids in the public eye so that they won’t have to feel as if they have to interact with them as if they actually do that in private settings.

      Ok, so here we have the hand-wringing PR story with having to leave them for this trip. Yet, where was the same PR sentiment when they left George behind for the same or a day more when they went to the Maldives? Does the hand-wringing only happen when it’s a work-related trip and not an adults-only tropical vacation?

      And why use the kids as a PR excuse for not working for the month prior to this trip? Can’t be away from them for 30 days because of a six-day trip? Really?

      It’s not as if W&K are 40-hour a week, full-time workers who have little time to spend with their kids. They, especially her, have loads of free time. Spending 30 days off from work for her is normal, whether there’s a six-day trip coming or not. So using the children as an excuse this time around for not working is so very lame.

    • bluhare says:

      We are not “all” one amorphous blur here, Alexa.

    • Zoobie says:

      I’m wondering if William isn’t pulling away from her in some way and making her clinically anxious to the point she feels overwhelmed at going out and doing anything. How old was she when they met? There were at University and I don’t know the ages there for that, but still quite young. I have one son in college and one a little older and I think back to my early twenties and I felt so “unformed” by everything–not quite adult and not child either. So since then she has been tied to a future with him, waiting for that future to start living. He seemed protective of her when they announced their engagement. If’s he’s pulling at all away now she probably feels quite a bit of panic. I was always an anxious sort about going out, meeting people, doing things on my own so perhaps I’m projecting, but perhaps she is finding it quite difficult to go out and present a happy little wife image if there is tension. I’m only imaging of course and thinking of myself but I can see wanting to hide away at home rather than deal with that.

  16. Christin says:

    #PoorMaria

    Assuming she is the only nanny (which I highly doubt), will she be having to document everything, answer to the lady duo plus granny C, participate in calls at who knows what time of day (time zone differences), etc.?

    • Magnoliarose says:

      What do you think Maria’s true purpose is? Very curious to know. No sarcasm intended.

      • Christin says:

        Purely a guess, but probably head nanny with secret nannies hidden in the background.

        If she is the only nanny for two very young children 24/7, I feel sorry for her.

    • Magnoliarose says:

      I can see that. Most very wealthy have one per child and sometimes a head nanny too oversee the others.

  17. vauvert says:

    You know what, I would feel sympathy for anyone else but these two. I wouldn’t bring kids this young to India either, no matter how luxurious the digs and the extra help because there is still a serious chance of getting severely ill, particularly at that age (my first husband almost died as a child while living there with his expat parents.) And if my own child were that young, I would do everything in my power to avoid being away for six days. I have tremendous respect for people who have to leave their young children home and travel for work, I could never do it.

    But – these two have left their young son to go on vacation, and didn’t seem to complain then. Also, I would feel a lot more sympathetic if they actually worked all the time, which we know they don’t. Lastly, they are not exactly hands on when home, no matter what their pr tries to tell us.

  18. Sam says:

    I were a British citizen who, heavens forbid, travels for business or is in the military or some such thing, I’d be really tired of their crying at this point. Do they realize how many parents have obligations to travel and have to spend time away from their kids? Dear God, it’s called Skype.

    • HappyMom says:

      Exactly. And they’re leaving them with the nanny who they’ve had for years, and their grandmother. It’s not like they’ve had to scrape childcare up from an online service or with friends. The kids’ routines will not change. Everyone will be just fine. And it’s less than a week!

  19. Karen says:

    This is PR. They need good PR, so they trot out the kids.

    They had no problem leaving behind a 7-month old for a week’s long vacation in Maldives with a then brand new nanny, or leaving George for 3-4 days to tour DC/NY.

    And this tour is very very short… only 6 days for 2 countries (& the last day is a photo ops at Taj Mahal), compared to Australia which was “19″ days.

  20. Alexa de Vere says:

    Take umbrage all you want- just because the media titles are a bit more upmarket, doesn’t remove the fact that the media has a royal agenda to pursue because it makes them money. His is all just clickbait for them.

    • Tina says:

      It may be click bait, but it’s the truth. If she did proper work, they’d report that too.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Yes, the media reporting facts is so evil, isn’t it Tina? When even places like the Telegraph start in on their laziness, it is past time to fix The Problem with Will and Kate.

  21. Mophita789 says:

    Can we take a moment to “heh” at the source of this here for a second. The woman quoted in the article is friends with some people who have worked for Will and Kate. She hasn’t worked with them directly, nor does it indicate that she’s worked with Maria the nanny. She’s just a woman who knows people who worked in some capacity with the couple voicing her own opinion that sometimes it’s hard for parents to leave their kids. And somehow this got turned into an article / narrative – hilarious!!

  22. my3cents says:

    Let’s remember that Harry extended his trip by a week- and these Dolittles cry over 6 days? Really?
    And why is there no criticism over them not doing any events till the trip- ITS YOUR JOB, as in JOB!

    • FingerBinger says:

      Harry isn’t a good example either. The older royals still do more engagements than Harry.

      • notasugarhere says:

        I don’t think it is the same case with Harry. He cannot be seen to do more royal work than his elder brother. Not with W&K’s PR reputations in the dirt. PR nightmare. It isn’t the same as Anne doing more engagements than Charles, because they’ve both worked hard for years AND Charles has the Duchy, taking over Philip’s land management tasks, and taking over things for HM behind the scenes.

        Harry is fifth in line, not second. Palace said he was going to take a break then get another full-time job. Now he volunteering 2-3 days a week with wounded vets and doing Sentebale and Invictus. The sooner he gets a full-time job the better for his brother’s reputation.

      • Rae says:

        He’s been heavily involved in the organisation of the Invictus games, to be fair to him.

        I think Harry gets a lot of goodwill because, unlike Bill, he seems to put effort and passion into what he is doing. At least more so than his brother.

      • Liberty says:

        Not all Harry’s events or efforts are recorded, to help his brother save face.

  23. Murphy says:

    Heirs before them used to go on tours for months at a time. Of course they worked more than 40 hours a year also but whatevs.

  24. Amaria says:

    Off-topic.

    As much as these two are a royal train wreck, I feel kind of sorry for Kate.
    I know she’s lazy and vapid.
    I know she went into this with her eyes open.
    But I think she miscalculated the whole thing. My hypothesis: she believed she could live normally (“normally”) in this marriage, somehow do the job, but it turned out to be too much. She’s sheltered, immature, codependent (that mother) and with no self-respect – that’s not a strong character, not a woman who knows how to deal with problems. Then there’s Willnot, spoiled, selfish and cold, who couldn’t care less about his wife. Then, there’s the job she didn’t really want, which seems to scare her (I know…). I think she’s fallen victim (a dumb, spoiled victim, but nevertheless) to her mother’s ambitions and Billy’s need to have a doormat who would bear him children. I believe she had serious psychological problems – had them before, and now they’re getting worse.
    I hope I’m wrong, but in my opinion there’s some royal mental health drama in the making. I mean, look at her. Look at them. This can’t end well.

    • JulieM says:

      Amaria: I agree completely. I think Kate thought she could live the life of the wife of a country squire, without the responsibilities of being the wife of the heir to the heir. She is in way over her head. I don’t think she is going to be able to withstand the mounting pressure. I, too, see some trouble ahead for her and even though I don’t respect her, I would really hate to see that happen.

      • Citresse says:

        Remember when Charles was young and he gave that interview about the expectations of his future wife. He said the public expected someone “special” for the role of wife to the heir. Did anyone feel that way about Kate? Not really. The reality is she hung around long enough and let’s face it; no one else seriously wanted William.

      • Amaria says:

        For all the imitating of Diana she did, it would be sadly ironic if she followed in her footsteps by having serious emotional problems – but it seems likely to me. If someone told me she has an eating disorder now, I’d believe it.
        Expectations with Kate may not be as big as they were with Diana – but Kate seems to have much weaker personality than her late mother-in-law.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Whereas I think she has the life she wanted and chased for a decade. Title, homes, endless budget, and last person standing so she ended up with The Prince. If she had been a workhorse for the 10 years of dating, it would be different, but she proved herself to be as lazy and entitled as he is.

      KM proved herself to be a piece of work who would take down anyone who got in her way, has a family that willingly has ties to the press, and they all love the press attention. Can anyone else remember a royal girlfriend who asked paps for copies of their photos for the family album? She’s not an orchid, she’s wisteria that will climb and survive no matter what.

      The only strain these two are facing is public perception of their games. They expected to spend another 10 years doing nothing but going on vacation 10 times a year and being touted at Golden Child and Bride so “leave them alone already” as they say on the DM. The public expects them both to work, the press isn’t backing down, and they keep pretending they can do it Their Way forever.

      • Amaria says:

        I wish you were right, I hope you are. I’d never wish mental health issues on anyone.
        But I don’t think she was the driving force behind the patient waitying and paps – Pimp Mama Carole was, in my opinion, and her characterless daughter did as she was told, mostly.
        It’s possible she got what she wanted- but what she wanted may not be what she actually needed, hence the problems.

      • notasugarhere says:

        I think Carole did everything in her power to get what she and her daughter wanted. They chased after entree into the set for years, but I doubt Carole would have set her sights so high for her eldest if KM hadn’t fixated on William.

        If Carole merely wanted a daughter married to a potential future king, she’d have thrown Pippa at him. She was a more logical choice in many ways. A few years younger, more popular and outgoing, appears less afraid of pretending to work.

      • hmmm says:

        Mama wasn’t around Waity Wisteria when she was fighting off any woman who looked Willy’s way. That takes a steely determination and a mean toughness. She’s no victim.

    • Betsy says:

      That’s how I feel, too. And I don’t think there’s truly “eyes open” about this job/family. I don’t think she’s right for the job, and I think having a monstrously entitled and unsupportive husband is terrible.

    • suze says:

      I agree with you, Amaria. There is something off here.

    • Kate says:

      I don’t think so. Her role is clearly defined, especially in the shadow of Diana. First few years of dating, sure, if she’s exceedingly dim she might have thought it would be a breeze, but after that…she knew exactly what she was getting herself into.

      If she was just a woman who wanted a nice relaxing country lifestyle with a rich husband, she could have saved herself a lot of trouble and married someone else. She almost certainly could have married richer, and lived a life completely free of any type of responsibility and expectation. But she chose this life, so she has to suck it up.

  25. Jaded says:

    They’re simply playing this “poor Duke and Duchess of Sloth have to leave their kids at home” angle in a blatant but lame excuse to garner some much needed sympathy. Funny how it’s backfiring on them.

  26. Citresse says:

    If this article is to be believed, W&K are acting like it’s a six week tour.
    The Cambridge courtiers are aware of all the bad press. W&K just appear as weak, silly and lazy (again). The only successful PR strategy for W&K is for them to get to work.

  27. Beatrice says:

    Choupette’s nannies keep a detailed diary for Lagerfeld. Guess it’s a “thing” now!

  28. Alexa de Vere says:

    The thing is, it’s not a job. Duty – yes. Unavoidable role in public life- yes. Inevitable head of state- yes. But these things are not jobs in the way we understand them. Kate has a loooooong old game to play here; chances are she will be trotting out to events into her 90s or even 100s as Williams queen consort or whatever it is. Yes if you or I were in her position we’d like to think we would do more with it and that’s great. We’ve all agreed the same. But we are not her, and for whatever reason, she’s not doing all these great things we expect of her. And that, while not making great material for Royal watchers to swoon over, is her choice to make. Because it’s not a job, it’s a role. Ok, she’s playing it badly right now perhaps. But she cannot escape it like she could of this were just a job. She just has to grasp its enormous scope, manage it and come to terms with it as best she can. And I think that is what she is doing during these first years of her marriage. This is despite the best efforts of the media (who have myriad vested interests in all sorts of ways) to paint her as dim, scanty and witless. She’s not perfect, but then neither are any of us! The difference is, she has a media lens pointed at her all the time for the rest of her life and there is no job that is remotely like that.

    • Tina says:

      It’s her (and William’s) choice to do this. And it’s my choice to decide that I, who have always been a monarchist, am going to actively support a republic once the Queen dies. I don’t mind Charles as head of state. But I actively dislike the idea of William becoming head of state and I will campaign and work to see a republic happen. And if I, a middle aged Conservative, am saying that, then others will as well.

      • Betti says:

        I’m with you Tina. I was always a Monarchist but the thought of these 2 anywhere near the throne is making me think of buying a pitchfork. Like you I won’t mind Chuck when he ascends – i like him and Cams, they both work hard and do their bit. Willy is bone idle and clearly only wants the perks, money and privileged without having to deal with what comes with it. Nothing in life is free – something these 2 have yet to learn.

        Personally I don’t think he’ll get to the throne, the Monarchy has been ruthless in their self preservation instincts. If he does become King it won’t last long and he’ll end up being forced off the throne in favour of Harry or George. He’s a liability! So is her family.

      • Tina says:

        @Betti, I hope you’re right. I don’t think that #poorjason understands that this is not something for which we look to the US and its press. These idiots are ours and we decide whether we want to tolerate them or not. The Establishment has a vested interest in keeping the monarchy, but it doesn’t have to be these two at the top of it.

    • notasugarhere says:

      It is a job for which they are richly compensated. If they are not willing to do the work, they should refuse all perks for the job until such time as they’re willing to work. The majority of working royals are further down the line, past retirement, and working rings around these two. If W&K are not able to do the job if the snowflakes just cannot cope, legally step away now and take the kids with them.

    • Sixer says:

      I am not a royal watcher. I have no desire to swoon. I am a citizen of a country and I am holding one of its institutions to account. Or should institutions of state not be held to account? Surely you can’t believe that, Alexa? You should listen to Tina. If people like her are starting to say these things, it’s all gone a lot further than a bit of internet bitchery. I live in a rural, small-c conservative area and I assure you: Tina is not alone.

      • Tina says:

        @Sixer, thanks! I’m not going around with pitchforks and it’s a long time to King Willy (heaven help us) so they’ve got time to turn it around. But I really don’t think they’re capable of doing so. When you compare Charles and Anne on the Windsor side to William and Sophie (and even Diana) at a similar stage to Kate, there’s just no comparison. They’re simply not going to be capable of taking on the role when it’s required.

    • pleaseicu says:

      She’s had a 15 year learning curve. At what point is she expected to be an adult and get on with the job/role/life she chased for 10 years and that she’s lapped up the perks from for the last 5?

      She’s simply not new to this. And she’s been coddled since day one about what she will/will not do. And Kate repays the generosity she’s been extended for having no expectations or demands placed on her by half-assing the few engagements she does manage a year. It’s ridiculous that she’s only spending between 20-35 minutes at an engagement.

      I think every few people are expecting greatness from her at this point. No one except maybe the Daily Mail and People expects her to be Diana 2.0. But faking that she gives a crap when she’s visiting children at a hospice center and not flicking her hair or rolling her eyes when she’s listening to teens at a center isn’t asking too much. That’s not even royal courtesy or expectations that’s just basic decency and common courtesy to others. At this point, I feel like Princess Estelle at 4 years old is more polished and has more stamina, focus, and understanding at royal events than a 34 year old woman with 15 years of on the job training and coddling.

    • vava says:

      One thing for sure, is this: If William and Kate thought they were being scrutinized before this, they are really going to be more-so during this junket. There will be a lot of pressure on them to turn their image around. Can they do it? Time will tell.

      Their staff have certainly been doing them no favors with this stupid People article, or statements to the effect that Kate’s wardrobe is being planned to work with “the back drops”.

    • hmmm says:

      What is her role? Fairy Princess of the Land?

      • LAK says:

        The Princess and the pea. The story of princess who is too sensitive and frail despite the layers and layers of padding beneath her.

    • suze says:

      It’s not her choice to make.

  29. Alexa de Vere says:

    Ps Bendy Windy- have you ever been to India? I don’t need to tell you about how absolutely desperate the poverty is there or how widespread- of course it will be an emotional trip because Kate and Will will have to confront Highly emotive issues and respond in a statesman-like, diplomatic way to situations and people that are just desperate for the visits to have any worth.It’s bad enough as a run of the mill visitor to witness these things and suck them up but we can just go back to our hotel rooms and come to terms with it in private. They will need to be very public in the face of highlighting and promoting really important issues- of course it will be an emotional trip.

    • vava says:

      Hopefully it will be an enlightening experience for these two, and bring them back to earth, at least temporarily.

    • notasugarhere says:

      It will only be an emotional trip if they care. They have shown time and again that they do not care. As her cousin said, KM struggles to find other people interesting or to care about things unless she is personally invested in them.

      Empathy and sympathy are required for this job, and neither Will nor Kate suffer from an excess of those emotions.

      • vauvert says:

        My husband travels relatively often to India, and we have considered moving there when he was offered an expat position. We turned it down for many reasons, but we are aware (me indirectly, him having experienced it first hand) of the terrible poverty and multiple issues – from women being gang raped and killed on the bus, to mothers washing their children in the sewer and elephants carrying goods down the street between cars, to whole families traveling on a motorcycle with zero safety, to disease that kills because they can’t afford a doctor or medicine.

        Most people would react to the experience with a lot of feeling and presumably, if they had the means, would help. Well, these two have the means. They have the means to help in the UK, where there also issues, like everywhere else, but on a different level and of a different kind. We have all seen what they do, and how involved they get; poor parents are responsible for mentally ill children, pose with photogs for 25 minutes, then go shopping. Are you kidding me??

        Now, I readily admit that I wouldn’t be able to be “on” 24/7. I wouldn’t be able to go day in and out to see only dramatic situations – hospices and disabled war veterans, children with cancer and so on. It would break my heart. But sure as hell any one of us here on this board would be capable of picking several causes that matter to us the most, that we feel passionate about, and put in a few days a week towards that, in between shopping and beauty appointments and galas with heads of state and movie stars. And if that is too much to ask, she had the option of not marrying him, if the role is too much. He has the option to remove himself from succession if travelling in style to a foreign country, with a full entourage, private plane, chefs and maids and stylists and secretaries, staying in luxurious hotels, being feted at dinners and spending a couple of hours (the horror!!!!) visiting a slum out of six days is just. too. much.

        The fact that they do so little, with no apparent feeling, always inarticulate and having no knowledge of the topic, is what bugs people. Their wealth and privilege is at the expense of a nation / Commonwealth. They are not successful entrepreneurs who earned their wealth, tax payers support them. There is an expectation that in return they provide some time and attention. But these two only want the benefits, what little they do is so clearly done begrudgingly. And you think they will have emotional experiences in India and will actually speak in anything other than platitudes? (shaking head in disbelief….)

      • Fallon says:

        @vauvert – very well said.

      • Elizabeth says:

        Vauvert, when I was 14 and convinced that I was going to be the first Oklahoman to marry into the Royal Family, I thought about all I could accomplish as a princess:

        Yes, I’d be patroness of the Royal School of Needlework (as well as a student) and an orchestra and an opera company and possibly a ballet company, but I’d also want to work with homeless animals, heart disease, sick children, prevention of skin cancer, Air Force veterans like my Dad and nurses like my Mom.

        I wonder what Kate dreamed of doing as a princess.

      • notasugarhere says:

        What she’s doing now, living the lifestyle of a country WAG. Shopping, vacationing, watching the nannies with the kids, waving at the public, and matching her outfits to the scenes where she’ll be photographed instead of actually preparing for her work trip.

    • Sixer says:

      If Kate Cambridge comes back from this trip having appeared statesmanlike even for one nano-second, Alexa, I will give you my entire supply of rhubarb chutney and my last remaining bottle of sloe gin. That’s a promise!

      • capepopsie says:

        Hahahahaha. . . . .
        :-)

      • BearcatLawyer says:

        Hang on, Sixer, you have sloe gin, you say? Time for a sundowner on the veranda, I say! Avec Cheez-Its!

      • Sixer says:

        Home made sloe gin, no less! If Alexa doesn’t succeed in winning it off me – and I don’t think she will, sorry Alexa! – I’ll be most happy to share it with you and your Cheez-Its (what are they?), Bearcat!

      • msthang says:

        Vauvert, When your marriage is in a shambles, it has got to be hard as hell to appear as though you care, so the charade of look at my expensive outfit and my glossy locks is really all Chutney has.

    • BendyWindy says:

      No, I’ve never been, though my in-laws are there now. Perhaps I’m a different sort of person because I just don’t get how it is “emotional ” to be separated from your kids for a work trip in India, but not emotional for vacations. But you seem to be much more invested in this than I am, so I’ll defer to you.

    • kaiko says:

      Wait….what????
      I mean, I get what you’re saying about India being the tenth level of hell, a place which would be highly emotional for most of us normal people who were raised with some sense of empathy and self sacrifice, but…this couple can’t even put on believable sad faces for actual dying children that are brought of care and posed in photo ops with them. And you have an expectation of gravitas and genuine human concern and sympathy as they tour the slums of Mumbai? I admire your ironclad faith Madame de Vere!

      • bluhare says:

        I don’t think I can go that far, Kaiko. I think Kate gave up on the children’s hospice work partially because seeing very ill children, and parents of children who died is really difficult to do. Should she have tried more? Maybe so. But some people just aren’t cut out for things like that.

      • notasugarhere says:

        You’re giving her a pass on dealing with a huge chunk of royal work (visiting the sick) because you think she’s too sensitive and it was difficult to do? SMH.

        She had a year (or 10) to choose her few charities. She chose that one. Now she cannot handle it, but gee mental health looks like it needs an ignorant spokesperson so she’ll slot herself in there.

  30. vava says:

    I’m sure Kate will miss her children, but the article is just unnecessary. Nobody really knows what goes on at Anmer, how much time she actually spends with her kids. Or how much William does, either. When I was a child, I hated it when my parents went away. But I didn’t have a nanny I’d bonded with, either. So, Maria will be a comfort for those two kids, and 6 days is manageable.

    The PR angle is kind of desperate. A poster up thread mentioned the military staff who are away from their families for much longer because They Have A Job To Do. Sacrifices are made, and while I’m sure the Cambridges would prefer to stay at home, they do need to get out there and show some initiative for all the perks they receive as royals.

    • sophietta says:

      I have wondered lately if Kate, in order to survive, is using drugs. As I commented on another site she looks manic, sometimes dishevelled and out of it with her hand and mouth actions. The difference between the girl of a few short years ago and the older woman we see now is remarkable for all the wrong reasons. Too bad.

      • Citresse says:

        I had a bad feeling about Kate shortly after the wedding, however I still had hope for K&W as a couple.
        I saw illness in Kate’s future. I had a feeling William would end up alone someday.

      • BendyWindy says:

        I can’t stop laughing. This is the silliest thing I’ve read. Drug problem? Lol. I’m sorry. I don’t mean to be rude, truly. It just seems like a leap across the Atlantic to me.

        I’m beginning to think, though, that Kate probably suffers from social anxiety. I had a nervous breakdown in my early 20s and went from being an exuberant, outgoing person to being a shell of my former self. I had difficulty making friends and going to parties. Sometimes going to the grocery store or calling a doctor’s office would induce panic attacks. It took years of therapy and medication for me to put together a relatively normal life.

        I think insecurity about her social status, accent, etc. makes it difficult for Kate to relate to people she doesn’t know well or get to know others. She’s afraid they’re all judging her and finding her wanting. The worst part is she’s not wrong. The upper class aristocrats will snub her and the resulting shyness and inability (or unwillingness) to connect with regular people will make it hard for her to quite fit any where.

      • Christin says:

        Yet she looks and (to some degree) behaves very differently at sporting and other ‘fun’ events.

      • Susan says:

        It is interesting…I followed a link from this site a week or so ago to what amounts to a Pinterest page of pics of Kate prior to the engagement. (Amazing, those internet rabbit holes!) Anyway, I was blown away by the personality, style and for lack of a better term FLAIR she used to have. And no it’s not the weight

      • KOri says:

        Drugs could refer to prescription drugs for an anxiety condition. I take a couple meds and it can really affect my nervous system. One of the conditions is anxiety disorder–I”m relaxed and comfortable in situations that are familiar or appealing and nervous, fidgety and stilted in ones that I’m not. They aren’t mutally exclusive (for mentions of Kate’s differing attitudes at varying events). It also causes me to pull out of things at the last minute. Now I’m not saying that this is the Duchess’s problem but it’s not out of the realm of possibility to have social anxiety develop after the marriage and to have prescriptions to deal with it. And, unfortunately since my income is much less than the Duchess’s, retail therapy has often been an escape from some of the anxiety.

  31. lower-case deb says:

    so far, reported preparation is:
    1. gala, of which the photos, when they are released, might feature glassy eyes and bared fangs.
    2. clothes reconnaissance and clothes shopping
    3. handwringing

    nothing about India and Nepal and highlighting interesting projects or causes ahead of the visit. we were given a short breakdown of their itinerary but it was less illuminating and more travel brochurey, another hint of this being less work and more vacay.

    nothing, that is, other than India and Nepal being interesting backdrops for Kate’s clothes and William’s memory of his late mother.

    • sophietta says:

      @lower case:

      There is nothing of substance to comment on….no prepping, no real knowledge, no awareness, no visible intelligence, no speeches, etcetera, ad nauseum, nought.

    • hmmm says:

      Way to break it down, lower-case deb. The photos will prove you right.

  32. HeyThere! says:

    Maybe it’s more the distance(4,000 miles), than the days(6)?? Or maybe when it’s somewhere you WANT to go, it’s easier to leave? And when it’s somewhere where you DO NOT want to go(work), it feel more difficult to go?? Either way, I kinda feel her in the distance area. I might be able to be on holiday for a few days not far away, but 4,000 is on the other side of the Earth. It will fly by for parents and the kids. No shade here.

    • lower-case deb says:

      because Maldives is only the next county over?

      Maldives is roughly the same distance away from the UK as India and Bhutan. yet they feel no anxiety of leaving the then less than 1 yr old George with a fairly new nanny for 10 days, which is 4 more than this India and Bhutan trip.

      back them people’s excuse is that it is good for parents to have separate lives from the children and have me time.

      and what about family guy Will who often skipped patron duties or flying duties to play doting dad, who went on a 4 day jaunt to attend an ex’s wedding.

      i assume it’s okay because Kenya is 4000 metres away from Amner, so Dad can fly back on the heli to celebrate Charlotte’s first easter… oh wait.

      distance from the children, to the Cambridges, is good… unless it is for work.

      • Betti says:

        William seems to keep his family at arms length – he kept his now wife at a distance for years only calling her for a booty call then marrying her as she was last girlfriend standing.

        One of the speculated reasons Middleton Manor got £1million worth of ‘security’ upgrades was because its her bolt hole – she spends more time with her parents than her husband. Thats what they are desperate to hide with the life the say they want in Norfolk (she is often seen shopping in London or visiting her favourite salon in the city) – the have always spent more time apart and being married with children hasn’t changed that. Its a dysfunctional relationship that will raise dysfunctional children, particularly if you throw Pimp Mamma Queen Carole in the mix. I have never thought it was a marriage that would see the distance. Willy is destined to repeat his parents mistakes.

  33. HeyThere! says:

    Also, something that drives me crazy: if she was in press saying how excited she was to leave the kids and go out she would get HEAVY shade. If she’s in the press, like now, talking about not wanting to leave them, she gets HEAVY shade. She can’t do anything right in the public eye. Must be frustrating!!

    • Fallon says:

      Which could definitely explain her becoming more reticent. I absolutely think she needs to step up more, but it’s got to be just impossible to live life – even a life she CHOSE – with this level of scrutiny.

    • Guesto says:

      Nonsense. No one’s expecting anything complicated or unreasonable from her, just a willingness to carry out public engagements with grace, and without needing the bizarre amount of babying and hand-holding and excuse-making she seems to require. THAT’S what’s generating the current media scrutiny.

      The ridiculous thing is, were she more engaged and proactive, the media attention would adjust accordingly in her favour. The ball is so completely in her court – and ditto, of course, in the court of her equally excuse-making, begrudging husband.

    • pleaseicu says:

      Those aren’t the only two options though. She can express how leaving her kids will be a challenge while still saying that she’s honored to be representing her majesty on this tour and getting to meet and spend time with the wonderful people of India and Bhutan. That is if she had to say anything to begin with.

      And who said she had to discuss/leak anything about the kids anyway? I don’t recall Crown Princess Victoria or Princess Marry or Queen Maxima leaking to various media outlets about how excited they are to leave their kids or how awful it is to leave their kids to carry out their royal duties on tours. Most people acknowledge it sucks to be away from family and small kids for work obligations. But these women make the tour itself and the people they’re meeting the focus of their pre-tour media articles rather than making themselves a victim of the big bad royal institution and royal obligations. Her PR team is the one going to their go-to media outlet trying to play the sympathy card and make her a victim who’s being unfairly forced from her kids.

      Maybe her PR team is already focused on post-tour fall out and are preemptively laying the ground work for her to disappear for another month or two post-tour.

    • hmmm says:

      You present a false dichotomy. It’s not “either-or”.

  34. Tourmaline says:

    This People story is just SO eye-rolling obnoxious. I’m a mom and not hardhearted, BUT as has been said by so many before me, it is just for SIX DAYS. It is probably only about the equivalent of the time an average working parent spends apart from their child over a few weeks!

    If Cosseted Kate wanted to be exclusively a stay at home mom, maybe she shouldn’t have angled for years to put herself in the position of being the future Queen of England? The cloying cluelessness of it all, I just can’t.

  35. Tanya says:

    There’s no way I’d take my kids on that kind of trip. You can’t wrangle away jet lag. My rule is that if you’re not going to be there for at least twice as long as it takes for the kids to get over jet lag, it isn’t worth it.

  36. Robot Dog says:

    This seems like pre-gaming to excuse anything that goes wrong with the tour. If they look miserable or disengaged, or if they mess something up, the excuse will be that they miss their children too much.

  37. Jade says:

    What’s so complicated? There is not much doubt here that both of them love their kids. It’s also acceptable not to bring the kids for a work trip. What’s unnecessary is the PR angle. It just makes normal people, especially working parents, roll their eyes. I don’t know how to simplify this any further.

    1) Their PR is bad and they should feel bad.
    2) They haven’t proven their legitimate criticism wrong. I will add a ‘yet’ for some of the optimists among us.

    Carry on.

  38. ClaireB says:

    When we saw the photos of Harry’s prep meetings for his Nepal trip, who was in charge of arranging those? Who decides where he will go and what he needs to learn about for his trip and then sets up “tutoring sessions” so that he knows what he’s doing?

    And who is not doing the same for Will and Kate? (I’m sure it’s because they refuse to bother and not because this behind-the-scenes person is incompetent.)

    • LAK says:

      The expression…..taking the horse to water, but can’t force horse to drink….or words to that effect apply to William. William has never knowingly applied himself beyond the necessary. Sadly he thinks he is doing ok. He probably think Harry is an idjit for applying himself and or showing effort publicly.

  39. Starlight says:

    It comes with the job sacrifices, which means trips abroad without children. It’s going to be very interesting when public school starts in the future I bet their children won’t board.

  40. notasugarhere says:

    I think the People article should have been titled “Will and Kate will find it quite hard to work for six days straight.”

  41. Grump says:

    You’re a mother.
    Of course it’s going to be hard to be away from your children.
    But you’re terrible at your job, which is why the only positive thing to say about you (literally, the ONLY thing) is that you will miss your children.
    If she ever did any work, everyone would still believe she was going to miss her children, but wouldn’t need to talk about it because there would be OTHER THINGS to talk about.

  42. Betti says:

    I can’t help but think all the bad press and bad decisions led by Willy shows that the Middletons have lost their grip on him and that he’s not even listening to Carole, who knows how to play a PR game. It seems that things are unravelling before us – as others up thread have said, somethings up.

    I’m betting she’ll pull out of the tour last min and he’ll go alone. I still think he was behind her pulling out of the Irish Guards event and then told her she wasn’t going to Jecca’s wedding. These things come in 3′s and this is the next big event where they are expected to be there as a couple. He wants all the good press for himself, he see’s Harry getting all the praise for doing things on his own. Whenever he does anything with Chutney, it becomes all about her, whats she’s wearing and if she flashed the royal biscuit to the world. Its his parents all over again – Charles was, allegedly, at one point jealous of the attention Diana got from the press. He’s going to throw her under the bus big time.

    • Starlight says:

      He absolutely won’t go on his own but I would love to have been a fly on the wall when Carole found out Wills was off to Jeccas wedding

  43. Steph says:

    Is it possible that there are different shots/medical precautions for India than Australia and thus the littles might be too little? i had to get a shot to prevent yellow fever when I went, and there was a laundry list of contraindications and possible side effects.

  44. DiamondGirl says:

    I believe that the only reason they brought George to Australia was because Diana refused to leave William behind at that age when they went. I remember it quite clearly; she had to stand up to the queen on that one and it endeared her to people.

    There was no way Kate was going to look like less a doting mother than Diana at that time.

    • Carolind says:

      Charles and Diana apparently had no intention of bringing William to Australia until the Australian Prime Minister asked them to. It is the kind of thing Diana would have done though because it wasn’t the “done” thing. Apparently they had to get special permission from the Queen for Charles and William, as the two heirs, to fly together because that wasn’t “done” either. In Australia William, for the most part, did not travel with them. He was left at bases.

      My thoughts – Hope nobody here is relying on the Daily Mail to get their news. I actually read it and I am ashamed. Only get it for the dog cartoon and a mental arithmetic test which are in it each day. It delights in keeping women down wherever possible and is soooo right-wing.

      Kate was always going to take George to Australia because Diana took William on her first tour. It also was quite a long time to be apart from a little baby. India tour is shorter and, yes, although Kate will miss her children no real great hardship. Carole Middleton will undoubtedly be staying at the house too with George and Charlotte.

      Regarding Kate’s feelings for her children, why should she think any the less of them than most other mothers do their children? People have got to be careful here because sometimes when criticising others, it is said we project our own feelings on to them. Whenever I have seen her with her kids she looks like any other mother. By the way, I also think she and William look right together but none of us can see inside a marriage. Might be as well to remember that too.

      I do think there is something not right going on with her. It is very possible that she has taken on more than she can comfortably handle. Also, that she is the kind who needs to spend a lot of time by herself relaxing! I frankly think she was mental having Charlotte so soon after George. It would have done her no harm to wait another year but, probably just following in Carole’s footsteps. She is not going to bail on the India trip though and she is not going to be pregnant for another year! Charlotte going to be about three before any sibling appears.

      PS Is she going to wear mauve and red or whatever it was Diana wore to “that monument”?

      • notasugarhere says:

        Mental? So difficult to handle having two children when you have multiple nannies, cook, housekeepers, cleaners, etc. What is a new mum to do when she is required to work 1 hour a month? Oh the horror.

        This was addressed above. People aren’t saying W&K don’t love their children. They are pointing out the hypocrisy of saying they cannot leave the kids in order to work, but leave the kids all the time for vacations, shopping, etc. The kids are obviously used as PR tools and excuses.

  45. Anare says:

    I rolled my eyes so hard st this nonsense that now I have a cramp in my forehead. The children will be fine. And so will the adults. Ugh. The Cambridge’s desperately need a good PR rep. They come across as fools every time their names show up in the media.

  46. justanotheropinion says:

    Buck up Buttercups. They state they want the “normal” life. Well, leaving the chicklets at home for business is definitely normal.

  47. ABC says:

    Ok, apologies if this has been mentioned already (haven’t read through all the comments yet – love how these articles generate SO much discussion) but couldn’t this be the sneakiest, most brilliant piece of anti-Cambridge PR ever? Let’s face it – there will be no chance now of sneaking off after the tour on a secret ‘recovery’ holiday to the Maldives if she’s missing the kids so much. Could it be that this article is to ensure the lazy-duo are back in the UK within the week and therefore ‘available’ to work? Just a thought..

    • Janis says:

      Interesting thought……

    • notasugarhere says:

      They appeared to sneak off after the Australia/NZ trip. They disappeared for a week or so. Wouldn’t surprise me if they go on another secret vacation. Hope the press watches the godfather’s private plane from now on.

  48. V says:

    I think it’s about time Diana sapphire went away awhile and Kate either wears her bands alone or Willy gets her another ring.