Duchess Kate schedules her first public appearance in a month’s time


Prince William, Duke of Cambridge visiting Pall Mall Barbers for ‘Mental Health Support and Wellbeing’ - London

We’ve known for weeks that Prince William would be traveling to New Zealand at the end of April. The Christchurch mass shootings were on March 15th, and NZ’s prime minister Jacinda Ardern requested someone high up in the royal family to attend some memorial events at the end of April. The Queen will not travel that far, and Charles’ schedule is complicated, so William is being sent solo. He will arrive in New Zealand on April 25, next Thursday. Here’s more:

Are the dates of Prince William‘s visit to New Zealand a clue for when to expect the arrival of Meghan Markle and Prince Harry‘s baby — or will the royal father of three miss the big day? The exact dates have been announced for William’s previously announced trip to New Zealand, where he will honor the victims of the Christchurch mosques terrorist attack. He will be in the country on Thursday, April 25 – or Anzac Day, the anniversary of the landing of the Australian and New Zealand Army Corps at Gallipoli during World War I – and Friday, April 26, it was announced Wednesday.

The royal, 36, will begin his trip in Auckland before continuing onto Christchurch, where William will spend time meeting the survivors of the attack along with their families, first responders and Muslim community leaders. The trip will be made on behalf of the Queen and at the request of the Prime Minister of New Zealand, Jacinda Ardern.

Prince William will likely get to celebrate the first birthday of his son, Prince Louis, on April 23 with his family. However, his travels could mean he’ll miss the arrival of Baby Sussex. But some royal fans believe William will want to be close when his younger brother becomes a first-time dad, hinting that the baby is due to arrive before or after William’s trip.

[From People]

Again, I don’t think Harry or Meghan really care if William is in England when she gives birth. It’s not a thing. The uncle of Baby Sussex doesn’t have to be in-country at the time. If she gives birth while William is away, he’ll meet the baby when he comes back. That being said, I really do hope that Baby Sussex comes before then. Fingers crossed for some movement in the next few days.

In addition to confirming William’s trip, Kensington Palace also announced the first public event for Kate in one month’s time – she’ll attend the Anzac Day Service of Commemoration and Thanksgiving at Westminster Abbey on Thursday 25th April. She hasn’t had a public event since March 28th. She got a whole month off? Were the Cambridge kids out of school that whole time too? Or was it as I theorized – that Kate wasn’t feeling as keen to be competitive once Meghan was on maternity leave?

The Duchess of Cambridge

Photos courtesy of WENN, Backgrid and Avalon Red.

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

144 Responses to “Duchess Kate schedules her first public appearance in a month’s time”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Jessica says:

    Are any of her newfound fans since 2017 disappointed or no?

  2. Gobo says:

    God damn she is lazy.

    • Kittycat says:

      It’s her best quality!

    • GoTDang says:

      Public events are just one aspect of royal work. I feel like I have had to say this more than I should. I give fewer than no sh*ts about this, monarchies are dumb af and have no place in 2019. Kate is a privileged white girl who needs no one defending her, either, so I say this with absolutely nothing to gain but a mor educated community: A lack of PUBLIC events does not mean “this lazy ass broad never works.” The majority of royal work is administrative meetings. This is true for all royals, even Her Maj.

      • Kittycat says:

        Public events are the best and easiest ways to measure work ethic.

        Hence why Princess Anne and Prince Charles are always topping the list of hardest working royals.

        Reality should be different but how would the public know?

      • Beli says:

        Private meetings are also listed on the Court Circular (Her Majesty received So-and-so etc). What with William and Kate’s ongoing reputation for laziness, if they were spending the rest of their time in administrative meetings and working hard behind the scenes, we would definitely have heard about it by now. I have seen no evidence whatsoever to believe that, especially with the Cambridges general lack of preparation for the events they do attend.

      • Becks1 says:

        I see your point @GOTdang, but Kate’s not putting in serious time behind the scenes either. KP always announces it when she is.

      • ShazBot says:

        Yeah, an administrative meeting Harry just had this week was put into the court circular. Kate never has anything like that listed. They’re also all well aware that her value lies in photo-ops, they just don’t care.

      • nic919 says:

        The Court Circular lists all their official engagements and she’s done nothing since the Scouts event. Not even private meetings. If she was working behind the scenes there might be an excuse, but she’s not.

      • norah says:

        she is that lazy – if she was having meetings etc it would have been all over the news or the papers

      • MikaC says:

        If she were having meetings, she would have something to show for it after 8 years.

    • Becks1 says:

      You know, she is lazy but I kind of give her credit, because she has trained people to accept “she’s with her kids” as an excuse for her lack of work. It’s pretty impressive actually. Any criticism against Kate gets silenced with “but she’s a mother.”

      • sunny says:

        It is amazing to me that she still works so very little. So many years on the job and she still barely puts effort forward toward a big aspect of her job.

        She does seem like a terrific hands-on mother though and putting up with Normal Bill seems like its own form of work.

      • Ali says:

        Being with her children is a 100% legit way for any mom to spend her time and as much of it as she wants. Who are we to begrudge 3 little kids time with their parents just because our lives don’t work that way? The attitude here that she owes more to optics or the general public than her family is a strange one.

      • Brandy Alexander says:

        After having my one and only child, I had a newfound respect for women who just want to be with their kids. If I didn’t need to work, I would absolutely rather spend my time with my child.

        I’ve always kind of thought that they just made a deal with the higher ups that they could put in minimal effort in the early family days, since it’s not exactly a job they get to retire from when they’re older. Given the disfunction in the BRF, I think it’s a good thing for Kate to be such a force in her children’s early lives.

      • nic919 says:

        I guess Anne and Sophie have neglected their children because they managed to be involved in their lives and do a significant amount of engagements. The counter narrative that Kate is doing little because she’s a “hands on mother” is that Anne, Sophie and even Diana are / were not hands on mothers and they are neglecting their children. That’s actually offensive.

        The older two kids are in school and there is Nanny Maria there for Louis so there is no reason that she cannot do a few engagements per week. Being away for a few hours per week is not asking too much. No mother is strapped to her kids 24/7.

      • Becks1 says:

        Yeah, she can be with her kids and still work more than 14% of the time. She’s not the typical working mother who would be gone for 10 hours a day or something. She can literally hold meetings IN her house.

        No one is saying she cant be with her kids. But she can certainly be with her kids AND work.

      • Ali says:

        I’m not calling anyone’s style of parenting neglectful.

        Some of us, and maybe Kate, prefer being with our kids above anything else and when we can, make that choice. And it’s a valid choice.

        That’s all.

      • Ali says:

        My comments are specific to the discussion of if her kids are on holiday, should she be, too?

        Of course, if she wanted to she could fit in other things into her day while her kids are out of school, but if she doesn’t want to because she wants to just be with her kids, I don’t see the problem especially not based on the argument that it isn’t a choice available to all parents in all walks of life.

      • ShazBot says:

        Ali, nobody is saying it’s not a valid choice, but she has a very plush lifestyle funded through the public. It is not the same situation as a family that decides one parent will stay home with the kids.

      • Cloudysky says:

        Having children and being a good mother to the future of the BRF is doing her job. That’s the foundation of the entire monarchical structure.

      • Sharon Lea says:

        It is impressive as you say, because Diana often spoke of how much she loved being a mother, which was obvious, and it didn’t get in her way of working ;)

      • Cloudysky says:

        Diana worked hard and loved her boys, but whether or not she was a good mother is certainly open to debate.

      • Becks1 says:

        See what I mean? Kate was smart about this.

        I don’t think anyone would care that she took off to be with the kids when they were on school break if she worked regularly when they WERE in school. But she doesn’t. It’s actually hard to tell when she is taking a break from working versus just…..the usual schedule.

      • ByTheSea says:

        But she will be QUEEEEENNNNNN! /s

      • notasugarhere says:

        Nowhere in the list of duties they perform for the Queen does it state “have children”. Plenty of modern monarchies have gone sideways when the heir couple doesn’t have children. QEII is an example, as is King Philippe of Belgium. We may be looking at the same situation in Luxembourg in a few years time.

        You’re correct of course, Becks1. Lather, rinse, repeat. Now any royal mother who works an hour or two a week is considered neglectful in the face of Kate Keen and her handful of nannies. All other royal parents worked more than W&K, but only Kate is incapable of both raising happy children and working a handful of hours in exchange for her massive perks.

    • Cee says:

      LOL their social media is updated so sparingly now that it only represents William and Kate. Lazy, indeed.

  3. Chaine says:

    I wonder how Wills will do solo for an event like this.

  4. Mego says:

    Showing up at a service counts? Wow must be nice.

    • Millenial says:

      To be fair, he does have to travel half-way across the world for it, and deal with the accompanying jet lag. I certainly wouldn’t sign up for that.

      Now, don’t get me wrong, I still think he’s lazy af, but I would consider it work.

  5. klutzy_girl says:

    I originally predicted today (or tomorrow) for Baby Sussex’s arrival but not feeling quite so confident right now.

  6. Leyton says:

    I thought this was supposed to be Kate’s great year? We’re nearing the second half of the year in a few weeks and we know they take the Summer off.

    Before anyone mentions Sophie and Edward, they did FAR MORE engagements than Kate in the months working so is balances out. Kate, last I checked, did less engagements than a Pregnant Meghan.

    A whole month off for the kids being out of school is ridiculous. What’s the point of having a whole staff of nannies if you need to be home with them during break? It’s not like she’s working a 9-5, 5 days a week.

    • Deedee says:

      Also, young children take naps and have play dates. There’s no reason Kate can’t do an appearance for a charity that’s less than an hour from arrival to finish and still spend most of the day with her brood.

    • Beli says:

      I’m still waiting for Kate’s big solo project to land…

    • Lady D says:

      In the first 100 days of this year, Kate worked 14 of them. She’s on track for about 55-60 engagements this year, or in other words same old lazy Kate.

      • Cee says:

        But she’s a Mother! And Future Queen Consort! /s

      • BayTampaBay says:

        I do not get the gut feeling vibe that Kate is lazy. The vibe I get is that she detest Royal Engagements, especially solo Royal Engagements.

    • norah says:

      camilla has done more than kate and she is going

  7. Iknow says:

    My kids get two weeks off for Spring break. I took 4 days off to go away for a few days. Why does Kate need three weeks?

    • Heather says:

      Because she was really tired from her previous 14 days of work. She deserves a break just like the rest of us!

    • Lunde says:

      I guess partly because her kids are off school for almost a month (March 28th-April 23rd). British private schools have mega long holidays

  8. ChiaMom says:

    I think Kate almost left the fold I shot you not. Why should she work so hard with bad press from wills?! That’s definitely not part of the agreement … and sending Wills away is about old school palace optics too. I’ve seen the crown LOL

  9. Becks1 says:

    a month between appearances. That’s ridiculous. Is that the longest she’s gone when not pregnant/on maternity leave?

  10. Mumbles says:

    I remember when everyone was waiting for Prince George’s birth and someone asked the Queen about it and she said, I hope the baby comes soon because I’m going to Scotland for my holiday in a few days. Lol. Yeah, they’re not scheduling around Baby Sussex. Maybe Charles, but certainly not Uncle Billy.

    • (THE OG)@Jan90067 says:

      I don’t think Harry was sticking around for all W&K’s kids to be born. Wasn’t he in Africa during at least one of them?

    • Mego says:

      Making William being out of country when his nephew is born a thing is just the press trying to generate Harry and Meghan stories. Who cares if William is around for the birth? Probably Harry and Meghan don’t.

  11. My3cents says:

    I wish I had a month off when my kids are are on holiday…. aha but I actually work more hours a day than she does in a month, strange world….

  12. HeyThere! says:

    My babies aren’t old enough for school, still several years away BUT I would be annoyed if they got 2-3 weeks for Easter, with summer break only 3-4 weeks away right and around the corner. Ha! A long weekend, maybe a week, is all you need. Normal parents work, what an inconvenience!

    • Ponytail says:

      Summer break in England isn’t 3-4 weeks away. The children go back to school on Tuesday, have five weeks, then a week off for half term, and then another 6 weeks at school. Most schools break up in the 3rd week of July.

  13. Lara says:

    I was talking to my usually sensible cousin at the weekend who went off on how much she doesn’t like Megan but really respects Kate because she’s ‘so hard working’. A 15 minute rant from me later and she changed her mind!

    • lsb says:

      A 15 minute rant later she’d probably say anything to get it to stop.

    • Mego says:

      It points to how their pr has worked for them because so many people aren’t paying attention to actual numbers, achievements and results. In addition it points to how effective a smear campaign is because people believe the lies which I find chilling.

  14. Spiegs77 says:

    Kids at fancy private schools really do get 3 weeks off for Easter. But school doesn’t get out in the UK until the end of July so summer break isn’t that soon.

    I legitimately don’t understand how parents take off their kids’ whole breaks but tons of them do across the country. And almost everyone I know travels the entire break too. I don’t understand how people afford the time or the money. But what do I know?

    (For context, I’m an American who has been in the UK for 7 years)

  15. HeyThere! says:

    I know every school is different all around the world but I’m in the USA and Spring Break isn’t a thing until college where I live. They get Friday and Monday off school from kindergarten to High School(public and private), and that’s it! Two days. Moreover, our schools get out by mid-May so it wouldn’t make sense to take week(s) off school with the school year coming to an end a few weeks later.

    • Anastasia says:

      Where are you in the US? Everywhere I know around here does a week of spring break!

      • HeyThere! says:

        I’m in a ‘fly over’ state in the mid west. In my area you get Friday and the Monday after Easter for anyone kindergarten-high school. This is just normal here. They had an open nesting with the school board to add a full week of break but parents came out in droves to say this isn’t wanted because all the working parents wouldn’t have childcare. They start school around here the 2nd or 3rd of January…then out by the second week of May. So, as of today there is less than a month of school left for the local kids.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        My sister lives in Kentucky. Schools there get a week Fall break in October and week Spring break in April. Spring break does not always coincide with Easter. This year there is not “time-off” for Easter regarding schools closing for the holiday. School in Kentucky ends the last week of May or first week on June depending if school days have to be made up due to “snow days”.

    • (THE OG)@Jan90067 says:

      In high school, for Spring Break, we’d all take off for Palm Springs! lol. We got one week. In college, we’d get two wks. off.

  16. guest says:

    They are both lazy. Nothing will change they just hide behind Meghan now 🤷‍♀️

  17. Anastasia says:

    It looks like she’s happily trying to steal that child in the last picture.

  18. Cloudysky says:

    The Windsor side of the family is famously emotionally stunted. I’m glad Kate has focused her time and energy on her marriage and raising her kids. Until they are grown and leave the nest, I don’t care if she ever works more than she does now. Those kids aren’t going to enjoy the relative privacy that Sophie’s kids or Anne’s kids enjoy. They’ll be thrust into the spotlight soon enough and it’s important that they have a good emotional foundation to weather the media attention, criticism and responsibility coming their way. Plus, raising three kids is hard work, even with a nanny. I suspect from the comments that many posters here have no sense of the emotional and physical work it takes to raise 3 children. Like it or not, it’s all Kate can or wants to manage right now. Other women might be able to handle more, or might prefer getting out of the house more, but every mother is different.

    • Kittycat says:

      Kate and William are parents with the luxury of having a staff on hand to help to raise their children.

      As one poster mentioned Anne and Sophie, if you only want to focus on woman, have managed to raise normal kids.

      But to each their own.

      • Kylie says:

        Normal is questionable. Peter still had Autumn convert since they married under the old marriage law despite how far down in line of succession he is. Compare that to the late Prince Friso of the Netherlands, he was I believe third in line when he decided to leave the line of succession when he married Mabel because they didn’t have government permission.
        Sophie and Edward allowed James to drive, which was highly irresponsible and not normal.

      • Kelley Bentley says:

        I have 3 kids and run my own law firm. I spend a bunch of time with my kids that’s quality time. Please stop insulting working mothers because they either choose to or have to work. I’m so tired of hearing that my children are neglected because I don’t spend every waking second with them. I don’t criticize the moms who don’t work. And I typically find that once the kids are gone they try to go back to work and are mad that taking a decade or more off doesn’t qualify them for higher paying jobs. You can’t have it both ways.

      • Tina says:

        @Kylie, I’m sure Peter didn’t force Autumn to do anything. They were not married at that point. To my mind it is no different than a woman taking her husband’s name. To say they are not normal because of that is quite a bit of a stretch. And plenty of children drive off-road in both the US and the UK, in rural places it is very common.

      • Nic919 says:

        Autumn never converted but was received in the Church of England. She had been confirmed as a catholic and didn’t have to reconfirm. And this situation highlighted the bigotry of the act of succession against Catholics and it was finally changed in 2015. Both Kate and Meghan had to do more to qualify as members of the Church of England because they weren’t confirmed prior to marriage.

    • notasugarhere says:

      If she wants to be a full-time stay at home mother? They have to give up the 10 bedroom country mansion, 50 room London palace, both housekeepers, the cleaning staff, the groundskeepers, and the fleet of nannies. And pay all of their own security costs.

      Otherwise? Just like all the other taxpayer-funded, working royal parents? She is required to work. NOW. Funny how her defenders keep insisting Kate is so incompetent she cannot handle an hour or two of work a week. Precious Snowflake.

      • Betsy says:

        This. And I stay at home, but I am not a public and publicly funded person.

      • stormy says:

        Funny, but no matter how much it bothers you, she doesn’t have to conform NOW to your expectations.

      • Barnaby says:

        No actually she doesn’t have to give up any of it because it doesn’t belong to her, it belongs to William. She benefits from the luxuries because of who she married and her marriage isn’t a contract. Last I checked she didn’t sign anything requiring her to work so many hours a week. William is responsible for maintaining their lifestyle, he is the heir to the throne and all the luxuries it provides. If the queen had any issue with Kate’s working hours then things would be different. It appears the queen takes no issue with it, it’s possible she might even prefer her being home more with her children considering how much time she spent away from her own. The royal family as a whole takes in taxpayer funding and no one knows how much is allocated to Kate. If people have such an issue with taxpayer funded monarchy then get rid of it. But until someone can pull out a contract that states Kate agreed to marry William and work this many hours a week and have this set of responsibilities, then the argument is pretty silly.

        And she isn’t required to work, none of their wives are “required” to work. It’s possible they like working outside the home more than Kate. Sure Kate could work more hours, but if she prefers not to then that is her choice and more power to her. I personally find being home with my children exhausting. My husband and I are wealthy and I have a nanny and a housekeeper, but my children are young and always prefer me. They want me to do the school pick up and drop off, they want me to color with them and read to them and play outside with them. Our nanny helps me to break up the day with our children.

        I’m very fortunate and I realize that. I was happy to leave the workforce and I still benefit from the income my husband brings in. All the complaining sounds to me like a lot of jealousy. Not everyone can be married to a rich prince though.

      • Tina says:

        @Barnaby, I have no children and am pretty comfortable myself. I work because I want to and can’t bear idleness, not because we need the money. I wouldn’t want Kate’s life for anything. I still resent Kate’s laziness, though, because I am a UK taxpayer and I see the consequences of austerity here in the UK every day. (And yes, we give money to charity, but there is no substitution for government fulfilling its proper role of looking after its vulnerable citizens – in my opinion it is a dereliction of duty to expect charities to look after such people). The royals set their own schedules and always have, the Queen does not expect Anne to do 500+ engagements and she does not expect Kate to do fewer than 100.

        I really hate this argument that we either have to campaign for a republic or not complain about the royals. I think the present monarch is great. I think her successor is going to be a very good monarch. Why should I advocate for an overthrow of the whole system just because the following generation is lazy as hell?

      • Nic919 says:

        Kate can still be with her kids and also take a few hours to do engagements. She gets her hair done pretty often to keep the grey away so it’s not like she doesn’t already spend a few hours away from them per week to do that. Or for the shopping either. Or for working out. She’s already not strapped to them 24/7 but she just doesn’t care to put any of that effort into helping others.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Gosh so Philip, Sophie, Camilla, Duchess of Gloucester can just rest on their bums like Kate? Nope, that isn’t the way it works. Both William and Kate are required to work for their perks.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        The optics of Kate doing so few formal engagements and the optics of Meghan wearing high-end non-British couture looks bad no matter what angle it is viewed from. Kate & Meghan have the right to do what they want as long as QEII is happy and what they have chose to do is not wrong in any way. It just looks very bad IMHO.

    • MikaC says:

      If Kate wanted to be a stay at home mom, she should have married someone else. End of story.

      When she married a Prince, she also married a job. You don’t get to accept payment (security, palaces etc.) and not do that job.

      • Barnaby says:

        Ok, can I see the list of specific job requirements and the hours she is required to work because she married William?

      • Tina says:

        Such an American attitude. We have an unwritten constitution. Many expectations on public figures are unwritten, including this one.

      • Mego says:

        No job requirements Barnaby?

        Ok then. Live lavishly on the taxpayer dime, be lazy. But please don’t use the media to lie about how you are hardworking and serving your country. Don’t use the media to tear down your new sister in law who wants to be different than you and you fall short in the comparison.

      • Nic919 says:

        There were no job requirements for Prince Phillip either and yet he didn’t sit on his ass and do nothing. Until he retired at 95 he was working way harder than his decades younger granddaughter in law and future future consort.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Go look at the official website for the British Royal Family, Barnaby. Nowhere does it state “have kids and sit on your bum while being supported by taxpayers”.

      • MikaC says:

        “You are a member of the British royal family. We are never tired, and we all love hospitals.”- Mary of Teck. The BRF has been expected to carry out engagements and not sit on their butts for about a hundred years now.

        Obviously there is no specification as to how much they should do but here is some food for thought:

        It is not asking too much to expect Will and Kate to work an average of 2 days a week. On each of those days they can carry out 2 or 3 engagements, meetings etc. At a rate of 5 engagements per week for 52 weeks they would be at 260 engagements per year. If they throw in a tour or two they’d easily be over 300 engagements per year, putting them in league with the other working royals most of whom are lower in the line of succession than the Cambridges. The Cambridges would be left with plenty of time for their children and any other things they want to do while still being able to use their position to affect change and help others.

  19. yuck says:

    “But some royal fans believe William will want to be close when his younger brother becomes a first-time dad, hinting that the baby is due to arrive before or after William’s trip.”

    Wow, that’s some “hint.” Yes, I think it’s safe to say the baby will arrive before OR after William’s trip. Does no one read this tripe before posting?

  20. Mrs.Krabapple says:

    The taxpayers funding their lifestyle don’t care. When they do, they’ll get rid of the monarchy.

    • Tina says:

      Most people don’t care, it’s true. But that doesn’t mean we can’t complain about it.

  21. RoyalBlue says:

    Ugh. I wouldn’t be surprised if she has cut back appearances because she is pregnant with number 4 and suffering morning sickness. Not surprised at all.

    She does not have the stresses most of us have with multitasking and coordinating different schedules, cooking, cleaning, laundry, etc. she literally has support whereas the average person may not. She is fully capable of getting out there and supporting her charities, giving a speech or two and raising money for them whilst raising their profiles. Some queen consort she will make one day

    • BayTampaBay says:

      I read somewhere that Cathy Cambridge is the type of person who gets very tired very easily and has almost no stamina. This could be all tripe but I did read this somewhere in fairly reliable publication (US Vanity???) but I can not recall which one.

      • Cloudysky says:

        It has long been rumored that Kate suffers from depression, anxiety, panic attacks and fear of public speaking. I’m sure these issues are exacerbated by her troubled marriage and the expectations of her as a member of the BRF. I don’t think she’s lazy, but it looks that way because public engagements are difficult for her.

  22. Ali says:

    I’m going to die on this hill I guess lol

    I hear all the complaints about Kate, duchess on the dole, who doesn’t work hard enough for the lifestyle she lives courtesy of the tax payers, etc.

    I’m saying that in this specific case of where has Kate been for a month, just because most of us cannot take a month long vacation with our kids, doesn’t mean that she’s wrong on any level to do it. She has three young children and by all accounts enjoys spending time with them. In her place, or even anywhere close where I could spend a month on holiday with my kids, I would, and I don’t hate the fact that she did just because I can’t.

    Maybe she’s using her kids as cover and is somewhere riding horses and drinking martinis, but as someone who would pick parenting over outside work any day of the week, I’m going to give her the benefit of the doubt here.

    • Royalwatcher says:

      But her month-long work-free zone doesn’t happen in a vacuum. That is the point for me and others.

      If she normally had work numbers like Camilla or Philip (you know, the other consorts), or even Sophie or Anne, then I don’t think most people (me included) would care one iota if she took a month off for her kids’ school vacations. But this isn’t the reality. She has 14 engagements (or days or work?) in 2019. THAT is the real issue. You can’t just look at her taking the month off because it’s what she is doing (or not doing) the rest of the year that also matters. IMO anyway.

      • notasugarhere says:

        ^This.

      • Becks1 says:

        @royalwatcher YES. A month off because the kids are out of school when she’s been working regularly since the new year? Fine. N

        But she doesnt work regularly. She barely works. So it doesn’t seem like she is off bc she wants to spend time with her kids, it seems like she’s not working because she doesn’t want to.

        She is not like any other mother out there, in a variety of ways, and we need to stop acting like she is. She’s not the typical working mom. She’s not the typical SAHM. It’s different. I don’t think the public has right to her kids. I do think, considering the criticism Meghan gets for her clothing budget , her birth plans, etc , that Kate deserves criticism for not working.

        And yes, I went there. Lol.

    • Nic919 says:

      She’s been playing this same game since 2011 and had the benefit of the doubt after George was born and then again Charlotte. She’s never going to change. She could easily have done a high number of engagements prior to the school break. She didn’t. Just like she didn’t last year, and the year before and the year before.

    • norah says:

      the problem is that kate is always the laziest out of all the family – she has 3 kids yippee for her but she has lots of help and staff if she was working when the kids are in school etc it is a different matter but she isnt – you mean that all the other royal ladies who have kids dont work ? the logic is that she is a higher ranking lady so she sd do a lot more . making excuses for her is just pathetic

  23. justwastingtime says:

    i get four weeks of vacation a year which is considered generous in the US. Not counting summer break, my kids school vacations during the year plus the odd “training day” total more than four weeks. It’s aggravating.

  24. Amne says:

    I’m cutting her some slack. That marriage is falling apart – and I’ll bet she is too. The whole thing is coming off the rails.

  25. Flying fish says:

    The Duchess of Cambridge is lazy. She is not spending all her FREE TIME with her children because 2 out of 3 of them are in school and the children have a nanny in addition to other help.
    The school age kids were not on Break for a month.
    Stop making excuses for this self indulged, privileged, lazy woman.

  26. Kathy T says:

    This is a very mean site, will not access it anymore. I’m surprised the Fug girls link to it.

    • Tina says:

      They link to the Daily Mail all the time, or at least they used to. Everyone on GFY seems very comfortable reading and discussing the Daily Mail.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        It is my understanding that the Geneva Convention allows for open-warfare on the Daily Fail at anytime or in anyplace! LOL!

    • Mego says:

      You want mean? Read the smears written about the Duchess of Sussex.

      I make no apologies for calling out the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and their lies and shenanigans which are well documented on this site.

      • lawyergal says:

        Yea seriously. Good riddance to the poster above if you think it’s mean to call out a racist lazy doormat who literally grinned with glee during a smear campaign against her pregnant sister in law. KathyT, if you are/were an American, did you/would you have supported giving Trump a chance? Kate clearly doesn’t care about children or mental health because if she did she would have done something. Oh wait, she likely had her own mother coordinate the smear campaign.

  27. Casey20 says:

    She’s been on Maternity Leave for about a month. Licking her wounds from Turnip Gate, I’m sure. Now a 45 minute appearance and back on Maternity Leave until Baby Sussex is born and maybe back on Maternity Leave for another month after that. As soon as she gets an idea Meghan is ready to return to work we will see her more wearing old out of date clothes and that silly annoying grin.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      Casey20, you make a good point but I would leave the line about “old out of date clothes” out of the argument.

      Most of Meg Sussex’s “designer duds” look just as ridiculous as Cathy Cambridge’s “old out of date clothes”. Neither one of these women understand the term “public optics”. Princess Anne and the Countess of Wessex are successful as Royals because the fully understand “public optics”.

      • norah says:

        why drag meghan into this conversation? if you dont like meghan say so – at least meghan was working right upto her due date

    • Mego says:

      I think Casey was pointing to her rather obvious repeating of outfits to bait the press into praising her “thriftiness” in contrast to Meghan’s excess. Again pr manipulation rather than genuine concern over overspending. Kate doesn’t give a toss about that.

  28. Salina says:

    Kate = bad
    Meghan = good

    We get it.

  29. Sassy says:

    Kudos to Kate, she successfully conned people into believing barely working is the normal for tax funded white moms. Meghan could never get away with this.

  30. Hill says:

    I’m not British but in an imaginary world it would be awesome if the queen would issue a law that the crown would go straight to Harry after her death. Can you imagine the crap storm it would cause (wrings hands with excitement)! I do know Harry has absolutely no desire to be king but I think his heart is definitely more geared towards helping people as is his wife’s . I’m in the USA and I just need to say this about people giving Meg such a difficult time about being take charge. That is the way for the most part that people here function. We are fast paced, take charge, career oriented, outgoing people. I totally get why everyone is upset about Kate and Will. I understand being with your children is extremely important. However, doing the bare minimum most of the time while living at the expense of taxpayers is puzzling to me.

  31. Margot says:

    I predict that like 2 weeks before Meghan goes back to work all of the sudden Kate will start working hard and gaining ‘points’. I think that it is crazy how much harder Meghan(in her last trimester none the less) has worked this year then Kate.

  32. Chatty Cath says:

    Oh dear. The main thrust of these comments is that women with children are never given enough free time with their kids. Future studies may show this has a bad effect on development and or society or it may not. None of us know.

  33. Jessica says:

    So the standard has been set that when the kids are out of school then the parents take off? I’ll remember that for the future.

  34. Elisabeth says:

    Yes. Sophie and Edward also had no public engagements this month and their kids were also out of school for three weeks. It seems to be the thing they’re doing now.

  35. LORENA says:

    I mean yeah, tons of parents take off when their children are on vacation. Half of my coworkers are off this week due to April vacation

  36. Kittycat says:

    Must be nice to take a month off of ‘work’ to be with your kids.

  37. Becks1 says:

    I take off when my kid’s school closes because someone has to watch him (like I’m off tomorrow and Monday because his school is closed.) That’s…..not the same thing.

  38. Millenial says:

    Well, I think the difference is it’s one week for Spring Break in the US, and usually parents do that because they don’t have alternative options for childcare, e.g. camps like they do in the summer. It kinda sucks to burn a week of PTO in April.

  39. Royalwatcher says:

    . original comment disappeared…

  40. Ponytail says:

    Would you normally have to work Friday and Monday then? Aren’t they both holidays in your country?

  41. Jackrabbit says:

    I think those of us in N. America have to stop judging the rest of the world by our experiences – even though it’s hard not to be envious. When we lived overseas we had 6-8 weeks vacation time and all bank/national holidays everyone had off (except those in some hospitality services). When I first arrived it annoyed me to no end to not have full retail/hospitality services on a Sunday/holiday. Even though I’m a SAHM, it was nice to have my husband home too when the kids were out of school. We’re now back in Canada and between the bank holidays, professional development days for teachers, breaks and summer holidays the kids seem to be always off school and in most cases parents have to work and they have to either pay for childcare, use a day of vacation time, pay for a camp or worst case scenario use a sick day. I totally feel for those who are left scrambling for childcare and I wish it was more like the European way on this side of the world when it comes to healthcare, maternity care/benefits and education.

  42. Barnaby says:

    It is really nice. Our family quite enjoyed it, it’s too bad other people can’t enjoy the same luxury, but life isn’t fair and we’re all smart enough to realize that by now.

  43. Becks1 says:

    Is this to me? Yes, I would normally have to work. They are not holidays in the US. the markets close on Good Friday, but its not a holiday. I work for the government and had to use vacation days to cover my time off.

    I said its not the same as Kate because she has way more help than I do (so she doesn’t have to be off the entire time the kids are off) and if my kid was off for 3 weeks, I would have to find alternate care. I could not take that much time off in a row.

  44. BayTampaBay says:

    No, Good Friday and the Monday after Easter are not normal PTO holidays.

  45. KatV says:

    Exactly. I’m om Scandinavia and we’re having a week and a half off. A month is a long time, true, but on the other hand who cares? I mean we have a monarchy too, and I have no idea when our Crown Princess did an engagement the last time nor do I really care ;)

  46. s says:

    +1000 Thank you! I have been been side-eyeing a lot of the comments and even commentary on here lately due to exactly this issue!

  47. MeghanNotMarkle says:

    I would spend more on childcare during that break than I would earn at work. Or I would get fired for not showing up. PTO is a luxury a lot of people don’t have (and is part of the reason I’m switching airlines – I need better benefits).

  48. Jackrabbit says:

    Our kids just had the last two weeks in March off for spring break and now they have a four day weekend for Easter – luckily Friday and Monday are also stat holidays (except for retail and hospitality industries) so I think *most* families are home together.

  49. E says:

    You should care, you’re the one funding their opulent lifestyle.

  50. BayTampaBay says:

    Denmark, Sweden or Norway?

  51. notasugarhere says:

    jackrabbit, most families support themselves. W&K do not.

  52. MeghanNotMarkle says:

    Therein lies the difference.