Duchess Meghan ‘is planning to take just three months’ maternity leave’


Meghan, Duchess of Sussex attends a panel discussionPhoto: Albert Nieboer / Netherlands OUT / Point de Vue OUT

Duchess Meghan has been on maternity leave for about five weeks now. Her last public appearance was on March 19th, when she and Prince Harry went to the New Zealand embassy, per the Queen’s request, to sign the condolence book after the Christchurch mass shooting. She’s been working behind the scenes, apparently taking meetings and of course moving into Frogmore Cottage and such. It seems pretty common for royal women to take their maternity leave about a month in advance of giving birth – Duchess Kate did the same with all of her pregnancies too. But people are already wondering how long Meghan’s maternity leave will last:

Meghan Markle is planning to take just three months’ maternity leave after giving birth to baby Sussex, it has been claimed. The duchess, 37, who is due in the next few days, has reportedly told aides she’s eager to get back to work as soon as possible. Heavily pregnant Meghan has continued to work with charities behind the scenes despite finishing her official royal duties six weeks ago.

A royal source told The Sun: ‘Meghan has made it very clear she wants to return to work as soon as possible. She has huge amounts of energy, is extremely determined and wants to be as hands-on as possible with her charities. She’s pencilled in three months, but she’ll most likely return to public life in six weeks — on the Queen’s official birthday, Trooping the Colour, in June. Three months’ maternity is standard in the US for American mums – they don’t normally get the six or even 12 months women get here in the UK. So this is totally normal for Meghan.’

Kensington Palace declined to comment. Her sister-in-law Kate, 37, took six months off after the birth of Prince Louis last year and five months leave with Charlotte in 2015. But the Duchess of Cambridge came back after just five weeks following the birth of George in 2013.

[From The Daily Mail]

I think Meghan will probably do what Kate did, which is make a few appearances at mandatory-events (like Trooping the Colour) during the first three months of her maternity leave. But yeah, I’ve said this whole time that I don’t see Meghan going completely dark for months at a time. Barring any postpartum complications, I think Meghan will attend Trooping the Colour and probably a half-dozen other events in June and July. Most of the royals take off August, and then Meghan will be back to a full royal schedule by September. Just my guess.

Sussex Morocco Asni school

Photos courtesy of WENN and Avalon Red.

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

166 Responses to “Duchess Meghan ‘is planning to take just three months’ maternity leave’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Lucia says:

    Okay. This is where Meghan and I are going to disagree. I think she needs to take the full 6 months to send a message to the US and to bond with the baby.

    Maybe it’s because I was born and raised in Canada where we have 1 year mat leave but I’ve lived in the USA for the last 15 years. I just feel like 3 months is not enough time for mat leave. I feel the UK’s 6 months is barely enough time.

    But I get the feeling Meghan is one of those people like me who needs to stay busy and can’t sit on her hands. I’ve been on FMLA for 2 weeks for my medical condition and I’m already going crazy. But she has a baby. If I had a baby, I’d probably want to be home for as long as possible. It’s not like she’s doing nothing. She’s taking care of her baby and bonding with them.

    I love Meghan to bits but I just disagree with her on this one. But if that works for her, I guess it works for her. I won’t dictate to her how much time she needs to spend with her baby.

    • Miss M says:

      I agree with you. I am getting exhausted with all these news she wants to set herself apart from all things British. Why marry one and move there if you want to change everything?
      Take the 6 months. I find 3 months so short. If I could take 6 months, I would without a second thought.

      • Lucia says:

        There’s nothing wrong with setting yourself apart. In her case, she set herself apart the second she become engaged to Harry. So why not set the trail on fire?

        I just think she would want as much time with her baby as possible. But it is not my place to tell another woman what to do.

      • Kittycat says:

        “Why marry one and move there if you want to change everything?”

        What has she changed?

        I’m from Canada and having a year off work to raise your child is great.

        Meghan is not living the life of a typical woman so whatever she plans to do is just fine.

      • Becks1 says:

        Eh, she’s still going to have plenty of time with her baby. I imagine if the baby arrives and she finds she cant return to work at 3 months, she will take longer.

      • Heather says:

        Maybe she realizes that returning to “work” after three months is not like returning to a 9-5 job or even being on set for 10 hours a day or what have you. Instead, returning to work for her will be a few engagements a week, a few hours a week with some weeks nothing happening.

    • Erinn says:

      I also don’t want to see people using this as a way to slam Kate. I think women should be able to take as much or as little of their allotted mat leave as they choose – but deciding to take less of it does not make someone a better person than someone who chooses or HAS to take more of it.

      I currently have a friend doing the 18 month leave (we’re Canadian) though the last 6 months is a further reduced payment if I recall correctly. Sometimes it’s cheaper to take the full leave than it would be to find childcare.

      As long as her decision is HER decision – that’s great. She should do what works for her. But taking a longer maternity leave is nothing to look down on.

      • Becks1 says:

        No one has mentioned Kate in this thread yet except you.

        (wait that’s not true – I did below, but only to say that I think Meghan’s summer will look similar to Kate’s last summer.)

      • deezee says:

        Whether its 12 or 18 months, the pay is the same. Meaning that if she were to make (for arguments sake) $10,000 then at the end of the 12 or 18 months off, she would have made the $10,000. That’s how the pay reduction works. She’d make reduced wages throughout.

      • Ader says:

        nvm. missed it in the article.

      • Becks1 says:

        @Ader – this article says she took 5 weeks, but that’s not entirely accurate. She did a few engagements at the end of the summer (I remember she went to an appearance in Wales with William, and there was some event where she wore a gold sparkly jenny packham), and then picked up again over the fall, but they were still in Wales at the time so I think it was all very sporadic.

      • Erinn says:

        “No one has mentioned Kate in this thread yet except you.”

        Not in the thread no, but she was brought up in the quoted source material, and I didn’t say anyone DID say it in the comments yet. I’m just making the statement that I don’t think women should be held up or put down when it comes to how much leave they take, and I know there’s going to be comments of “oh well, there’s no reason for them to take x months anyway” – which, about 8 minutes after I had commented is the turn it took.

        Regardless of what kind of job someone has – famous or not – they should not be looked down on for taking the amount of leave they have available/is the norm. They don’t have normal 40 hour work weeks, but they still should be able to take as much OR little of the leave as they want without people judging them for it.

      • Becks1 says:

        Meh, I think the people judging Meghan are the ones acting like if she doesn’t take 6 months, she wont be able to spend time with her baby. I think she and her baby will be fine. Shrug.

        ETA and telling people not to slam Kate is just opening the door for people TO slam Kate. come on now. You know how this place rolls.

      • Bluthfan says:

        It definitely makes Kate look bad but not because she took a longer maternity leave. It just brings more attention to how lazy she is outside of maternity leave. No one begrudges Kate maternity leave. But, she has full household staff and multiple nannies and can’t manage to do more than 15 events in 4 months.

    • MCV says:

      I think she’s one of those people that like to be busy all times. And it’s not like she has a 8 hour a day kind of work anyways.

      • Bettyrose says:

        MCV,

        IKR? That’s what’s weird about this discussion. Americans who work full time typically spend 9 hours in an office and 2 hours commuting. Whether Meg takes 3 or 6 months leave, she’ll have time for bonding and self care. Now, her life is stressful in ways I can’t imagine, every move scrutinized in a global forum, but maternity leave hasn’t spared her from that.

      • Snazzy says:

        I came here to say exactly this. It’s not like she’ll be away from her baby all day every day. She’ll do events and come home. A few hours at a time, a few days a week. It’s not like she’s out there in the workforce. This whole discussion is so strange.

    • Eliza says:

      I think this might be a “pre baby” idea, and not post baby reality. I hope she does events important to her as she feels up to it, but doesn’t get back into a busier schedule with tours until 6 months at least have passed.

      I thought my 10 week maternity leave would be girls lunches with the baby sleeping and pilates. I was an idiot!! Like honestly a moron! I didn’t get a calm sleepy baby; she has consistently slept hours less than average her whole life (dr “it’s average for a reason, some are above and some are below”) I never left the house, I nursed so it was me on call day and night. My body was not ready at 10 weeks. A lot of my pre baby ideas ended up being crap lol

      • escondista says:

        I think a lot of first-time moms think that’s how it will be (me included) – lots of naps, pram walks, a precious baby asleep in their bed while you clean and watch tv and lovingly prepare healthy lunches.
        And the reality is an unshowered, exhausted emotional mess because you’re so nervous you’re doing it wrong and you haven’t had enough sleep in weeks and weeks and your back is killing you from nursing, and there is literally no break or vacation from it in sight.

        And then it gets better. But maternity leave is a necessity and our three protected months here are a joke.

      • Lucia says:

        I can see that. I just hope she doesn’t have any post-partum depression issues. I worry about her becoming a Masako after she has the baby.

      • Lady D says:

        I remember while pregnant asking my mother-in-law the same thing. If all I have to do is feed, bathe and change him, what else is there? She laughed. My life as a new mother was exactly like your second paragraph. I laughed at stories about new mothers not brushing their teeth until the middle of the afternoon and thought yeah right. Turns out they knew what they were talking about.

      • PlainJane says:

        @ Eliza +1 on everything you said! It’s so easy to say what you will do after you have the baby BEFORE you have the baby. I know I did!

        Then you have the baby, and the pre-baby plan goes straight out the window! Maternal love is something that can’t be explained, so she may not want to be separated from her newborn. And brand new babies are exhausting!

      • BayTampaBay says:

        Did Diana take maternity leave with each of her boys?

      • megs283 says:

        Yeah. I took 12 weeks with my now-three year old, and it was NOT enough. I got an average of 4 hours of sleep a night the first month – that wasn’t even consecutive. I was losing my mind.

        I took 16 weeks with my one year old, and that was a lot more workable. But I wish 6 months would have been an option, you know?

      • Vanessa says:

        Co-sign what esconcita said. My pre-conceived ideas had no relation to the struggle of new motherhood. Granted I did not have a staff, which might have helped. ;)

      • Gigi La Moore says:

        Everyone’s experience is different. Mine sounds nothing like yours. I had energy and was out of the house with my baby 2 days after he was born. Meghan will figure it out.

      • Salvation says:

        Every woman has a different birth experience. Some on here make it sound like child birth is such a horrendous experience, it’s really not. I work in postpartum and in the NICU (and I have 5 kids of my own, all born and raised in a third world country) but in my hospital even C-Section moms are sent home after 48 hours. SVD moms go home after 24 hrs, so it’s really not that horrible. Some on here make it sound like working child bearing women are neglectful parents which is just ridiculous. I’m my country we have no epidurals, so ours are the natural childbirth. And mat leaves are not an option for us so we birth our kids today and a week later you are back to work if you
        are self employed. If you work a 9-5 which we call an office job, you take more than a couple weeks off and you not guaranteed to find yr job, so you better get back to that desk in a couple weeks if you still want that job. If you till the land to sustain yr family, you back to working the fields in about 3-4 days if you had a spontaneous vaginal delivery. However, even with all that, less that 0.1% end up on the streets or living lives of crime, we raise pretty well rounded and productive kids. Taking a year of mat leave doesn’t necessarily guarantee bonding and/or raising the best kids. I just RME at all the “Meghan should do this or that because otherwise Kate looks bad” blah blah blah, geez. How many times have we been reminded how William or Kate are not responsible for Meghan? If Meghan wants to take a month of mat leave or a year that’s fine nothing wrong with it. It’s not like she wakes up at 6 am to go work the fields till 6pm like us regular plebs.

    • Patty says:

      I think the whole concept of maternity leave for Kate and Meghan ridiculous. They don’t need 3-6 months. Let’s be real here the work that they do is not something that requires them to leave their kids at home, with a nanny, or take them to daycare 8-10 hours a day for days at a time; like a typical working woman.

      Both could certainly do some work here and there and still have plenty of time to bond with their babies. We are talking about engagements that typically don’t last longer than a couple of hours.

      • Lucia says:

        That’s pretty cruel. They deserve unmitigated time off to bond and be with their babies. They’re not whipping girls. They don’t need the pressure of engagements on top of a newborn. They deserve their time off just like anyone else.

      • gemcat says:

        Oh come on, it might be a tiny bit harsh, but it is certainly not cruel. Patty is simply pointing out that the do already get quality time to both rest and spend time with their baby within their (very unique) work schedules. Schedules they would still be able to influence I would assume.

        I see it very much like someone who chooses to (or has to) study part-time whilst having a baby, you can generally squeeze in a few hours here and there without it having to affect your time with baby, especially if you have family/nannies around. Maybe not while your body is healing still, but for some women that doesn’t take long. *Obviously if it does take long to recover or sleep is an issue then sure, that can change things markedly.

      • Kylie says:

        The body still needs time to heal. Unless you feel women should show up bleeding to various places. Maternity leave isn’t just about bonding with baby, it is for a woman’s body to have time to heal.

      • Himmiefan says:

        Patty, I agree.

      • Lucia says:

        It is cruel.

        Yes, the British Royal Family is paid for by tax money. But that doesn’t make them slaves. They deserve the chance to be their own people and to have their own lives outside of royalty and engagements. They’re not monkeys that dance on command.

        This is one of the reasons I think it may be best for the monarchy to go away. Let them be human, let them do what other humans do instead of people thinking they’re entitled to participate in their narrative and to think that since they’re paid for by tax money that it’s okay to dump a constant stream of sh*t all over them.

      • FredsMother says:

        @patty I agree. They do not have 9 to 5, commute on public transport, etc type jobs. 3 months is OK.

        My brain would atrophy if I had to stay home with a child for 6 months because that is just not me.

        I do know that the country where I live now gives 2 years paid maternity and paternity leave–partial pay for the second year, I think. I am observing the women here, and am now firmly of the view that too much maternity leave is a detriment to women, society as a whole. Some women here get quite demotivated and do not want to return to work after 2 years. Some women lose their place on the career ascent path. Also, negative stereotypes are held by the men who think, automatically, that a woman is a bad mother for not wanting to stay at home and take care of the babies. Unrealistic gender-roles are formed, making the woman the default primary caregiver even though men can take paternity leave and should be equally responsible for his child. Men rarely take the paternity leave. Majority of companies are led by men here, reinforcing the gender imbalance at work and in society.

        And yes, in general, I do think this long, paid maternity leave and the associated consequences make it difficult to achieve material gender equality.

        I hope some posters here can appreciate that not everyone needs 6 months… I don’t like the tone of posters that suggest that anything less than 6 months is not enough to bond. I am quite attached to my daughter but 2 days after I brought her home, I left for 3 weeks of work/travel obligation. I run my own business so, even if the government compensates, the money could never cover the reputational hazard for defaulting on 3 major contracts and I must work when the work is available. So I travelled and my husband took charge. I was able to connect with my child when I came home. This was not a big deal then for me and would do it again if I had to. I am still a mother, no different from those who took 6 months or more leave.

        Women are different, raised differently, etc. I never saw a woman in my family on any type of maternity leave and maybe they would have liked it but they did what they had to and this was the model I came to know, appreciate and want for myself. Who is to say this is the wrong way, when this is what I feel is right for me.

      • Salvation says:

        @Fredsmom, totally agree with your post.

        @Lucia, no it’s not actually cruel to point out the fact that these 2 privileged women do not need 6 months or a year to bond etc. I don’t get why the insinuation that only Kate is the only one bonded with her kids. There are other royal child bearing women that have kids and worked at the same time. Also, do you mean to say that since male royals take none of those lengthy pat leaves they don’t bond with them kids? That’s just absurd. Wasn’t Harry dragged through the mud on here when it was suggested that he would take longer than 2 weeks of pat leave?
        And no, the woman’s body doesn’t take that long to heal from childbirth,. Some people bleed for just a couple days. The majority are back to having sex with their partners after just a couple weeks to a month. If you can boink, you surely can do those engagements “work” thing that them royals do a couple days a week.

      • Clementine says:

        No matter how much help or money you have, you deserve time to bond with your child.

    • sunny says:

      I think she should do whatever works best for her and the baby. However, I am going to point out something that also may be a play here aside from her possible American experience with maternity leave, which is race. Aside from her general attitude which suggests she loves being busy, most black women I know are hyper-aware of being perceived as lazy.

      It is fine to say she should take a year but I dread to think of the dog whistling we would see about her level of effort if she indeed took all that time off. That is probably weighing in her thoughts as well.

      • Becks1 says:

        I was thinking this as well. Can you IMAGINE the comments if she took 6 months off?? They would be inappropriate comments, but I can see her just shrugging and being like “you know what, I’m not going to give them the chance to come at me for my work ethic.”

      • Lucia says:

        That’s VERY true. I didn’t even think of the racial stereotypes and aspects of it. You’re very right to point that out.

    • Salted Watermelon says:

      It’s not. I was “lucky” – I was able to stay home for a full 14 weeks (paid!) with my son. My first day back, I was sobbing to my husband that I wasn’t ready to leave him. And then he stopped sleeping through the night as soon as I went back to work. Someone said, “oh I hear they do that when mom goes back to work because your baby misses you and wants to spend more time with you.” Damn near broke my heart.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        Meghan will have or has a full staff in place. She can take as short or as long maternity leave as she sees fit.

        I support Meghan 100% but I really understand the point of view stating that it is not like she is working as a CPA (Charter Accountant in UK) major partner in an accounting firm or as a lawyer major partner in a law firm 50+ hours a week.

      • ByTheSea says:

        My baby did the same thing. And it seemed obvious to me; “I didn’t see you the whole day, so I’m going to stay up and spend some time with you!” It was brutal. I had stayed home for 6 months and he was sleeping just fine until I went back to work.

    • Surly Gale says:

      We women who only got 3 or 4 months mat leave worked very hard to enable younger families that year to be together and bond, here in Canada, because no one is the same. That we get a year doesn’t mean you have to take it, if you are going stir-crazy. In Canada, you have that option. I had 4 months and went back to work. After a traumatic birth, I was still barely conscious. So I say, do what’s best for you and your babe and glory in your options. I believe DoS recognizes not all have those options. I believe she’s seen both sides now.

      • Lucia says:

        At the end of the day, it is not my place to dictate how much time a woman takes off when she has a baby. My original comment was more intended to sending a message to the USA regarding the abysmal mat leave laws.

    • ShazBot says:

      But this implies that a woman can’t bond with her baby unless she spends 24/7 with them for 6-12 months? Meghan is not like most women. She has as much help as she needs. Going back to work so soon for women who have jobs outside the home is so hard because you’re away from your baby ALL DAY, and then you’re up with them at night, and you’re physically and emotionally spent.
      Her going and doing 3-4 hour long engagements a week would absolutely not impact her ability to bond with her baby, and would probably not adversely affect her health.

      I’m 100% for paid parental leave for anyone who wants to take it, but we also don’t need to pretend like the duchesses are in the same boat as the rest of us.

      • Lucia says:

        Meghan will do what is best for her. As many have pointed out, it’s not like she’s going back to her HR job. She and Harry will bond with their child regardless. It is not my place to dictate her mat leave for her.

      • ByTheSea says:

        This! We are absolutely pretending these women have ordinary jobs. They can totally do one appearance every few weeks and not break “maternity” leave.

    • Montréalaise says:

      Taking a full six months would make sense if she had a regular career, but royal work consists of attending events and meetings for about an hour at a time. I don’t see how attending an occasional event is going to prevent her from bonding with the baby.

      • Lucia says:

        When I suggested it, I thought of it as a message to send regarding mat leaves. My original comment was likely a little tone deaf. I’ve learned much talking to these lovely women today.

    • AryasMum says:

      Three months in the U.S. is a luxury. Most women I know get six weeks, and then they use up their vacation days if they want more.

      Just speaking in generalities on American women, not implying anything regarding Meghan.

    • Originaltessa says:

      3 months? I get six weeks. 3 months would be amazing. My husband gets zero paid paternity leave. He has to use vacation. The US is really crazy in this regard.

    • Oh-Dear says:

      we (Canada) actually get up to 18 months now, depending on work history. The last 6 are without compensation. I am sooooo grateful.

    • Clementine says:

      Meghan is a true worker, and I respect that. However, I agree that she can use her platform to set an example of the importance of taking 6 months. With all due respect to the Duchess of Sussex, her “returning” to work with cooks, nannies, housecleaners, personal assistants, etc. does not even come close to “returning” for your average working (and sometimes single) mom who’s crying because her babysitter is sick so she can’t go to work, or she must choose paying for daycare or her post-partum work wardrobe. To be an advocate for a process, you usually must participate in it. There’s nothing wrong with her taking the full six months as we all know it would be purely selfless bonding time with the baby, not because she didn’t have the care to get back to work.

    • Lilly (with the double-L) says:

      I felt a similar way before I had my baby, that I was a working person who would go back to it quickly. After birth though, I could not be separated from my daughter. It’s likely more space filler from the press while we wait for the birth, she probably doesn’t have very concrete plans and plans go out the window once you have your child.

    • Mrs.Krabapple says:

      Excuse me, but I bonded just fine with my own working mother, and my sister bonded just fine with her baby even though she returned to work sooner than YOU would have chosen to do. I wish people would stop spreading the notion that working mothers are abandoning their children — especially if they have the luxury of round-the-clock nannies. Some women cannot take doing nothing but sitting with an infant for 24 hours a day, for months on end. They need mental stimulation that a baby can’t provide. If they get that from other family members, great. If they get that from working, then also great. If they need to have a longer maternity leave, then that’s ok too. But it’s certainly not wrong to return to work sooner than YOU would chose to do.

      • Mrs.Krabapple says:

        “When I suggested it, I thought of it as a message to send regarding mat leaves. My original comment was likely a little tone deaf. I’ve learned much talking to these lovely women today.”

        I didn’t see this when I posted my own rant. Apologies.

      • Lucia says:

        Quite alright.

    • Lilly says:

      I think she’s trying to outdo Kate and show that she is somehow better or more dedicated, less lazy? But I think she will change her mind when she has the baby.

  2. Amy says:

    Just long enough to avoid the Trump visit (understandably!)

  3. Oh No says:

    A month or two postpartum, my mom couldn’t wait to get back to work. She loved my little brother but was so bored she didn’t know what to do with herself. So I’d understand Meghan going a bit mad if she lost parts of her routine

    I can def. understand not taking a long mat leave, but it really should be an option to every expectant parent

    • Dee says:

      Meghan is hardly going back to a drudgery 8 hour plus commute office job. She will be in a gorgeous mansion with lots of help and a prince and a baby, and get to plan amazing charitable acts and go to fancy parties. Hardly the same thing as real world maternity leave/returning from maternity leave.

      • Oh No says:

        My point was the boredom that comes with maternity leave and, at times, the isolation.

        But go off, sis

      • BayTampaBay says:

        Exactly! See my comment above.

      • Deedee says:

        Right. She could visit a charity during afternoon nap time and be home in an hour.

      • Sunnee says:

        Yep. She’ll have plenty of help. I took 6 months with my first. Then decided not to go back to work at all after my second. Stayed home for years. My fourth was a year old when I sent back to work. After my surprise fifth, I was so ready to return to work when he was 4 months old. Admittedly, I had help from my mom and cousin who also had an infant. Every woman is different. If she returns after three months because she wants to, good on her. She does have a lot of help and maybe she’s eager to get certain projects done. BTW, I’m one who believes that the royals do valuable work and that it IS hard work. Charles, Anne and some senior royals put in the actual work. Working on projects, bringing people together, taking meetings and showing up for events is not as easy as some seem to believe. It is work and it is valued.

      • TeresaM says:

        ^this

      • Eliza says:

        I think here and there she can do stuff if up to it. But I think a tour or fuller schedule should be left to 6 months post partum. Just because pregnancy, delivery and recovery take such a toll on the body she should be able to completely recover first. Put the oxygen mask on yourself first before tending to others.

        I think deedee said she could do an event while the baby naps, but realistically that’s not always the case. My baby didn’t sleep longer than 30 mintues until 10 months old. It was brutal.

      • Kylie says:

        All women need to have time to heal after giving birth regardless of the money and resources available to them.

  4. Becks1 says:

    So, as an American, I understand the thinking that she should take longer to make a point about American maternity leave policies, which are abysmal.

    But, I also think that she understands that her job is not the same as the average working woman, and she can come back from “leave” and still control her schedule and still have a great deal of time with her kid, and a great deal of flexibility. She can do two events a week, have meetings in her house with the baby one room over (or right there with her, whatever), and say she is back from leave.

    My guess is that we will see her much like we saw Kate last summer – a few key appearances, and then September she will be back full force (maybe October.) The royals are all pretty quiet in August anyway, so that wouldn’t be surprising if they go to Scotland for two weeks at that point in time.

    • Bluthfan says:

      I’d be surprised if we saw her as infrequently as Kate. Meghan is really invested in her patronages and has continued to a lot of behind-the-scenes work while on maternity leave. Kate doesn’t seem to actually care about her patronages so she had no worries leaving them for months or more.

  5. Millenial says:

    I have a feeling the poor woman is overdue. I feel her, my kids were both overdue by almost a week. Sending her positive labor vibes to get things moving!

    • Lucia says:

      I don’t think so. Her mom just arrived on Monday. My thinking is she is due sometime next week. I would think her mom would want to be there the last 7-14 days before the due date.

    • Peg says:

      She said her due date was late April, early May.
      It was other people saying she was due in March.

    • Cherie says:

      I don’t think she is overdue, I think we just knew about it much earlier in her pregnancy. Whether due to the HG or other factors, we didn’t get announcements about Kate expecting until she was further along.
      The early announcement was likely due to the tour.
      Regarding the mat leave – I hope she does what she wants regardless of what others did.

      • Becks1 says:

        Actually, we always heard about Kate super early. Like with Prince Louis, they announced September 4. Assuming he was on time, they announced when she was about 6 or 7 weeks along. (I just googled the date, I don’t know that stuff off the top of my head, lol.)

        My guess is we knew about Meghan right at the 12 week mark, so late April/early May would make sense.

      • Olive says:

        the HG actually meant that we heard about kate’s pregnancies EARLIER than normal because she was sick and missing engagements very early on. they announced she was pregnant with george on december 3 (they had to announce because she had been hospitalized) and he was born july 22.

      • BabaBlacksheep3 says:

        Didn’t you know that Kate was faking her HG? At least according to people here 🙄

    • Millenial says:

      Okay, everyone is naysaying me, but hear me out. They announced on October 15th, which according to Google was 27+ weeks ago. She had already had her 12 week scan at that point. Unless she had her scan literally the day they announced (which I doubt, because they also run tests and do lab work) my guess is she’s 40 weeks pregnant already.

      I also assumed they said late April in the sense that it’s really mid-April but they said late April so people wouldn’t bug them about it. It’s a common pregnant tactic :)

      • Becks1 says:

        I don’t disagree with your general timeframe, and those were my thoughts as well before, but Doria arrived…April 16? I thought someone said? I just don’t think she would have arrived here at that point if Meghan was due in mid-april. So I do think probably late April was more accurate, with early May thrown in just because.

  6. Iknow says:

    If Meghan wants to take three months maternity leave, she should. Let’s not kid ourselves and believe that Meghan’s “work” is like all of us. She can work for 3 hours and go home to her baby, play with her/him, then turn to the standby baby nurse or nanny when she has wants to do something as simple as wash herself. Unlike myself, who worked in Manhattan and had to wake-up at 5:30 am and drag my butt for an almost two hour commute to a job that made me feel I had to get myself together quickly after being out for 6 weeks. Meghan and her baby will be fine.

    • Nic919 says:

      Exactly this. We need to stop pretending that either Meghan or Kate are pushed back into a 40 hour a week job like every other woman who takes maternity leave. There is an argument to be made about having better and longer leaves for average women in different countries, mostly the US, but the royals are not a realistic part of this discussion. They have tons of help and they all get to control their schedule, something average women don’t get to do.

      As for an actual timeline, it’s the Daily Mail so they don’t actually know anything. They are speculating.

      • IlsaLund says:

        Agree. This is the Daily Mail and Sun making stuff up as usual. They have no clue as to Meghan’s plans.

    • lucy2 says:

      This.
      I hope she takes as much time as she wants and needs, but her job is not typical – she won’t be rushing out the door to wait tables, or teach a classroom of kids, or perform surgery. She’ll go to events and a few meetings and be able to ease her way back into it as she sees fit.

    • broodytrudy says:

      THIS 100%. Meg should absolutely be pushing for maternity leave reform and definitely deserves the time off, but her position is nowhere near the position of other working women. I got 3 weeks off before i had to come back for fear of losing my job, and picked right back up on a 60 hour work week. It was awful and huge reason why child #2 is unlikely to happen. I wasn’t able to bond with my kid, and even now as a 3 year old it still feels like something is off between us.

      • Dee says:

        Oh that’s so sad, Trudy! But you’ll have lots of time to cuddle and bond with your wee one over the years to come!! You’ll be the best of pals, because your kid will appreciate how hard you worked for your family.

      • burdzeyeview says:

        I had 12 weeks Mat leave after my first baby (she was a section) because I had to go back to work and it was waaayy too soon. Luckily my daughter was a delightful baby and she was well looked after by my in-laws but my body was definitely NOT ready to go back to the 9 to 5. So it would be nice to be able to choose to have longer off work with your baby so if anyone has that choice IMO they should make it.

  7. Trish says:

    3 months?!? Meghan you are not in America anymore – you can take a normal leave just like everyone else in the industrialized world (except the USA)

  8. Snap Happy says:

    I was convinced I would go back to work after I gave birth. I loved my job, but I changed my mind. She should be free to do whatever she wants too post baby. Anyone checking the clock on her can go sit on it. That woman was a machine on her tour. No one is doubting her ability to work hard.

  9. Marina says:

    It’s a fair question. What exactly do the Royals do for us? We, the taxpayers, pay for their lifestyle but what do they actually do for us apart from attend events that hold no real value apart from pomp and ceremony?

    • Lucia says:

      I grew up in Quebec. Traditionally, Quebecois are very anti-Commonwealth. I’ve always believed when Elizabeth II’s reign ends, Canada will most likely leave the commonwealth. Although I’m not so sure anymore and I’ve always been torn as to whether I agree.

      The Queen does provide a service. She unites us with all of the other Commonwealth nations. Also, I’m firm in my belief that the tourism revenue would sink fast without a monarchy in the UK. Yes, the UK pays tax dollars but in return they get an incredibly stable economy in return. People go to the UK for the monarchs. They go for the history, they go for the chance to catch a glimpse of any of them. They are economical props.

      Now with Brexit, I am curious if this fast tracked the monarchy towards becoming a Republic but only time will tell.

      • OriginalLala says:

        I’m Canadian and grew up in Quebec too and I can’t wait until we are no longer supporting this dog and pony show. It’s the 21st century, the royal family has no use other than to glamourise inequality.

      • Lucia says:

        And this is where I’m torn. The monarchy is fine, I just don’t want to pay for it. Canada does not see the benefit that other commonwealth nations do. The UK tax dollars I sort of understand. It benefits their economy the most. In Canada there is little to no benefit, more importantly it does not represent all Canadians (it especially does not represent Quebec!). But the benefit of knowing the other commonwealth nations have our back if Trump decides to invade is nice (that’s a joke…I hope).

      • Prairiegirl says:

        It will not happen. No political party would want to wear it, and no voter in their right mind believes any political party could navigate the massive change from constitutional monarchy to republic (or any other form of government) well. Not in Canada, and definitely not in Britain. Exhibit A: the clusterfudge that is Brexit.

      • OriginalLala says:

        I hear ya @Lucia! If the Brits want to keep the BRF, their choice, but I really don’t understand why Canada needs to keep them around after QE2 goes

      • Deedee says:

        Can you start to scale down how much money they get? Make a list of allowable work-related expenses and then they get reimbursed for those when they turn in the receipts?

      • A says:

        Also from Canada, although not in Quebec, and while I’d like to see a move towards a republic, I can’t see how that could be facilitated with the current legal and political set up in Canada and some other parts of the Commonwealth. The Crown is a legal entity wrt certain treaty obligations between certain First Nations groups in Canada, and as far as I understand it, becoming a republic would involve having to wrangle with issues relating to that, and I just don’t trust either the government in Canada, or the one in Britain, to do that type of thing justice. I don’t think any political party in Canada, barring some of the really anti-monarchist ones, would want to touch those types of issues with a ten foot pole, so we’re putting up with it for now.

  10. Case says:

    I’m sorry, but why only three months? I can’t stand our mentality in America that you should get back to work as soon as possible (or rather, you’re guilted and/or forced back as soon as possible). The countries that allow a long maternity/paternity leave have it right. I 100% feel you should work to live, not live to work. She’s not going to get that time back with her child and has a unique opportunity to be with them longer than most moms. Why not take advantage of it?

    (Note: I am most definitely a feminist and certainly don’t think women should give up work to be a mother or anything. But I do think Americans have an unhealthy mentality about taking time off from work, for maternity leave, holiday leave, sick leave, etc.)

    • Olive says:

      she probably LIKES her job and being busy, and it’s not like she’s being forced to return to a job with a 40 hour workweek and long commute just to support herself like most american women – her engagements can last just a couple hours. do a couple a week and that’s still plenty of time with baby.

  11. Jane says:

    You do all realise that the tabloids know absolutely nothing about what this couple is doing and this is just more bs because her name is profitable clickbait.

    • HK9 says:

      I know!! Yesterday they were off to an African country and by the end of the day it wasn’t true. They know nothing.

    • Valiantly Varnished says:

      Exactly this.

    • claire says:

      Exactly!!! Since there is no real news to report, the Fail in particular is biding time until the baby’s arrival by posting stories from Meghan’s brother about her childhood and re-posting a lot of stale photos from her pregnancy.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        Daily Fail also has a story about Doria’s arrival and the comments are some of the nastiest I have read anywhere on any subject. The comments were so nasty I did not even get through one page. There were 2.7K comments at the time I was reading. This is NOTHING but CLICK-BAIT for $$$$$ which is sorta like the USA’s 1950s Dialing-for-$$$$$.

  12. Anon says:

    She’s damned if she does, damned if she doesn’t. If she takes six months, the Brits will complain about their new “welfare queen.” If she takes three months, she’s not “sending the right message to the U.S.” (as if that should even be on the radar).

    Either way, I think those of us who have had babies admire her spunk – but the *reality* of childbirth (uh, ouch?) and breastfeeding a newborn 24/7 and all of the other new issues that come afterward might collide with her expectations. I have no doubt she will stick to her planned schedule. But newborns have a way of annihilating the best laid plans. :)

  13. aang says:

    She has a real choice so I won’t judge whatever she decides, plus royal “work” is a few hours a day a few day a week. I also had real choice and decided to stay home for years with my children. Although my choice was day care not a private nanny so not really the same. But most women do not have that choice and have to go back to work in a crazy short amount of time. Even 6 months seems so short. 8 hours at work plus an hour or more to come and go and then buying/cooking food and cleaning up leaves no time to just be with your baby. If a woman wants that, I’m all for it. But if a parent wants to be home to raise their own young children society ought to help them out.

  14. Chaine says:

    Love how the DM thinks three months leave is “standard” for American moms. Give me a break! That three months is only guaranteed if you work for a company of 50 or more people, and there is no requirement that you be paid while on leave. And the reality is, the average person can not afford to go unpaid for three months… I have a friend who works for a small marketing company with less than fifty employees and her paid maternity leave was just three DAYS. Any more than that, she had to use her vacation time and sick leave which only amounted to a few weeks, and she didn’t want to use that all at once, so she went back to work after the three days.

    • LNG says:

      That is horrible. I could barely walk after 3 days. I hadn’t slept at all. I could not have formed coherent thought. I can’t understand why any business would want to put an employee through that. That’s just a body sitting in a chair – a bleeding, sleep deprived, hormone ridden body.

  15. Meija says:

    I have always worked for small companies here in the States, when I had my babies it was 6 weeks and back. So very hard, but I had no choice since finding skilled temp help was hard for my employers so this is what we were allotted.

  16. Sassy says:

    Meghan likes being busy and she’s aware that she will never get the benefit of a doubt from people. After the baby comes her body has to be back to what it was or very close to it and she has to be working or she will be considered lazy to the British people.

  17. notasugarhere says:

    Harry and Meghan named to Fortune Magazine’s list of World’s Greatest Leaders.

    • Digital Unicorn says:

      Ooooh – I wonder how the man-baby and stepford wife will take that!

    • Yoyo says:

      When it rains it pours.
      More attacks on Meghan and Harry guaranteed.
      Next they will be going to Antarctica to feed the Penguins.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        “Next they will be going to Antarctica to feed the Penguins.”

        This is not a bad idea as there are scientific research teams in Antarctica which would love to have a Royal visit to call attention to their work and the havoc being wrecked by global warming climate change. I think Meghan and Harry would enjoy this type of reaching out visit. I do not say this with cheek. I am 100% serious.

      • Pete Booty Jig says:

        Lack of awareness about global warming isn’t the problem.

    • Mego says:

      Meanwhile at Kensington Palace: William continues in his preparations to be King one day and Kate prepares another vaguely worded memo about her next big initiative to send to Katie Nicholl…

  18. Jan says:

    Just curious where most of you are from? Typical mother’s in the US do NOT get three months they get a guaranteed six weeks. Period. Your employer may be nice and give you more but they can say six weeks and you can lose your job if you don’t come back. That’s all you are guaranteed by law.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      @Jan, You are so correct regarding US Federal Law om maternity leave.. As usual the Daily Fail has no idea what they are talking about.

    • Carey says:

      There’s two kinds of leave for new mothers in the US: medical leave to recuperate from the birth (6-8 weeks depending on the kind of delivery you have) and then FMLA leave which is three months and unpaid. Depending on what state you’re in, you may qualify for additional benefits. In California, everyone is eligible for paid medical leave and then an additional six weeks of paid family leave. So the Daily Mail seems to be referring to FMLA.

      • AryasMum says:

        Unless its changed, FMLA only guarantees you will have a job at the company, not that you will have the same job.

      • Kk2 says:

        Looks like about 50 percent of mother’s 18-34 qualify for FMLA and 60% of mother’s 35-44. Those mothers are guaranteed 12 weeks, not necessarily paid (some employers pay at least a portion, some don’t). But that doesn’t mean all the rest get nothing. I don’t qualify for FMLA for current pregnancy because I haven’t been at job long enough, but i still qualify for 12 weeks paid leave under my state’s law for state employees. And my employer would have let me take 12 weeks (unpaid) regardless without losing my job because it just takes more time to recruit and hire and train a new person. I also have a friend who works at a small company (not FMLA eligible) who negotiated I think 14 weeks leave of which 50% was paid. So it varies a lot but I don’t think it’s crazy to say 12 weeks is typical in US….it is at least common, though not universal. I think less than 6 weeks is uncommon, though not rare or unheard of.

        Whether 12 weeks is enough is a different conversation. The hardest part for me the first time around was sleep deprivation. I came back after 16 weeks and it was still tough, though I was ready to get out of the house. This time I only have 12 weeks but I’m going back to a part time (20hr/WK) job.

        But Meghan and Kate don’t have typical jobs so I don’t think they are that relevant to b discussion of maternity leave for the rest of us. They are insanely wealthy and have flexible, part time jobs for family basically- great for them but not very representative of a typical life.

    • Becks1 says:

      No. No type of paid maternity leave is guaranteed by federal law. Not 6 weeks, not 12 weeks. FMLA protects your job, nothing else. Many employers will give you some paid time, or let you save vacation/sick time to cover it, but they are not federally required to do so. They are required to hold your job (if you and your company qualify for FMLA.)

      the 6 weeks that so many talk about is usually a function of STD insurance, which many workers in America have, but not all (for example, I do not.) That may cover 6 weeks of leave for a vaginal birth and 8 weeks for a C-section, but its not necessarily at your rate of pay. Again, it is not something mandated by law.

      California and NJ both have much more favorable laws as I understand it, and much better policies, but they are definitely the exceptions.

      Many private companies offer much better policies than what the government requires.

      • Kk2 says:

        Who said they guarantee paid maternity leave? Not me. 12 weeks unpaid. Some employers pay or you can use your accumulated paid sick/annual leave, others do not.

  19. Nicegirl says:

    We are waiting for you little Sussex!

  20. itspurplespice says:

    In what world is 3 months maternity leave “standard in the US”? I don’t have children but my understanding is that 6 weeks is more the standard and even then, you’re most likely not being paid unless you have saved sick/vacation time to use or have short-term disability coverage.

    • claire says:

      6 weeks??!! That’s crazy. How are women supposed to breastfeed (if that’s what they choose to do) and have adequate time to bond with their babies? At 6 weeks women are barely recovered from childbirth. Glad I am not in the US.

  21. Guest says:

    Meh. It’s not like the royals work that hard to begin with. Unless William is going to ship them to Africa right away (jk) all they do is show up, smile, look pretty, shake hands, leave. Not really bringing home the bacon 🤔

  22. Cate says:

    Meh, she hasn’t actually had the kid yet and this is her first. She may be all “three months is plenty!” now and feel differently later.

    And, as others have pointed out, even the “hardest working” royals take plenty of vacations and downtime, so even if she does cut leave “short”, she’ll still be able to craft herself a pretty low-key work schedule if she desires.

    • Gia Mia says:

      She is doing it royally well as she constantly pans out how hard-working she is. And now just three monthes maternity leave – wow, just like everybody else.
      Except that she has more support than 95% of the population.

      • MA says:

        I mean, its undeniable that she is and always has been hard working. Unless all the other royals (except Sophie), she’s the only one who’s ever had to work to support themselves.

  23. Kelley says:

    Can we please stop calling this break a maternity leave? Slowing down and taking things easy when you don’t really have a “job” isn’t a maternity leave. I completely support her decision to scale back on her charities and spend time with family, but she’s not taking a maternity leave from a necessary job essential to self support.

    • Yoyo says:

      Where did you get Meghan is scaling back on her Charities from?
      Even the dishonest media, is saying she is still have meetings with her Charities.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      @Kelley, You make an excellent point. In the old days, the Royals called Maternity Leave “Confinement” as in “The Duchess of Edinburgh will enter her confinement on September 1, 1948″.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Confinement was not maternity leave post-birth. In HM’s case as you’re referencing, it was the last two months of her pregnancy. Not the time she took after the birth.

    • mina says:

      100% with you.

      Returning to work for the royals after a baby is nor the same as of returning to work for actual working moms, who actually need to pay for daycare or make other arrangements, need to work to sustain their families, or simply because they want to work!

      For Royals is not the same, period! It doesn’t matter if we are talking about 3, 6, months of Maternity Leave or a whole year. So excuse me if I find this whole how great is X or Z because she took X amount of time off from “work” compared to X or Z.

  24. HeyThere! says:

    This is the exact problem with the thoughts around with pregnancy-giving birth-postpartum experiences…..EVERYONE is different!!!!! When can we just admit and realize this?? I know some women who gave birth and HOURS later were jumping around the room, feeling great, and asking to be released from doctors care early. I know my experience was awful and I had to be on meds around the clock for several weeks and had a hard time even getting out of the hospital bed for a few days. Took me MONTHS to be able to sit on a chair(car or house) without a donut seat!!! It was hell. Every birth is different. It is NOT a one size fits all.

    Also, not taking away from anyone’s work but but she’s not at a 8-5, five to six days a week, 12 months of the year job. Some people want to get out of the house for a few hours a week, some don’t. Could you imagine the dramatic news storyline if we didn’t see MM for a while 12 months?!?!

    I am a big MM fan. I find her to be refreshing, smart and beautiful. I wish her all the best on her new adventure of parenthood!!!!

    • Gia Mia says:

      She will have A LOT OF support. Her mother and her husband who doesn’t work a regular job and her staff.

  25. Casey02 says:

    Why don’t the Brits right about the future King and the English Rose….leave Meghan alone! Days from giving birth and after giving them the middle finger they can’t stop thinking about Meghan. All of this after they have said time and time again..she’s married to the 6th in-line and not important..yeah sure, yet they write 3 and 4 articles a day about an insignificant WOC… racist Brits!!

  26. Gia Mia says:

    Yep, when Kate took 3 monthes maternity leave she was scolded. But Meghan will take just three monthes, so that is okay.

    • Bluthfan says:

      People didn’t scold Kate for taking 3 months. they scolded her for being the laziest royal in recent memory for the past 7 years.

  27. A says:

    I don’t see why she has to take a longer maternity leave, if she doesn’t want that for herself.

    As multiple people have pointed out, her situation is just fundamentally different from that of most people. She has the capacity to set her own schedule, to decide the degree to which she wants to ease back into work, and she will be getting help in terms of childcare and other things. How she’s returning to work after maternity leave can take many different forms. I know a lot of women who got the chance to take up to a year, but very few of them followed through on that in its entirety. A number of them returned to work in some way or another after three to four months, whether that meant going to the office one day a week, working from home, whatever, and it provided a nice, and incredibly necessary change for them from the rigors of childcare.

    Maybe I’m the odd one out here, but I would much rather see some flexibility on issues like parental leave, that can accommodate what the parents decide for themselves after the birth of their children. The main problem with something like 12 weeks maximum is the fact that it’s an imposition that doesn’t take into account the wide variety of situations among parents. Having the option to decide for yourself is what’s most important.

  28. MA says:

    For some reason William’s affair is trending on UK Twitter now. Does anyone know why?? Was a new article published or something?

    • notasugarhere says:

      Check notcchelseafc twitter

      • MA says:

        Thanks, nota!

        Did you see this? Former IPSO/solicitor (verified on Twitter) nazirafzal confirming that there’s a media blackout on William’s affair. And a BBC journalist embjournalist in his mentions confirming the same….!!!!!

      • notasugarhere says:

        I had not seen that! Smoke, fire, and media blackouts.

      • MA says:

        Update: the BBC journalist deleted her tweet but there are screenshots… Kaiser, get on this!

    • Becky says:

      What seems to be going on is Sly Willy is throwing his new sister-in-law under the bus to cover/deflect for his affair with Rose. A reporter overheard senior reporters complaining about the gag on reporters to cover this (the affair). This caused Will to trend today. Notice, however, Meghan has no such luxury- the press is going for her like rabid wolves. Sly gets whatever Sly wants.

  29. Yoyo says:

    The latest, the Cambridges are mad that Harry is taking over Mental Health (Heads Together) and it was Kate’s baby.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Harry was the one who started doing mental health work with Veterans years ago. After he got positives for it, W&K decided they’d jump on the bandwagon. They’re the latecomers, not Harry.

  30. Olenna says:

    “From The Daily Mail”. Enough said.

  31. Canadiangirl says:

    Live in Canada, take 12 months or even 18 months. 3 or 6 months is not enough.

  32. Kirsten says:

    It’s not like she actually has to work a 9-5 out of the house away from her baby 40+ hours a week. She has crazy work flexibility so I take this “going back to work” concept with a grain of salt.