Us Weekly: Duchess Meghan & Harry ‘both want a big family, at least three kids’

Prince Harry and Meghan Duchess of Sussex visit to Sussex

I’m excited to see what the Duchess of Sussex wears to Princess Eugenie’s wedding tomorrow. I’m sure it will be conservative, and I’m hoping for some kind of cute hat or fascinator. It’s a quick turnaround for Meghan and Harry – they’ll attend Eugenie’s wedding and the reception, then they have to finish up the preparations for their big royal tour Down Under. Some people theorize that they’re flying on Sunday? I think so. They will have a lot on their plate during this tour, and very little of it will involve the White Markles or babies. But that’s all Us Weekly wants to talk about.

How Meghan reacted to Samantha Grant’s visit: Meghan reached her breaking point when her half-sister, Samantha Markle, showed up unannounced at Kensington Palace on Saturday, October 6. “Meghan is really anxious about Samantha being in London,” a source reveals exclusively in the new issue of Us Weekly. “She knows these tactics won’t stop. It’s sad that this will continue — and it’s making Meghan very uneasy.”

She’s worried about what her dad will do too: The Duchess of Sussex, 37, is also frustrated with her father, Thomas Markle Sr., who has lashed out at her and the royal family in a series of interviews. Even with husband Harry’s support, Meghan continues to feel “worried,” the source adds.

But Meghan & Harry are trying for a baby: Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan are “trying for a baby,” a source reveals in the new issue of Us Weekly. “They both want a big family, at least three kids,” the source notes of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. In the meantime, the source adds that the former Suits star plans to stay busy and is “starting to feel more settled” in her new role.

[From Us Weekly]

Re: Samantha and Thomas… I think Meghan worked out the plan with the palace, and the plan was to play the long game, to take the long view of it. Thomas Markle and, to a lesser degree, Samantha Grant overplayed their hands and overstayed their welcome. The British press would still pay for them to talk sh-t about Meghan at any point, but the appetite for those stories has significantly waned. Meghan basically let her dad and her half-sister punch themselves out.

Re: royal babies… do you think they really want three kids? I doubt that. I think they’ll have two kids, at most. I could even see them stopping with one.

The Duchess of Sussex attended the opening of 'Oceania' at the Royal Academy of Arts

Photos courtesy of WENN, Avalon Red.

Related stories

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

103 Responses to “Us Weekly: Duchess Meghan & Harry ‘both want a big family, at least three kids’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. ByTheSea says:

    The most likely scenario is that they will do IVF and have twins in the next year or two. She’s not old, but she also doesn’t have many childbearing years left.

    • Ib says:

      God I would love it if she had twins. How cute would that be!!!? Also have there EVER been twins in the British royal family?

      • Scram says:

        You have to go back centuries, like six. That’s why there are always twin headlines when Kate’s pregnant. The tabloids want them, but I don’t know about the non-royal watching public.

    • TrixC says:

      These days IVF doesn’t typically end in twins, particularly in the UK where there are strict regulations about how many embryos can be implanted at once.

      • Mel M says:

        I did IVF twice, implanting two embryos at a time, and both resulted in a singleton. I, shockingly, got pregnant naturally after and it was twins 🤷🏻‍♀️.

      • ByTheSea says:

        Here (in the US), it’s almost a trend among high profile people (Mariah Carey, J LO, Rebecca Romin, so many others…)

        And let’s face it, will physicians in the UK really hold them to the same standards as us peasants?

    • PrincessK says:

      OMG…people are talking as if they have first hand knowledge of her medical history and that she has fertility issues, and that IVF is her only option. There are thousands and thousands of women in their late 30s and 40s who get pregnant without any need for intervention. It is also quite clear that Meghan has never tried for a baby before, clearly putting her career first up until now.

    • Himmiefan says:

      For heaven’s sake, she’s got time for two! Thirty -seven is not 47.

  2. Abby says:

    those adorable babies are going to come,when these two are good & ready….

    • Lilly says:

      Agreed and after the first is when you really decide how many you want, even with help from nannies etc.

      • Nix says:

        ^^ Spot on, Lilly! My naive childless 38yo self was keen for at least two in quick succession when I finally found my man. I was lucky I fell quickly and naturally, but after our cherub decided regular sleep was an optional activity (on top of a touch of PND), DH and I realised we should count our amazing, single blessing and not put ourselves under crazy pressure to have another!

  3. Maleficent says:

    IVF two in one pop then it’s a wrap

  4. Kittycat says:

    I think they will end up having 4 kids.

  5. ByTheSea says:

    Harry’s hair! With all that money and he can’t do anything about that? He’s aging in dog years.

    • Lana says:

      Yea it’s interesting how Meghan looks the youngest of 4, -younger than Will, Kate, and Harry, although she is the oldest.
      She’s always so fresh and lovely

      • janerys says:

        Yes, I haven’t thought of that before. Posh Brits don’t seem to age well.

      • Amelie says:

        I don’t think it’s that surprising. She is biracial and people of color tend to age better than we white folks (especially white folks who love the sun too much and tan). We don’t have as much melanin which offers natural UV protection (doesn’t mean if you’re darker you should be walking around without sunscreen) and skin with more melanin tends to age better. Or at least that’s what I’ve read on dermatology websites. Harry, Kate, and William are pasty British people and don’t have a lot of melanin so they will likely not age as well.

        That being said, Queen Elizabeth does NOT look like she’s over 90. She obviously has access to the best care and nutrition and to me she looks like maybe somewhere in the realm of late 70s-early 80s.

      • Tina says:

        The Queen has also kept out of the sun quite a bit. When she routinely went on tours, she wore (and wears) hats. She generally doesn’t take holidays outside of the UK, so doesn’t have sun damage like Princess Margaret did. Harry, Kate and William don’t seem particularly bothered about staying out of the sun, but Beatrice and Eugenie both seem to have beautiful complexions and should follow in HM’s footsteps.

      • Steph says:

        I think the many overcast days in England compound the sun damage bc I feel like a lot of English folk (obviously not all) age faster than the rest of their European counterparts.

    • Avery says:

      @ByTheSea I said the same thing! He could swing over to Switzerland and got that taken care of before it got worse. Even Will too…I am really confused as to why they just let it go.

      • Scram says:

        I wonder if men in those circles consider than kind of work beneath them, too vain. On the one hand it’s perfectly natural, but on the other their wives would be slaughtered (like the reaction anytime someone notices a grey hair) if they presented themselves that way. Then there’s us in the public just wanting to look at something nice.

      • Elisa says:

        Yep, or for a budget version in Turkey. Just kidding. :) I heard the procedure is a bit of a hassle, but the results are impressive.
        All I can see in the top pic is his bald spot. She does look younger than him and I really love that green outfit.

    • Polly says:

      I doubt he’d get plugs, imagine the ribbing he’d get in the tabloids. He does need a decent haircut though, I get he leaves it long to disguise the thinning on top but it looks scruffy and frizzy, reminds me of fozzy bear.

  6. karmacoma says:

    Wow – So would I!

    But with the UK in the grips of austerity, low wages, crippling childcare, us regular working parents don’t have such privileges.

    But please, feel free to breed at will – you’ll never have to worry about such things – like us peasants do.

    I pray to god we will see a republic form in the UK in my lifetime.

    • Gigi La Moore says:

      I think you are on the wrong website. There are always people with more or less. Some out there probably are upset that they don’t have the opportunities that you have. Did you have this same viewpoint when William, Zara, Sophie and the rest had their kids?

      • OriginalLala says:

        I don’t want to have kids (and after reading the latest climate change reports, Im certainly not going have any now) and I generally don’t understand the need for large families when our earth is already overpopulated and over-burdened, but I am even less inclined to agree that people whose lifestyles are funded by taxpayers (and taxpayers who are seeing their social service VANISH, while royal life remains largely un-affected) should be encouraged and celebrated for having large families on the public purse.

      • karmacoma says:

        Of course there are people with more and less – however the ‘more’ you speak of in this case are in a position of tax funded wealth, protection – that they did not EARN themselves, and they were not elected by the UK.

        They use tax payers money to do up their apartments, and when they get married, they use the police to drag away all the vulnerable and homeless in Windsor, lest they spoil their sickening display of austerity.

        It’s wrong. Plain and simple.

      • Beech says:

        Actually Gigi, I think you are the on wrong website. That’s all the UK needs is for these two benefit recipients to breed out three kids for us to pay for.

      • chinoiserie says:

        OriginalLala, people want kids because people love children and wish to have a family when they get older. It’s one of biggest wishes for people in human history. Adoption isn’t that easy as pop culture makes it sometimes feel, not only there is costs and waiting but countries sending children are constantly decreasing because they want to keep their kids and there is more regulation. And people are having more abortions. And foster children are not often easy to take care of and often taken away by birth families.

        Not that I am discouraging adopting or fostering, just that it’s not easy. And having just one biological child is already decreasing population, even two is since not everyone ever has children due to choice or maybe early death so population replacement number is 2.10. Western countries would all already decrease without immigration, apart form couple of exceptions, I think Ireland and France. So with the numbers already dropping and constantly faster those who want to have children can have them. Even in rest of the world fertility numbers are constantly dropping even if there are some alarming places in places like sub Saharan Africa.

      • OriginalLala says:

        @chinoiserie yes I understand the concept of why people have children. I’m saying that I don’t personally get it, especially with the current (and future) state of our planet..I don’t really need to be patronized about it thanks.

      • Lady D says:

        @chinoiserie, “Not that I am discouraging adopting or fostering,” It sure sounds like you are. It sounds like you’re even discouraging people from trying. As for the world population dropping, if you believe that, I have a planet to sell you.

      • Sunnee says:

        Gigi, don’t you know the rules are stricter for Megs since she’s bi racial ? No kids for them, because their kids will be a drain on the welfare state. BTW, I don’t believe the article is true either, just made up stuff, but the reaction to the idea of her having a family is bizarre. Also keep in mind that Meg is literally 5 months older than Kate yet everyone acts as though she’s approaching her dotage, “she’s no spring chicken.” WTF! Kate had baby #3 just 6 months ago. No one on here questioned Kate’s decision to have another, everyone smiling ear to ear cooing about Louis. Give me a break, to criticize Meg having kids is just not BS . BTW, Meg looks younger and more gorgeous than the other three. So there.

      • Whitecat says:

        The population in western countries is dropping but not everywhere, in my home country, 40% of tue population is under 18, and the youth population is enormous.
        However, the best way to solve it is not
        To have more children, but actually, to allow easier migration. But that will never happen because many European countries and America cannot deal (they definitely have the resources but racism is well and Alice still) with an influx of non-white youth coming to work – despite it being beneficial in the long term and for the aging population.

      • PrincessK says:

        If you find someone you really love there is often a strong desire to want to produce children with them.

    • Claire says:

      That won’t change anything! You’ll still have crooked politicians and the environment is doomed. 50% of the worlds pollution is created by China and India. Unless they reduce reduce it drastically we are screwed. No clean water, air or soil. That’s reality unfortunately. Anyone thinking otherwise is fooling themselves. My industry deals with environmental issues constantly. All of the helicopters used in Vietnam were literally dumped into the ocean. Fuel and all. Leftover cans of paint used to paint ships thrown into the water, plastic islands… need I go on?

      • ex-Mel says:

        Claire, politicians are subject to vote, and if they screw up they can also be deposed or made to resign. Most of all, politicians – as crooked as they may be – do WORK for their pay and their jobs have very clear descriptions. These people, on the other hand, have done nothing but be born and procreate, having inherited a fortune that some ancient ancestor acquired by sheer force, cunning, and corruption, certainly not through merit as we perceive it today. The “work” they do in exchange for their palaces and their millions, not to mention general adulation and other perks, is merely a ceremonial one: waving to the crowds and giving the occasional speech. The monarch will be the recipient of £82 million for the fiscal year 2018/19. Theresa May’s salary is around £200 000, and Angela Merkel’s around £ 300 000.

      • Claire says:

        It’s a one off with the RF. The economics are pretty simple. A republic won’t make a lick of difference. In fact the cost of living will go up even more. One of the reasons England is having a tough go of it because it’s overcrowded with more people on the dole. The only country on a role right now is the US which is rather ironic considering the antics of Trump.

  7. RBC says:

    I can just see the “sad ,abandoned grandfather” photos and interviews that Tom Sr and Samantha”Scam” will flood the media with once Meghan and Harry start a family.

    • L84Tea says:

      That is the one thing that truly makes me cringe for Harry and Meghan, is knowing that when the time comes that they do have a child or children, those people that she happens to share a little DNA with will try to crap all over it in spades.

  8. Becks1 says:

    I think they will have two kids and I definitely expect a pregnancy announcement by their first wedding anniversary. My guess is they are not actively trying now because of the tour (not just because of Zika, but also if they don’t know how Meghan will handle the first trimester- even without HG or even morning sickness, first trimester can just be exhausting.)

    And yes, sometimes I think about it and I feel a little weird commenting so much on strangers’ family planning activities, lol.

    • Betsy says:

      Ah first trimester exhaustion. I once put my head down on a table just to rest for a second and fell asleep there. Granted, it was my second and not my first pregnancy, but the exhaustion.

      • Ripley says:

        I almost let the kitchen burn down because I was so tired. I remember lying on the floor with our dog and my husband running in yelling, “Don’t you smell that?!?” I did, but I was so tired, I simply didn’t care.

      • Anastasia says:

        I came home from work (was a high school teacher), put my key in the front door lock, and just leaned my head against the door and snoozed. I was RIGHT THERE. I was so close to my couch! My husband came home a few minutes later and found me there, laughed, and opened the door. I laid down on the couch, purse still on my shoulder, coat still on, and slept hard for about two hours.

        SO EXHAUSTING. It’s like every single bit of energy in your body is going into that tiny zygote.

    • PrincessK says:

      @Anastasia, that used to happen to me in the early days of my pregnancy. I would get home from work, manage to open the door, and then drop my bags, and stagger to the couch and fall asleep. My husband would come home a couple of hours later and find me in that same position.

  9. PlayItAgain says:

    I hope they have a herd of adorable ginger babies that take over the whole royal family.

    • Lana says:

      Well I’m not a gene biologist but I’m pretty sure their kids won’t be ginger. Adorable yes, but unlikely ginger

      • Shasha says:

        They could! There are plenty of black people in the US who have red hair, who have far smaller amounts of Caucasian ancestry than H&M’s kids would have. I also know several people with two brunette parents who are redheads. If they each provide a gamete with a recessive gene, then the trait will be seen in the baby. Harry’s gametes will provide that recessive gene every time, and even if only some of Meghan’s have it, the trait will come out in those babies.

        I also think Meghan has the redhead gene because she’s so freckled. That’s actually a really good clue in darker complected people who have some redhead ancestry. If they have lots of freckles. Especially that pattern of freckles where it looks like a tan from a distance but when you get closer you see it’s just dozens of individual points. I think she probably has the gene but she also has the more dominant darker genes so that’s what we see in her.

      • DizzyLizzy says:

        Actually Markle Jnr was ginger when he was younger (there is a very famous pic with him pulling her pig tails) so it is HIGHLY likely that their kids could be ginger.
        And there are plenty of ginger black people FYI.

    • Guest says:

      I hope they adopt, myself. I think it would be awesome if they didn’t have any biological babies (cause you just know the white Markles are going to claim blood relative status) and Harry is now so far from the throne it is completely unlikely he would ever be king and his kids ever be monarchs. Too many would have to die and it’s not likely they all would, hopefully. So I hope they adopt a la Angie and have a multi-coloured family :) Love knows no boundaries, knows no limits, never divides only multiplies

  10. Kk2 says:

    I’m pretty confident that this is pure speculation based on the fact that they like talking to kids at events. I also hate that the uterus watching. She’s 37, people. A wedding night baby is not that likely and miscarriages would not be unexpected. I do not envy her being under the spotlight for this. My prediction is also IVF twins, just because that seems to happen for a lot of famous people.

  11. AmandaPanda says:

    Just FYI in the uk you would have to sign a consent form overriding medical advice to implant 2 embryos into someone who is under 40 with no long term history of infertility or a failed ivf cycle. It’s not like the US – they are very anti twins here except for older mothers or those with failures.

    Not that it’s any of our business at all – but it annoys me when people assume those outside the US can magic up twins on demand.

    I also would definitely have 3+ kids if I didn’t have any financial/life pressure – I think lots of people would. I loathe the whole system of monarchy but don’t see why they wouldn’t do it given that’s the system we’ve got.

    • Scram says:

      I was thinking of Charlene and Mary when people mentioned IVF twins.

    • Millenial says:

      That’s fascinating. That’s some crazy overreach IMO.

    • Sofia says:

      There are also strict guidelines in the U.S. for transferring more than one embryo, although some doctors do go rogue.

      We often hear pregnancy/IVF success stories of women in their late 30s/early 40s, but they’re the unicorns. Failed IVF stories are more common, but women tend not to share them because it’s too painful and most people don’t want to hear a sad story.

      • AG-UK says:

        I was a unicorn then, I was 40 approaching 41 when I had Orson he was my miracle baby as my chances were 5% and it worked the first time but I know someone who was a good 8 years younger and she tried 5x. It was called unexplained fertility. Had him in London and was promptly put in the “mature mothers” midwife group.. It’s a lot of stress IF they go that route your hormones all over the place.

      • mltpsych says:

        Unicorn here too. I had my first child at 38 and had no issues getting pregnant. My sister had a baby at 41 with no assistance either. It’s weird how much everyone’s fertility differs including “geriatric” (hate this term) mothers to be

    • TrixC says:

      That’s not strictly true AmandaPanda. I did IVF at 37 on the UK NHS, I’m currently pregnant. My hospital’s guidelines were to transfer two embryos in women my age, unless they were the absolute top quality grade. It was my first IVF cycle, no history of failures. I actually had to sign a consent form saying I was going against medical advice in deciding to transfer only one. But yes, you’re generally correct in saying the UK are much stricter than the US about this.

    • Steph says:

      Why is the UK against IVF twins? Is it cultural, medical, government/population? Curious

  12. Originaltessa says:

    I think she’s pregnant already. Or starting hormones to prepare for Ivf. Although if they’ve just married and haven’t even really had time to try I don’t know why you’d just default to ivf. I really do think she’s pregnant. She’s glowing and concealing her midsection strategically.

  13. Case says:

    I wouldn’t be shocked if they had one or two naturally and then adopted.

  14. Susan says:

    I love me some Megs and Harry articles but this sounds like fanfic to me with nothing new. Saying they want kids is the equivalent of saying Katie is keen. Cliche with no new info.

    Sorry US magazine, in my book you lost your street cred years ago.

  15. Rianic says:

    I doubt she’s on the meds already. I did just IUI, and there were many vaginal sonograms (to monitor follicle stimulation and growth) and blood draws (to monitor various hormone levels) each month. I can’t see her doing that during the tour because there would be no way to discretely evaluate her.

  16. NIKKI says:

    Curious…why are commenters assuming she needs IVF? I just had my second at 38 – no problem conceiving.

    And, granted, people do need help w getting pregnant (I have members of my extended family that had to go through that and friends as well), not everyone does…

    So, what insight do you (commenters) have to know that IVF is a definite route for her?

    About the overpopulation, the earth will reach approx between 8 and 10 billion during the years 2050 to 2070.

    The good news is, the growth rate – which is more important in the long term than the population rate – has steadily decreased after reaching equilibrium, since 1980.

    Which means, by around 2100, the population will actually decline after reaching a plateau. In some areas, while growth has continued in “less developed” countries, this is already starting to happen in terms of pure birth rate, ie, China, Russia, Germany, just to name a few.

    The rate of fertility is also steadily decreasing as of 2017. More women are becoming educated and as a result having less children. There are also environmental factors at work as well.

    (All this info is courtesy of UN data on world pop, CIESIN, SDAC and other sources of studies presented recently that focus on population/demographics)

    -N

    • Kk2 says:

      I at least was speculating, not assuming. She may get pregnant just fine. Plenty of women do. But for most women it takes more luck at 37 than at 27. And they start looking at IVF if you dont get pregnant within 6 months at that age instead of waiting a year. So I think a lot of older women end up getting IVF who might have been able to get pregnant on their own eventually, just because you don’t have a lot of time to waste then- I think things start to get harder quickly when you hit 40.

      I very sincerely hope it is easy for them because she is under a lot of scrutiny anyway.

    • PrincessK says:

      Well said Nikki!…..People should lay off Meghan and the assumption that she has fertility issues and needs IVF.

    • Himmiefan says:

      Thank you! There’s so much knee-jerk reaction here. Sure, it will take her longer than if she were 25, but 37’s not that old! She’s got plenty of time for two.

  17. Honey bear says:

    Umm. It’s a little late for that, isn’t it? Let’s not pretend she’s some spring chicken. I know plenty of people her age that have already lost their fertility. I’m sure they can cook one up in the lab with the resources they have though.

  18. Cupcake says:

    I think this is purely speculation. Her age is also a factor. At this point she will be nearly 38 or already 38 when she has her first, at the youngest. Sure we all know the woman who got pregnant with healthy twins her first try at 46, but that’s rare. She may have trouble conceiving at this point. They are royals but they are still human and I think 1-2 is realistic.

  19. homeslice says:

    I did no IVF and had 1 healthy baby at 39 and another at 41.

    My bet is one and done…but I will duck for cover because I don’t see the marriage lasting.

    • Originaltessa says:

      I think it’ll last. They’re not kids. She’s done this already and probably knows the things to avoid. Harry probably just wants stability and a happy family life. They’re so lovely together, and I just personally find her to be so likeable and gorgeous. I think her background will help her cope with the fame aspect, and they’re not under the same pressures as Will and Kate. I think they’ll be just fine.

    • SWP says:

      Homeslice I agree. I don’t see it lasting:

      I think she is clearly a mature, educated hard working woman. She’s had some real life drama, had to work to get what she wants, struggled sometimes, which in my opinion, gives people gravitas. She’s a grownass woman.

      He? He (from what I’ve read) barely made it through high school, has wandered through life and having his mistakes and shortcomings covered up, handled, and at worst excuses because he lost his mother. I see him as an immature spoiled rich kid that needs to be “mothered” and managed. Once the new sex/excitement haze burns off…I think she will tire of taking care of him and seek someone with similar work ethic and intellect.

      • Natalie S says:

        What I will say for Harry is that he does push himself to improve. Someone content to coast would not have created the Invictus Games. And my memory is fuzzy on the details but there was a reason why he chose Edward Lane Fox that is based on his desire to improve. I have to go look it up.

        What I notice in Harry is a desire to prove himself. He wants to be someone who does meaningful things and you can see him slowly improving. I think part of the reason he chose Meghan is because he saw her as someone who would help make that happen. They’re not together solely for their ridiculous chemistry. If they have an issue, it will be what happens once Harry comes into his own.

      • Beach Dreams says:

        “has wandered through life and having his mistakes and shortcomings covered up, handled”

        Frankly, this statement applies to William far more than Harry. I remember when Harry’s messiness and poor behavior was all over the media and he was treated like an irresponsible wild child, a joke, etc.

        Reporters have hinted that Will got into just as much trouble during his youth, but since he was the heir, it was (mostly) neatly swept away.

  20. Beach Dreams says:

    “…but I will duck for cover because I don’t see the marriage lasting.”

    Why not?

    • Claire says:

      For some reason I don’t see it lasting either. She’ll get bored I think. As for children, maybe she doesn’t want any. Nothing wrong with that.
      On another note, Harry is looking more like Charles every day.

    • passerby says:

      They. don’t. like. Meghan.
      They. NEVER. thought. HE. would marry. HER (!?!!1!)
      They are. rooting. for. a. divorce.

      Oh, and. Kate will be QUEEN CONSORT!!!!!!!1!!!!!1!

  21. shy vi says:

    I see them having at least 2 children and 3 max. I still feel like she may already be pregnant…

  22. TheOriginalMia says:

    I could see them having one and doting on him/her. I don’t see them having 3 at all.

  23. BANANIE says:

    Is three children considered a big family? I always thought that was for four and up. I know that the average is closer to 2, but I don’t think it’s “big” until 4.

  24. Stefanie says:

    Omg so much pressure on her uterus. I feel sorry for her. If she is not getting pregnant within the next 6 months then there will be nonstop talk about that die to her age.

    • Himmiefan says:

      I know, all the pregnancy talk and her age is creepy. Meghan doesn’t exist just to make babies. I think she and Harry will get pregnant some time after the new year, and they’ll have two and live happily ever after. Really. I do see then having a great relationship and lasting, particularly when the attention shifts off them over time and on to Will and Kate’s kids.

  25. Maria says:

    By the way, her ex the good looking chef Cory Vitielo became a father last week, and the other ex Trevor married his nutritionist girlfriend on the weekend. Her banker father is worth over $200 million. Not bad, not bad. Everyone is moving on.

  26. ladida says:

    Every time there is an article about their babies, people immediately speculate about her age and this place turns into a fertility blog. I am SO sick of this. Yes, some women need IVF. Plenty don’t.

    • Vanessa says:

      It’s bizarre the way people are going on about Meghan fertility no one knows when they will have kids and the way people are age shamed her is ridiculously . She 37 she not 90 I think it’s just a another way for people who don’t like Meghan to make cheap shots at her newflash we are going to get older . I guarantee you if this Kate people wouldn’t not be making up stuff about her fertility or age shamed her they be like we need to respect Kate but because it’s Meghan it’s ok to drag her about her age or called her a social climber or saying that she going to dump Harry and run back to American and according to someone here write a tell book

      • ladida says:

        Yes!! As a feminist, I am appalled by the conversation that forces women into child rearing “by a certain age.” Yet women disparage her fertility because GOD FORBID she started thirty seconds after age 35. There is actually quite a lot of science that dispels these notions. Cue the fertility army in 3…2…
        And yes, I agree with you I have never seen these things written about Kate.

      • Patty says:

        Thank you! I like celebrity gossip as much as the next person but I’m always alarmed at all of the fertility talk whenever it comes to Meghan Markle. She’s barely 37 not 57. Truth is over 90% of women over age thirty five who are actively trying to get pregnant will conceive. They haven’t even been married six months yet. If or when they get pregnant, an announcement will be made.

    • Lobbit says:

      It’s appalling. Between the gross comments about Meghan’s desiccated husk of a uterus and those asserting ownership over her reproductive rights, I’m reading with my mouth agape. It’s awful.

      • PrincessK says:

        I agree totally.

      • Poots McBoots says:

        Desiccated husk! I love the description, and I completely agree with you re: this unseemly focus on her breeding potential. I’m a big Meghan fan, but some things are, to me, sacred. I’m happy to watch their marriage in the public eye and I will be pretty excited if an announcement is made. But I don’t care for the relish with which some people are discussing her uterus.

    • Himmiefan says:

      Agreed. She doesn’t exist just to have babies.

  27. 2020 says:

    I think she is already pregnant
    Early stages, 3months.
    They will announce after the tour

    It’s not impossible to work for 16/17 days whilst being pregnant..

    I worked till I was 8.5 months standing most days in a busy environment..

  28. Mrs.K says:

    She would need IVF and for sure then she will have twins as IVF basically guarantees that. She is 37 and too skinny to have kids the natural way.

    • LeeAnn says:

      That is totally wrong. I was a Nurse on a Maternity Floor and you are way off base with your comment. As long as her health permits, she most certainly can become pregnant naturally and yes, IVF does have lots of multiple births, but they also have many singles too. It depends on the doctor and how many seeds he places in etc. But when push comes to shove, it is all in the hands of a more powerful being than us.

    • Lady D says:

      Can we stop with the too skinny to get pregnant myth? All you have to do is look at all the 3rd world countries full of starving women all giving birth to children that will also starve, to know that skinny is rarely a factor in getting pregnant and giving birth.

  29. LeeAnn says:

    From the interviews that they did do where the topic of children came up, they have both stated before and after their marriage they would like to have 3 or 4 children. Unless something prevents them from going further, I do not see them stopping at just one. But because of the age factor, if she does get pregnant, I think the children will all come right after one another. They do not have the luxury of waiting 3-4 years in between births unless of course she goes with IVF or adoption. In fact, I can see them having two and adopting one or two more. After all, their new House/Apartment at Kensington Palace has 21 rooms however many they are blessed with, I truly think they will be amazing parents like William & Catherine. Perhaps despite the very busy schedules while on their coming up tour, that just might be the environment they need to get things moving. Away from her family who chose to jump the pond and show up at the gate. The home they will be renting while in Sydney is quite beautiful and appears to be a very relaxing environment and may relax them enough to start the baby trail. I wish them much luck and happiness no matter what happens.

  30. Lobbit says:

    Lol British or not, you don’t get a say in how another woman asserts her reproductive rights wtf?