Duchess Meghan apparently will leave Archie in Canada with Auntie Jessica Mulroney

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle continue their visit to Africa

As always, I continue to enjoy the saltiness of the British tabloids over anything and everything involving the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. Back when Harry and Meghan returned to the UK in early January, it took the papers days to realize that Meg and Harry did not bring Archie back with them, and that Meghan clearly had only intended to stay in Britain for a few days before dropping the Sussexit announcement. Well, I wondered if Meghan would bring Archie for this last “royal tour” of the UK for the next week, and it looks like she will not. Archie will stay in Canada with Auntie Jessica Mulroney. And the Brits are weeping salty-ass tears about that AND the “security costs.”

Meghan Markle is not expected to bring son Archie with her when she joins Prince Harry in Britain this week for their last round of royal engagements. The Queen, 93, and Prince Philip, 98, are said to be ‘very sad’ by the news, having seen so little of Archie since his birth, according to the Sunday Times.

It is believed that Archie, who has yet to set foot on UK soil this year, will remain with the Sussexes’ nanny, and with Meghan’s friend Jessica Mulroney. Archie’s last official sighting was in a photograph with his father the Duke of Sussex, posted to the Sussex Royal Instagram account last New Year’s Eve.

Harry and Meghan’s decision to leave Archie behind is also thought to add another £50,000 to the royal couple’s security bill, The Sun reports. A royal insider told the paper: ‘Meghan’s London jaunt is proving a real headache.’

They added: ‘It’s an expensive time just when the costs of looking after the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are under scrutiny.’

[From The Daily Mail]

The Sun and the Daily Mail are just throwing out wild numbers in the hopes of agitating an already racist & pressed readership. How dare Meghan… have security for a baby. How dare she not bring Archie into a hostile environment, which has been made more so by the racist press? Yeah, that’s what it amounts too. Plus, it’s probably just easier for Archie to stay on Canadian time and not mess up his sleep schedule too much. Still, just know that I find the But The Security Costs issue to be the new But Her Emails. Same people arguing the same things too.

archie harry2

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, Instagram.

Related stories

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

218 Responses to “Duchess Meghan apparently will leave Archie in Canada with Auntie Jessica Mulroney”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Em says:

    Yeah given the amount of vitriol and threats going their way, I’d leave my kid out of it too. And frankly I doubt Elizabeth really cares.

    I think they are just ticking the boxes til the end of March. I’m excited to see what they do once they are off the leash.

    Plus I have to say it makes me a little happy every time M&H manage to pull the rug from under the British press.

    • Scollins says:

      Agree. It will be interesting to see how much they appease the Q. At this point they should only do exactly what they want, nothing more. I have a feeling they are going to be harassed non-stop since the royal family are all such douches.

      • Enny says:

        I have a hunch they may be quietly laying the groundwork for Meghan to skip out on the UK trip altogether.

      • WingKingdom says:

        @enny, if I were Meghan I’d skip the whole thing- she owes them nothing. But I think she’ll go because she has organizations that she wants to continue to support.

      • Dutch says:

        @ Enny – That would make sense. It seems like an odd thing to put out there, obviously there was no announcement, but it was let out to the press for a reason and laying the ground work for DoS to nope out of the entire mess seems like as good a reason as any.
        She has a dozen solid reasons to not show up at all and the dangers of travel at this time are very real.

      • Amy Too says:

        Dutch, I doubt that it was Harry and Meghan who leaked about not bringing Archie. I would think it would either be the press just making up a story, or someone in the U.K. RF who leaked that to the press with the “poor Queenie and Philip, they’ll never see the baby” spin. They would probably know already who’s coming and who isn’t so they could arrange security and events and stuff. I don’t think Harry and Meghan would feel the need to let the public know ahead of time.

      • Tessa says:

        Piers is writing horrid articles for the DM as usual.

    • Lucy De Blois says:

      The Queen had months with the baby just beside her house. It would take few miles (I take the enormity of the palace’s size) to visit him. And Phillip, well… that’s a joke. I’m very sure he cares very little for the bi-racial son of an actress. If she really cared about the baby welfare, she would take the same measures to protect him and the parents from nasty and racist attacks.
      Come on, the queen left London for her vacations while her husband of more than sixty years was going to the hospital in London! She didn’t even care to make a quick detour to see how he was doing. Seriously, she is melting for the baby? Really?

      • Maevo says:

        Yeah there’s no way Liz and Phil GAF about seeing Archie. They didn’t go to Louis or Archie’s christenings, I dong think they can be bothered much about the great grand children. Hell, the Queen didn’t even go see her own husband in the hospital!! I also suspect that Philip has declined quite a bit in the last few years since his retirement…

      • Becks1 says:

        Yeah, to be honest, I don’t think the queen cares that much about seeing Archie and I don’t think it has anything to do with H&M or Archie personally. I think she just doesn’t really care that much about any of the great-grandchildren. She probably likes to see the occasional pic but I get the impression that if she sees them once or twice a year, she’s good.

      • Original Jenns says:

        Exactly my thought. They were on the same grounds/closely connected a lot of the time the Sussexes were at Frogmore. And “Meghan’s London jaunt”??? I’m pretty sure Harry is going with, and I’m pretty sure that half the time the papers have been saying the Queen ordered them home to attend all of the March family stuff (I don’t believe that, I think H and M are their as they see it as their duty). So obvious and ridiculous.

      • minx says:

        She cares about her horses.

      • Pineapple says:

        And she cares about her dogs. XO

      • Marni112 says:

        Dont think this comment is accurate as M herself mentioned running into PP (and I believe the Queen) on a walk with the baby…and even Fergie and other have commented on what a interested gm the Queen is…

    • (THE OG) Jan90067 says:

      For God’s sake, there’s a pandemic virus out there, with new cases popping up daily. More papers today are saying more people are probably affected than we know, but mild enough to just be carriers.
      WHO WOULD KNOWINGLY EXPOSE AN INFANT TO THAT RISK? Even flying private, there are risks. Why do it if you don’t have to? Betty of Petty “commanded” H&M to be here for the Commonwealth Service. She didn’t “command” Archie…..could she have? Demanded he be brought?? I don’t think so….British Law CBers, could she?

      • pottymouth pup says:

        and lord knows that air travel greatly increases the risk of catching some sort of respiratory infection which, at Archie’s age, is something they’d want to limit

      • Lara K says:

        The Queen’s “command” does not usurp individual rights. She can only command insofar as she can grant and take away titles and money. But nobody has to do a dam thing if they don’t want said titles and money.
        So H&M are not going to the Uk because they have to. They are doing it to appease the queen. But this whole charade is to maintain some level of family unity. They could walk out today. They just have to be ready to give up titles, money, etc.

        So Archie is out of reach.

      • (TheOG) jan90067 says:

        Thanks, Lara!

      • Silas says:

        Betty of Petty!

      • Some chick says:

        BUTBUTBUT it’s “Meghan’s London Jaunt!”

        Because I’m sure she’s sooo psyched to go there!

    • Agreed. How do they know anything about Archie. They are guessing. Even the way they write it is a guess. They know they can write vague articles like this and have a 50% chance of being right as Archie will either come with them or not. Since the African trip, none of the RR have a clue what the Sussexes are doing. They only know anything from what the Sussexes decide to post or announce. I don’t buy any of their ‘in the know’ articles anymore. That this comes from the Times means nothing as that paper is owned by the same man that owns the Daily Mail: Murdoch. The Times slant is a bit more polished than the DM, but much of what they write about either of the Sussexes has the same.

      • Amy Too says:

        And if he does come now they can spin it as perfect future queen gave Meghan a stern talking to about how important it is for extended family to see their (great) grandchildren and how this could be the last opportunity for sickly Prince Philip to see the baby.

    • Abena Asantewaa says:

      Now that Frogmore Cottage; 2.4m is going to be paid for, and SG is also out, now the new stick is now security. Since, so far the RF has pandered to the media and given in to all their propaganda, they, are now hoping Security would be withdrawn, but I hope, The Sussexes don’t volunteer to pay for their own security. I think it is so wicked of the press to take that route, what crime have these 2 comitted, that they are being treated as if they have leprosy! It is so sad, but oneday the truth shall be revealed, and expose a whole lot of people behind this smear.

  2. Toot says:

    Hope it’s true that Archie is staying in Canada, but I know the tabs don’t know if he’ll be with Jessica. They just like throwing her name out to further piss off readers.

    • Andrew’s Nemesis says:

      I’d love to know what Jessica Mulroney has ever done that is so wrong, that has caused her to be called ‘thirsty’ and harassed by the Wail/Dumb/Expectorant. She seems like a perfectly nice, decent, loyal woman. The sheer insanity of attempting to destroy any FOM is deeply disturbing. No wonder the Sussexes didn’t release the names of the godparents

      • Silver Charm says:

        She’s sort of a stand in to blame for anything House Sussex leaks. Her husband is kind of a big deal at etalk and good friends with Laineygossip so I think she automatically gets blamed when North American media get a hold of anything exclusive. And we know the British press haven’t liked being behind the curve.

      • Sofia says:

        @Silver Charm

        Is there any proof that Ben and Lainey are good friends like you say other than that one dinner pic? I must have missed something.

        And considering that Lainey has said some ridiculous things (I remember she was basically freaking out whenever Meghan touched her bump) I doubt she’s getting any good scoops like Omid.

        If the Sussexes want something out there they either go through their IG or through Omid.

      • Mika says:

        Whoaa whoaa whoaa…. Do not undermine Lainey’s credentials. Lainey has been working with Ben Mulroney at eTalk for over 15 years. They worked in separate cities for some of that time (He was in Toronto when she was still living in Vancouver) but they were always friendly. Does anyone remember the great Micheal Buble intervention? When Ben Mulroney was so tired of Lainey being mean to Buble on LaineyGossip that he forced the two of them to hang out?

        And even without Mulroney, Lainey could easily have a line into Megan’s world. She works in media in Toronto. It’s a small, fake-friendly, incestuous little family. We all know someone who worked on Suits. I know two people who knew Megan – one was an office PA on Suits, the other was a line cook at her ex-boyfriends restaurant. I’m a very small player in Toronto media. Lainey is huge. Her Megan and the Mulroneys gossip is GOOD.

      • Summergirl says:

        @ Andrew’s Nemesis, I think a lot of the antipathy towards Jessica Mulroney comes from her trashy “Real Housewife” look, with all the fillers etc., and beyond that the constant self-promotion on Instagram. She also tried very hard to create buzz around herself at the time of Meghan’s wedding. The impression I have of her as that she’s a very snooty, status-obsessed person. Maybe I’m wrong, but I do think a lot of people share this impression. Of course we don’t know any of them so all our impressions are pretty much based on their self-created images.

      • Nic919 says:

        Mika – so true. Even I know someone who worked on Suits, albeit only as an extra.

      • carey says:

        LOLOL @Mika….So odd how overzealous this response was.

      • Jules says:

        @mika- fascinating!

        re: Lainey, yes she can be full of herself, but usually her gossip is spot-on.

    • Maryann says:

      I’m not a huge Jessica Mulroney fan but I do admire her work ethic. However, Archie would be staying with her nanny because she’s never home.

      • carmen says:

        Lol – Exactly. I guess it makes for a good, click-worthy story though, as others have indicated.

      • PrincessK says:

        I am sure Archie has his own nanny. For all we know Doria may be helping out too.

  3. Belli says:

    If they flew him over privately, that would be a problem.

    If they flew him over on a commercial flight, that would be a problem because of the risk to his health.

    If they brought him, he would be subject to the disgusting press and their bile.

    Best decision to leave him where he is with someone he knows and they trust and not put him at risk of infection by taking him on a flight.

  4. S808 says:

    There’s a virus spreading at an alarming rate I would leave my infant child at home too. It’s not like the press is going to see Archie anyway. Why disrupt his schedule for this? If members of the family want to see him (highly doubt but whatever), FaceTime exists.

    • Scal says:

      This. Also they are only going for a week and have a jam packed schedule. Why mess up baby sleep schedule AND put him at risk by putting him on a plane and with lots of people.

      Heck I left my baby at home from going to Costco because of the crowds, no way I’d take him on a plane right now.

    • Emmitt says:

      If (obviously not Elizabeth or Phillip at their ages) Charles, William, Kate, etc want to see Archie so bad, instead of jumping on a plane to Mustique or Davos or Switzerland or wherever, they can jump on a plane and go visit Harry, Meghan and Archie.

  5. Neners says:

    I wouldn’t bring my baby to the UK either! The press and tabloid media have made it too dangerous for an innocent baby to come to the UK. Let that statement sink in.

    • Jane Does says:

      Sadly, you are so right. It would likely be unsafe for them to bring their baby along. The racists are incandescent with narcissistic rage.

    • Cosmo says:

      I agree. I think all three of them have been threatened. I’m sure they want to do their duty and then get out of the UK.

  6. Zapp Brannigan says:

    I would not bring my baby to those $shit heels either. Technically the Queen has custody over the minor royal grandchildren and seeing as she has been acting saltier that the Dead Sea I would not have my precious baby within her reach either.

    Plus lets be real with the threat from racists, Coronavirus and the general plague that is the Royal Family I would not bring my kid either, especially as the British media are clamoring to see just how white he is, that is their interest in this, they need to know how white he is and adjust their malice accordingly.

    • Katherine says:

      Technically she doesn’t. This has been disproven time and time and time again. It’s a left over royal prerogative from the 1700s. It was never an act of parliament and would never even come close to being enforced in the modern court system. The UK may have a outdated monarchist set up but we are certainly not in the business of taking children away from their parents for no earthly reason royal or not. The royal family follows laws (with the exception of a few very specific loopholes) like everyone else. The queen doesn’t get to snatch and relocate children. Come on now with this. It pops up on these threads all the time.

      Source: IAAL

      • JulieCarr says:

        Exactly. Even if she did have custody, it’s 2020. Nobody would support The Queen taking a baby from its parents. I kind of wish this fantasy world where that’s a real risk was real, because that would be the end of monarchy right there.

    • KellyRyan says:

      If Archie is on Vancouver Island he is 20 minutes away from the US. The monarchy, UK law does not have jurisdiction in the US. Archie has an American mother. He has dual citizenship.

      • Arpeggi says:

        Canada is an independent country, it has it own laws…

      • Jaded says:

        Just because we’re a commonwealth country doesn’t mean the Queen can come flying over on her broomstick and grab Archie. We are referred to as a “realm” which is a sovereign state. This means we have power over ourselves and our government is under its own control, rather than under the control of an outside authority. So no, they don’t have to take Archie to the US to keep him out of the clutches of the royal family.

      • Nic919 says:

        That’s right. Repatriation of the constitution baby!
        (Only Canadians will understand this)

    • Pineapple says:

      Zapp … I personally wish people would stop saying the Queen might “take Archie” because it is not true. It heightens the hysteria of an already ridiculous situation.

      In this time, we have to be so, so, so careful to only say what is true. The Queen can NOT take Archie from his parents.

    • Jane's Wasted Talent says:

      Zapp- just wanted to say how much I’ve enjoyed your comments over the years and I’m sure people don’t mean to pile on.

  7. Carrie says:

    Plus why would they chance it with Coronavirus? If she did bring Archie there would be claims that she was being irresponsible. The BM are incredibly hostile. The queen didn’t attend Archie’s christening; Charles didn’t see him until 8 days after his birth, I doubt they are in the least bit “saddened”. Why on earth would they disturb Archie for all that shit?

    • BayTampaBay says:

      With regards to the BM mostly The Fail:

      “The Sun and the Daily Mail are just throwing out wild numbers in the hopes of agitating an already racist & pressed readership.”

      Read this story on Sunday in The Fail. 9K+ click$ in 11 hours.

      The BM is about nothing but money.

      • Pineapple says:

        I think from now on information like this should be in these stories. Nine thousand clicks in eleven hours??????????? Bots, and bots and bots and bots. Nothin’ but bots. XO

  8. Prof Trelawney says:

    I’m glad they’re leaving him in Canada, sends a powerful signal that they will do everything they can to protect their son. I also think the racism from the BRF and the media really ramped up when Meghan became pregnant, because the reality of mixing Harry’s “pure blueblood” lines with Meghan’s threatened their deeply rooted sense of white supremacy… Really, I think Archie is what broke things between Harry and his family…and I’m not sure it can be un-broken…

    • Maevo says:

      I agree. I think Archie was the game changer in an already difficult and tense situation.

    • grumpy says:

      archie is white but has some african genes. the queen is white but has some african genes. they are no different.

  9. Lucy De Blois says:

    Well….. Of course the comfort of Archie is a big card to consider and no mother would like to mess up the biological clock for iddle reasons. But even less a mother would like to leave her little baby behind, specially of so tender age, with strangers.

    No matter how much she trusts and loves her girlfriend and her nanny, MM already showed loud and clear she’s very protective. It would be a lot more logical and acceptable if he was with her mother: then, it would make sense. With her friend and nanny (or nannies)??!! I don’t think so.

    Those trips leaving behind a so small baby don’t look right to me. Please, nothing to do with conspiracy theories. It sounds to me more like … precautions.

    • Erinn says:

      “it would be a lot more logical and acceptable if he was with her mother”

      To WHO. To you? Because you’ve embraced a dated outlook on how a mother has to be tethered to her baby at all times? Get out of here with that attitude of what’s ‘acceptable’ for another mother to do.

      Suppose you’d rather the small baby risk picking up a carona virus because it would be ‘more acceptable’?

      • Ainsley7 says:

        @Erinn- I think @Lucy meant Meghan’s mother, but I agree that Meghan can leave Archie with anyone she wants to.

      • Erinn says:

        Idk about that, Ainsley. She made a point of saying “leave them with strangers” and “no matter how much she trusts and loves her girlfriend and her nanny” – she’s making the argument that a ‘good’ mother would not leave her baby with a friend, and then went into “those trips leaving behind a so small baby don’t look right to me”. Again, judgment to the mother, and I don’t think that’s at all cool. Notice there’s not a word about Harry leaving the baby to travel.

      • Olenna says:

        Agree, Erinn.

      • Lucy De Blois says:

        Erinn: I never wrote she should travel with the baby; I never wrote she should let the kid with the mother instead of the others; I never wrote the grandmother is the only person entitled to take care of a grandson (daughter).

        By acceptable, I meant the news, not what she did and you can see that beside this word, I’ve put the word “logical”. Because in my point of view (which doesn’t mean is exactly yours), I think the news strange. What MM did, maybe was the best solution she could find to the situation they are going through.

        And to risk the baby’s life in a world risk of viruses, I agree it’s unthinkable. But I didn’t mean THIS trip. As you can see, I said trips, meaning the previous one, where there was no virus alert.

        From all I’ve read on many blogs it seems they don’t want to bring the kid back to UK, which I can’t blame them because the kids can spot a stressful situation even if they can’t read newspapers. What I wonder is if that’s the only reason, considering how the family has behaved with them. That’s my conclusion, which might be different from yours and I respect your opinion, as I do of the others.

      • bros says:

        I agree with calling her on her outdated ideas that the only safe place for a baby is with its mother. HOWEVER, everyone on here talking about coronavirus: it’s not getting many kids or babies at ALL.

    • grumpyterrier says:

      I agree, @Lucy. Something seems very off with her leaving him so often on another continent for several days/a week at a time. I don’t know many mothers that would willingly do that not once but many times. When I was pregnant I was totally ready to not have baby disrupt my life, take trips, go out without him but those damn hormones flood in after the birth and make it almost impossible to be ok leaving him for even a few hours, especially as an infant. They make you anxious and a little crazy in my experience. I hope little Archie has someone that is always there (his nanny, hopefully) and loves him like his mom/dad and provides that stability that babies need. I understand not wanting him to be exposed to Coronovirus but the first deaths are occurring in Washington state, right nearby.

      • Ali says:

        @Lucy

        Parents since the dawn of time have left their kids on different continents while they work.

        The Queen of England left her two kids for 6 months to tour the world. Hell even the Yorks left Beatrice when she was 2 weeks old.

        Nothing unusual.

      • Helen says:

        Lol stfu.

      • Sofia says:

        @GrumpyTerrier: can you stop the mummy shaming please? And don’t say you weren’t because your comment reeks of passive aggressiveness that I’ve read and seen too many times.

        The Queen and Philip left Charles and Anne to do a months long tour. But I suppose it’s just Meghan that bothers you. Nobody else even when they’re doing the exact same thing.

        Edit: Also how do we know it’s “easy” on Meghan? How do we know that she’s not bursting into tears at missing Archie (I don’t think she is but we don’t know that!) and face times every hour on the hour? Just because she does something doesn’t mean that she likes to do it or is completely comfortable with it.

        I wish some people would stop trying to get into Meghan’s head and thinking they know her when they’ve probably never been in the same room as her

        Edit 2: Harry went to Italy a week after Archie was born. No one shamed him. He went to Amsterdam for a day and no one shamed him. He did a solo tour of a part of Africa for a week and no one shamed him. Just say you’re sexist and/or don’t think fathers are a real parent since you don’t hold Harry to the same standards

      • Olenna says:

        @Helen, I second that, LOL!
        @Lucy and @grumpyterrier, the Sussexes have left Archie in Canada one time. One time. This trip will make two. So, please stop with the exaggerations and faux concern about their parenting skills. BTW, I’ve never seen either one of you commenting on some of the bullsh*t the Keens have pulled (eg., leaving baby George while they went an exotic vacation thousands of miles from home).

      • GuestWho says:

        I’m guessing you don’t know ANY mothers who are in her particular situation. H&M choose not to bring their baby around people who are hostile to M and by extension Archie. It’s not really a stretch to understand why H&M (because it is a decision made by both parents) feel it is safer to leave him in Canada with people they know care about his wellbeing. They have duties they are obligated to fulfill. They are not obligated to put their baby in danger – they are in enough danger themselves. Add a spreading lethal virus? Yeah, leaving him in Canada is the right decision.

        Stop judging people who are in a situation you can’t begin to comprehend. The BM has literally put a target on their backs. Why expose their baby to that? Disgusting mom shaming couched in BS “concern.”

      • turbunguin says:

        People cannot constantly laud “it takes a village” and then criticize the mother when she uses that village. After I was born and a few months established, my mother dropped me off at my grandparents’ all the time for a weekend getaway or a week’s trip. I am so glad that she had the privilege of resources to leave me and didn’t allow herself to be utterly subsumed by motherhood. It made me a better person for it, cared for by multiple loving people, growing up seeing my mother as an individual with her own interests in whose life I did not need to be constantly present even though she made very clear that she would drop (and did) everything for me when I needed it. I’m glad to see that Archie seems to be taken care of in the same manner; it’s very healthy and broadening.

      • Lucy De Blois says:

        Olenna: I’m sorry to differ, but I am, maybe, the most outspoken here and on other sites about how W&K are behaving towards H&M. And since the very early stage of the mess, I’m saying that is William who has the shaddy personnality. And I know what I’m talking about, not only because of my profession but because I had a very similar situtation in my own life.
        William’s problem is the very same problem of many, many eldest sibblings: jealousy and competition. And everything came to this ghastly end because (as it happens in soooo many families) no one put a pin to blow up his inflated ego.

        You can see my old comments and I reproduce here the very same words: since DM, Express, Sun and others started claiming they should be sent to Affrica, forever, I suspect they were going to be chased off UK. And they were.
        William behavior was disgusting, but they were not alone on this. Actually, I think it was a scheeme of all the family.

      • notasugarhere says:

        My SIL has to travel 3-5 days away every couple months because of work. They cannot afford to have one parent stay home full time, so they both work and her work requires travel. Apparently earning a living makes her a bad mum in your eyes.

        Meghan hasn’t left him for weeks at a time. A couple of days for the initial Sussexit meeting, where she got out of the UK as quickly as possible. Now for a few days, keeping away from possible coronavirus exposure. Not because she wants to fly to the UK, but because the BRF is *requiring* them to do these final few days of engagements. Because her WORK is requiring her. After the end of March, she is free from that Firm’s demands.

      • Emmitt says:

        The current queen left her two toddlers to go tour the world. That’s why Charles and Anne were closer to the nanny and the Queen Mother than to Elizabeth.

      • Olenna says:

        @Lucy, you plainly said, “Those trips leaving behind a so small baby don’t look right to me”. At worst, that’s being being judgemental about someone else’s parenting skills. At the least, it’s skepticism that the parents know and have a right to decide what best for their child. So, I’m not going to expend anymore energy trying to re-interpret what you wrote or meant to write.

    • Rapunzel says:

      “Please, nothing to do with conspiracy theories. It sounds to me more like … precautions.”

      Precautions for what? Do you think the Sussexes are worried about Archie’s safety in the UL/around the BRF? I could see that.

    • TheOtherSarah says:

      So many beyond reproach mothers who suggest Meghan take her baby to Coronavirus-ridden Britain… Interesting coming from all these perfect mothers.

      • Julie O'C says:

        Corona virus-ridden Britain??

        “Four more patients have tested positive for coronavirus in England, bringing the total number of cases in the UK to 40, PA Media quotes the chief medical officer, Prof Chris Whitty, as saying.”

        Out of a population of around 65m – Hardly virus-ridden!!

    • Becks1 says:

      Well, I think they have a live-in nanny, and leaving him behind with said nanny is probably easier for everyone involved. Why haul him to the UK when they don’t have to? They’re not leaving him with someone from Care.com they’ve never met before.

      I think people are mad because 1) they were really clamoring for a new pic, authorized or not and 2) this makes it clear that this is a working trip, they aren’t going to be popping round to Anmer for a playdate. They’re returning to the UK to work – they’re going to work, and then they’re going back to their son.

      • notasugarhere says:

        They’re going to work because the Firm is demanding it. If it wasn’t for the Commonwealth event, I doubt Meghan would be traveling to the UK.

      • Lady D says:

        Nota, didn’t Kate and William go on vacation to the Maldives or something about 4-5 months after George was born, leaving him behind with her mother? I remember George being very young at the time.

    • Beff says:

      A nanny is not a stranger. A nanny likely has a stronger bond with Archie than Doria given the amount of time the spend together. Lucy, your entire post is garbage.

    • L4frimaire says:

      Lot of assumptions there. Who said she was leaving the baby with Jessica? Doesn’t Jessica have a job in NY? She’s pretty busy right now. Do you think anyone will say who is watching the baby or where he is? Meghan’s mother has a full time job in LA. She’s not some retiree who can just drop things at short notice. This is a working Royal trip. If she canceled all those events to stay behind with the baby, she’d be dragged for snubbing the Queen, shirking her final duties and obligations, letting down patronages etc. etc. There is also a global health pandemic. I think everyone needs to take several seats. This is not some little vacation and we need to stop trying to run this couples lives. Their child, their decision, full stop.

      • Amen, L4frimaire! And again, none of us know anything about what is going on in the Sussex’s lives or whether Archie will be with them or not. Seems like a lot of comments judging Meghan’s mothering here, without knowing a damn thing about exactly what they are doing or going to do.

    • TheCat'sMother says:

      It does take a village…

    • Sunshine says:

      Lucy De Blois…. aren’t the Cambridge’s in Dublin for 3 days without their kids? Weren’t they in Pakistan for 6 days? Hope you had that same energy then.

      • notasugarhere says:

        W&K also choose to leave their 8 month old son, with the brand new nanny, to go on a 10-day beach vacation in the Maldives. Not for work, for play. Took over the entire resort for the two of them and their security.

      • Lady D says:

        LOL. I just asked you this question, Nota. I should have read a little further.

  10. TQ says:

    Yet again, it’s all such b.s. Where is the discussion of security costs for Kate when leaves some of the kids at home with the nanny?

    And the kicker: ‘The Queen, 93, and Prince Philip, 98, are said to be ‘very sad’ by the news, having seen so little of Archie since his birth, according to the Sunday Times.’ Seriously? He lived at Frogmore Cottage in Windsor, where the Queen lives! Was the Queen so eager to see Archie then? Please. The logic is so inconsistent and flawed.

  11. Aang says:

    I have to travel twice this months and I’m already convinced I’m going to get corona. I’d leave my baby at home too.

    • Andrew’s Nemesis says:

      Me too, Aang. Me too. I’ve recently been diagnosed with a heart condition on top of other serious health issues so am really scared!

    • Scollins says:

      @Aang & Andrew’s Nemesis, I’m curious to know how your employers have addressed travel wrt Coronavirus. My daughter recently went to work for a start-up and much of it requires travel in the US. So far nothing official has been said.

      • Andrew’s Nemesis says:

        @Scollins Luckily, as a history tutor and writer, I’m self-employed. I dread to think what pressure corporations put on their employees during such an angst-filled time. Realistically, so much could be done via Skype – there’s no need to put people’s health at risk by forcing continental or intercontinental travel on them. I hope that your daughter stays safe and well.

      • Scollins says:

        Andrew’s N, thanks. Your history connection moves me to ask have you read “Gods of Upper Air: How a Circle of Renegade Anthropologists Reinvented Race, Sex and Gender in the Twentieth Century?
        Check it out. Loved it so much I gave copies for Christmas gifts prompting many thanks.

      • Andrew’s Nemesis says:

        @Scollins I haven’t come across that text, as it happens: thank you for the recommendation! I’ve made a note of the title and will hunt it down – sounds most intriguing.

      • Cleo17 says:

        For what it’s worth – my husband works for a fairly well-known company in Tennessee. Right now, it’s business as usual, but they’ve let people know at least in his department (which is IT) that if things get worse, they can work remotely. They also let people work remotely when schools were closed here for a week because of the flu. More companies need to follow suit with that.

  12. Aa says:

    I doubt Archie will be with Jessica. Jessica was away working the last time they claimed Jessica was taking care of Archie.

    • Mumbles says:

      Yeah I think that’s the prevalent name the tabloids really know as part of Meghan’s support group (because Mulroney is very thirsty, sorry not sorry.) She lives in Toronto and the Sussexes are all the way across the country, why would she be the go-to babysitter in real life? Archie probably has a nanny who has been part of his daily life for months, seems like the more likely scenario.

      • carmen says:

        That’s what I was thinking too, Mumbles. I guess the Fail don’t know how to look at a map. Jessica also has 3 of her own kids, a busy career and requires her own childcare!

      • Lady D says:

        They are running commercials in my area about Jessica’s new show. She is giving people a chance a a second wedding after their first was a disaster, in whatever way. The commercial shows a hurricane hitting a beach wedding. It’s debuting soon, so I imagine that is keeping her very busy these days. The show is called I Do, Redo.

  13. janey says:

    ‘Meghan’s London jaunt is proving a real headache.’

    this is hilarious! she’s returning to the UK at the behest of TQ to fulfill final royal duties, but it’s a “jaunt”!

    Also leaving Archie is just sensible. Whatever she does she won’t win.

    • Becks1 says:

      The wording is just…..belittling? degrading? they are going out of their way at every opportunity to make Meghan sound like a gold digging social climber (sorry if that’s redundant) who flits about the world in private jets and doesn’t care about her child. It’s gross.

      • Feeshalori says:

        If you’re going to blame anyone, blame the Queen who commanded this “jaunt” for BOTH Harry and Meghan to come back for work-related duties. This loaded language is just so exasperating!

    • (TheOG) jan90067 says:

      Also, it’s ALL about MEGHAN “leaving Archie behind”. Uhm.. last I looked, HARRY has “left Archie behind” as well. No ragging on the dad though… the WHITE “royal” dad …this time.

  14. GuestOne says:

    The reporters are sure schizophrenic. After the documentary in October they said family had distanced themselves& nobody was calling& texting the Sussexes. Then when it was announced they weren’t going to do Sandringham Christmas it became, everyone will miss them, Philip& the Queen may die of a broken heart from missing Archie. This is a continuation of that.

    I know of a business& law firm in London that sent employees to work from home because of coronavirus. At my work place there is a work travel ban in place. If these reports are true wouldn’t blame Sussexes for not bringing an infant over for a few days.

    • Nic919 says:

      My company has its HQ in the UK and they have already restricted international travel in the last few weeks.

      It’s actually a bad time to travel so it makes complete sense not to expose a baby to that.

  15. Powermoonchrystal says:

    This is ridiculous. The coronavirus is now in the UK and Europe, so even though babies do not seem to be in the worst case scenario group, this is just the smartest decision from that perspective alone. Are the DM readers that ignorant?

    • Arpeggi says:

      Well, covid-19 is in Canada too though there hasn’t been cases of community-acquired infections yet (there will be; if there are some in the US, there will be some in Can, viruses don’t care about borders). But nonetheless, yeah, I wouldn’t disrupt the routine of a toddler who won’t remember anything of it anyway to go visit ppl I already don’t really care about.

      Though considering the sources are not trustworthy, it’s possible they’ll bring him along and they’ve only thrown this out to stir some s@&t

      • Powermoonchrystal says:

        What? No, please get informed. Staying at home is not the same level of exposure than flying on a plane full of people, going through airport, etc. There is a reason why responsible firms are carefully monitoring air travel for their employees, and cancelling it when the risks outweigh the benefits. It is not necessarily panic but precautions.

      • Arpeggi says:

        Of course staying home reduces risks of exposure, my point was more that covid-19 being present in the UK isn’t the main reason to avoid bringing Archie when there’s already such a toxic environment waiting for them in the UK. And it’s not like it’d be wise to have a toddler who just got off the plane to visit 90-something relatives anyway. Imagine the headlines: Baby Archie got Philip sick and killed him…

      • Lady D says:

        They printed this so they can next print that the Queen has ordered them to bring Archie. The haters will be once again filled with glee that Meghan’s been given her orders even though they were bringing him anyway.

    • Belli says:

      DM readers are just looking for an angle of attack. No matter what H&M do they’ll find one, so they’re better off just doing what’s best for their son.

  16. lemonylips says:

    As someone who has moved from my country I can vauch that within normal families this wouldn’t be an issue at all. To have good relationships both sides need to try to stay in touch.

    • lemonylips says:

      sorry was meant to be a reply to a poster @a a bit more up….but can’t see it anymore

  17. MegJ says:

    With the virus that is going around I wouldn’t take a baby on a commercial flight, and god knows what the reaction would be if they flew privately!

  18. Candice says:

    She is not cutting anyone off from the royal family. There is a coronavirus spreading so she wouldnt risk archie to that. The Cambridge kids don’t even care about Archie as they are not at the age to care about their cousin. Archie doesnt even know what cousins are to him. Archie has barely been outta the UK for 3 months and everyone is acting like he has been gone for 17 years and he is about to graduate. Meghan isn’t the only parent here, Harry is a parent too. He and Meghan made a decision together also…THIS AINT OUR BABY.

    • Belli says:

      The Cambridge kids’ school was closed because of corona! No diagnoses yet, but it’s not worth bringing an infant close.

  19. Alissa says:

    lolllll you came to the wrong place with this nonsense.

  20. Ellen Olenska says:

    I think it’s killing them because the British media know that pictures of Archie bring clicks and views. Think of all the photo ops they could have milked for months after this short visit…who does Archie resemble ( racist and non racist versions of that story). See Meghan turn the baby away from the queen ( as she turns to the side to pat his back and burp him at a royal event.) See Prince Charles look wistful as Harry and Meghan walk away from him with Archie ( to change his diaper but hey, we’re not after the truth here) . Does Meghan make baby Archie bow to the queen? No? What a Hollywood faker after all we’ve done for her. See FFQ play peekaboo with archie while they wait for the queen…no folks, it’s not the FFQ and FFK’s fault they’re not living here…it’s all Meghans fault.

    It’s the loss of revenue that hurts…not the security costs. And of course if Meghan opts to stay home w Archie…well…then the tabs could go with “ Divorce is imminent.”

    What do you make a bet someone subjects Meghan to a truly heinous reentry coronavirus exams

    • Andrew’s Nemesis says:

      I LOVE your username, Countess – one of my favourite books :)
      You’re so right: the legions of ‘body language experts’ are rending their hair and garments because they’ve been denied the opportunity to slam Meghan for £££s

      • Lady D says:

        Don’t forget the jewelry and textiles experts too. They’ve also lost their jobs along with the lip readers and body language experts. Now that I think about it, I’m a little surprised they didn’t bring in the experts to devote columns to her hair.

    • bamaborn says:

      Spot on, Ellen!

    • TheOtherSarah says:

      +1,000

  21. Janet says:

    Half of Canada’s coronavirus cases are in British Columbia, so I’m not convinced that keeping Archie safe from the virus is a valid reason to leave him home.

    I agree with the poster who said that this might be the groundwork for Meghan eventually not going to the UK either.

    • Erinn says:

      It’s not like he’s in a daycare, and they’re probably not bringing him along for groceries and stuff like that. Still safer to be at home than to hang out in airports/planes with thousands and thousands of people.

    • Helen says:

      Um keeping a baby at home in a house is 100000000000000% safer than traveling and going through airports.

    • Ali says:

      All the cases of the coronavirus at this point in Canada are from direct contact. Who knows if locks spread us happening like in Washington state.

      But if harry and Meghan decide to leave Archie in Canada its their choice.

      • Janet says:

        @Ali: the thing is, all of the “hotpots” started with “direct contact with an infected person” patients. And then it starts spreading “somehow”, maybe door handles and unwashed hands, maybe asymptomatic carriers, maybe people with a super mild case who don’t even realize they are infected. I don’t think Canada will be any exception to that.

        My point in all of this, which seems to have been missed, is that no matter what, the virus will spread. It might even spread via animals, one patient’s dog in Hong Kong tested a weak positive for it, although they planned to re-test to rule out some sort of results contamination.

        I don’t know if both parents intend to quarantine themselves and their security detail when they get back? What is it, a 2 week incubation period? They are no less likely to be exposed while travelling than Archie. Then they come home and cuddle their baby.

        I’m quite sure that they have very valid reasons to leave Archie at home. First and foremost, Archie isn’t a working Royal and so why should he be disturbed and trotted out for the Royal dog and pony show? The Duke and Duchess haven’t said that they are leaving him at home due to the coronavirus, the commenters here are putting that forward as the reason.

    • GuestWho says:

      Maybe they are trying to keep him safe from the lunatic fringe the british media continue to whip into a frenzy.

    • joanne says:

      Vancouver is where the virus cases have been. Vancouver Island is completely separate and you have to fly or travel by ferry to get there. The area in North Saanich where they are staying is sparsely populated and very private. There is much less chance of being exposed to the virus there. British Columbia is a large land area. The only place heavily populated is the Vancouver area.

    • Olenna says:

      “I’m not convinced that keeping Archie safe from the virus is a valid reason to leave him home.” I don’t think you thought that through, @Janet. Try again.

    • Shirleygailgal says:

      errr, WRONG….BC has one case, the rest are all back east

      • Janet says:

        15 cases, 7 in BC according to the govt website.

      • Erinn says:

        BC is up to 8. But BC is also a very large province – over 944k square kilometers. Also has a population of over 5 million people, so the numbers still aren’t that scary yet.

        Ontario has 15, and Quebec has 1. But again, these are huge areas with SO many people in them.

      • Janet says:

        @Erinn: something like 80% of the population of Canada lives within 100 miles/160 km of the border with the US. Realistically, how many km2 of land there in BC probably isn’t that relevant since most of it is empty.

        Even the most remote town is bringing supplies in from somewhere.

      • Lady D says:

        You can fit four United Kingdoms in British Columbia. That means that realistically speaking, BC should be able to hold another almost 265 million people. Staggering, no? Population of Europe is 741 million and almost all Europe would fit in Canada. Our population btw, 37.5 million. Come to Canada, we need you.

      • Erinn says:

        Janet – I bring up the size of the province because it is at least somewhat relevant. You have a huge province that has a smaller total population than some US cities. They’re living in a wealthy neighborhood, on an island. The fact that there are less people crammed together does help with the spread of infection. I’m on the lower end of NS, so I’m actually living more southern than some US residents in Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont.

        Obviously the spread could happen really quickly – there isn’t anything guaranteeing that it won’t. But at the end of the day – it’s not the same as going to an airport. Airports see SO many people coming from international flights – there’s just a much higher concentration of germs and an international flight is rarely fun for anyone with a baby haha.

      • Shirleygailgal says:

        update: we now have 8……but still none on the island

    • L4frimaire says:

      @janet, What exactly do you want for them? What is your wish list for the Sussexes and their baby? This trip is required and requested for Ma and Pa Sussex, but baby is not needed there.People everywhere are nervous about travel. We’re supposed to go to Italy this summer and honestly don’t know if we’ll go through with it, even though we have a few more months to decide. There will be a lot of disruptions and cancellations, and the virus is still spreading quickly. Some of our local Costco’s have sold out of disinfecting wipes and lots of trips are cancelled. What is this obsession with seeing this baby? How many people bring a baby on a business trip?

      • Janet says:

        @L4FRIMAIRE: I didn’t realize that I’m supposed to have a wishlist in order to express my opinion that they have valid reasons for not taking Archie along, other than the coronavirus scare (which is something neither of them have claimed, btw). Which, if that was in the forefront of their minds, probably would have lead one or both to cancel their UK trip, due to the risk of contracting it and bringing it back home to Archie. Unless they intend to quarantine themselves for 2 weeks when they get back.

      • Liz version 700 says:

        So Janet do you want them to travel with the baby in the hopes that he gets sick? How do the folks who lie awake thinking of ways to hurt this baby live with themselves? You can argue land mass all you want but you are criticizing a woman for speculation that she won’t travel with her baby during a growing epidemic that has killed 3000 people.

      • Janet says:

        @Liz700: I’ll thank you to not put words in my mouth, I haven’t critized Meghan or anyone else here at all. I’ll point out yet again as well that NEITHER Harry or Meghan has given the threat of Coronavirus as the reason for leaving Archie in Canada.

        In other words, you’re attempting to “defend” the Sussexes to me about something I never said, concerning something they never said either. What’s up with that?

      • L4frimaire says:

        @Janet, You seem to want something. Just not exactly clear on this whole virus patrol thread with all these stats thrown out. So, you’re disappointed they won’t be taking Archie with them to the UK?

    • notasugarhere says:

      Keeping him safe in their home vs. exposing him to travel through airports, in the recycled air of airplanes, and more airports. Yes, there is a difference.

    • Emmitt says:

      Keeping an infant in the house … away from a spreading global pandemic …which has shut down his cousins’ school even though there haven’t been any diagnoses … is not a valid enough reason not to bring the infant on the plane…10 time zones away… to see his great grandparents.

      Think about that for a minute.

      • Janet says:

        @Emmitt: Valid “enough”? Was there some announcement by the Sussexes giving this as the reason? Or are we talking about the theory being put forth by commenters here who are just guessing or voicing their opinions? As mentioned in an eatlier comment, I suspect that if this actually was the reason, one of the 2 parents would also not travel. The same risk of being exposed in airplanes, airports, trains and crowds exists for the parents who will then be coming home to their child.

        Personally I don’t see why anyone thinks they have to explain why. Their kid, their choice. And if I were Meghan, I’d be staying home with him and skipping the last UK media feeding frenzy.

    • PrincessK says:

      This is such a silly conversation. Why drag a 10 month old baby across the world for just a few days, coronavirus or no coronavirus. Both parents are going to be very busy with meetings and engagements and Archie would need to be left with a carer even if he came.

  22. Andrew’s Nemesis says:

    I believe that the origin of ‘blue blood’ originated among those who prized skin so translucently white that the blue veins could be seen beneath the skin
    This ‘outrage’ is manufactured solely because the press want to sell pictures of little Archie to those who a) think that they ‘own’ him as they ‘own’ the rest of the ‘royal zoo’ (‘Our Harry’, anyone?) b) to see how dark his skin is. It’s classic, monstrous, racist voyeurism. And the lunatics justify their inhuman savagery by playing the money card.
    The hysteria has risen because Meghan refused to be ‘owned’ by the general public and her perceived ‘slight’ to be thus abused was and is exacerbated by a barbaric press. They’ll never accept that she can do what she damn well pleases, including faultlessly Duchessing While Black, and her refusal to play their game has tipped them over the edge. Keep up the good work, Meghan.

    • L4frimaire says:

      I’ve never seen so much possessiveness and need to control toward a public figure as I’ve seen toward Meghan, and by extension Archie. Someone on twitter actually said that the British media liked Meghan until she went rogue! Like , what?? !! What does that even mean? The rogue duchess. You know who they have zero expectations of? The Cambridge’s, especially Will. Like seriously, no one is saying they need to step up, connect more with the public, or stop playing petty games and take their roles seriously, beyond a popularity contest. Ugh 😒.

  23. Sofia says:

    These people had Archie in the same country with them for months and they couldn’t be bothered to visit. Nor protect him and his mother.

    Their concern trolling isn’t fooling me

    • Olenna says:

      This. The British media is so desperate for more Sussex news that they’re making up conversations (and feelings) for Queenie and Phil. #mypalacesource

  24. Florence says:

    This is a good idea. If Archie looks at Louis “the wrong way” (and the toxic press WILL insist a mixed race baby can do that) then trolls and Cambridge stans will be all over it.

    That poor little lad has been vilified from birth. Keep him safe.

    • Becks1 says:

      Just adding on to your comment to remind people that we have not seen Louis since the summer – I think the polo match. We got the family portraits at Christmas, but that’s it. So when people get up in arms over wanting to see Archie, my response is always….well where’s Louis? (I don’t think either set of parents has to “show” their baby/toddler, but lets at least be consistent.)

      • Nic919 says:

        And George was seen even less than Louis at that age.

      • notasugarhere says:

        The family Christmas portrait was also six months old, from their summer vacation. The pics of Charlotte posted recently were also a year old. But somehow the RRs complain about not having pictures of a private citizen child of soon to be no longer working royal parents.

  25. KellyRyan says:

    Have Queenie and spouse travelled to Canada to see their two great granddaughters? Of course not. Driving Range Rovers, playing with Corgi’s, turning their lives over to miscreants is their way of life, and of ultimate importance.

  26. bamaborn says:

    GOOD!!! Leave that cute baby where he can be safe. And, that means Duchess Meghan and Prince Harry won’t tarry longer than necessary in that viper’s den. Kudos!

  27. Sofia says:

    Also I don’t think she’ll nope out. I think that she’s someone that cares about her “duties” and wants to fulfil them. But I think she’ll be here for the least amount of time. Jet in on the morning of the 5th and then leave by the 10th or whatever their last engagement is

  28. Beach Dreams says:

    There’s no need for Archie to be in the UK, especially with the nasty atmosphere there. I don’t think Meghan’s going to skip the trip, but I wouldn’t blame her if she did.

  29. TheOriginalMia says:

    As others have said, there is looming pandemic and he’s in the vulnerable group. He’s not staying in Canada to tweak the Queen. He’s staying because it’s safer. Throwing Jessica Mulroney’s name in the mix stirs the pot as well.

    As the British tabs know nothing about this family’s plans, I actually doubt he is staying with Jessica. She has her own children and career to wrangle. Meghan & Harry have a home. He’ll stay there with his nanny and security. If anything, Doria might come up. We don’t know & neither do the tabs.

    • morrigan01 says:

      It honestly would be easier for Doria to come up and watch him. She’s on the same coast of North America, meaning the same time zone *and* it’s only a 3 hour flight from LA to Vancouver. Correct, we don’t know who Archie will be left with, the tabs just keep throwing Jessica’s name out there to stir stuff up.

  30. Jen says:

    I’m sure the family would like to see the baby, but when you can’t protect said baby or even attempt to, you lose the right to cry about it when the parents say “enough is enough.”

    It’s hilarious though the uneducated morons on twitter who think they didn’t bring him because the Queen has the legal right to him and would exercise it. That’s…. not how it works.

  31. Loretta says:

    With the Corona virus this is the best decision for Archie.

  32. MellyMel says:

    Yeah I definitely wouldn’t have my baby on a plane and going thru airports right now with Coronavirus if it wasn’t absolutely necessary, especially not to see some racist relatives. Whether he’s being watched by Jessica or a nanny, he’s better off at home.

    • ME says:

      How is he getting to Toronto? Am I wrong by assuming Jessica lives in Toronto? Her husband does Etalk and that’s filmed in Toronto. Maybe I got my info wrong though…

      • MsIam says:

        Who said he is going to Toronto? The tabs don’t know where Archie will be staying, they just need to fill page/website space.

      • MellyMel says:

        I’m not sure where Jessica and her family live. We also don’t know where or who is going to be watching him. This is speculation.

      • Nic919 says:

        Ben and Jessica live in Toronto and it’s where etalk and the morning show for CTV are based.

  33. Noodle says:

    It’s important to note that this is a work trip for M and H. They will be busy at events and engagements, and even if they brought Archie (disrupting his schedule and routine), he would spend a number of hours every day with a caregiver. Why disrupt everything, expose him to possible illness, to just be with his nanny back at Frogmore anyways?

    Responding to those who criticize his parents leaving him behind, attachment doesn’t mean he is attached to just his mother and father. A happy and healthy child is capable of developing attachments to a couple of caregivers, and I’m confident with whomever his parents leave him, he feels safe and secure with that/those person/people.

  34. GuestOne says:

    The story came from Roya as an exclusive from the Times the Queen had requested Harry, Meghan, Archie back for Commonwealth Day service (which I’ve just seen the line up for and is headlined by black/mixed race Brits so yay the family DO love diversity lol). I think the press were hoping for a photo op as why mention Archie- he wouldn’t be at the service. So yesterday Roya published story that the BRF& royal fans will be disappointed not to get a glimpse of Archie as it’s ‘understood’ he will he left in Canada. So then story becomes cruel Meghan denying the rest of the family quality time with him.

    But if he does come (as who knows truth of the reports), then she’s a bad mother risking infection to her infant, the Queen forced her to bring him. And paps will try get a picture like they did of Harry when he arrived in U.K. last week. Lots of stories to mine& that’s the point.

  35. Suz says:

    Maybe they don’t want their child near Harry’s pedophile Uncle since Mummy insists on keeping her favorite by her side.

    • Lady D says:

      He’s an ephebophile. He likes adolescent not prepubescent children.
      (It matters to victims of pedophiles)

      • JC says:

        Thank you for that.
        It drives me absolutely insane when people call him a pedophile.

        There is a huge difference.

  36. Mich says:

    What is the over/under that this is completely made up and the British media has no actual idea what Meghan’s travel plans are?

    • lingli says:

      The vast majority of these stories are based on speculation, either by “sources” (e.g. Diana’s former bodyguard in the VF piece today) who have no current contact with any of the major players, or “experts” (journalists who write about the Royals and who *may* at one time in the past have had access to a particular Royal or his/her circle). Only a tiny fraction come direct from the horse’s mouth, through an interview or statement, and even then they’re diced up, presented out of context and spun.

      But because something is printed it becomes a reality, and then readers/commenters start discussing it as if it were true. Look at the way people here are accusing one another of “mommy-shaming”, or getting into the weeds about the spread of Covid-19. And then the story becomes part of the accepted narrative, even while folk are saying the original source is unreliable.

      Hilary Mantel gave a speech a few years ago where she talked about “royal bodies” and how royal women are, essentially, a blank canvas for our (societal) projections. Kate is often (and sometimes begrudgingly) praised for being exactly that: attractive, pleasant, and almost mute, which allows us to attribute a whole set of characteristics to her (in the case of this website: often laziness, anxiety, strain, smugness, mental ill-health, vanity; but on others: poise, grace, style, engagement, enthusiasm, warmth…). Meghan, for all that she’s been more politically outspoken, is still that same blank canvas. Which makes these speculative tabloid titbits another space for commenters to project motivations and emotions onto strangers, often with great certainty, despite the fact that it’s 99% certain this story is bullsh*t.

      It’s fascinating, really.

    • Cynthia says:

      Yup. If true, how would Roya obtain this information? And let’s remember that Roya is the one who wrote “H&M are moving to Africa” and “Anne will replace Harry as Captain General of the Royal Marines”, among many other fake stories. Would Harry and Meghan tell the palace “hey we’re not coming with Archie” ? Highly doubt it. Why would Harry and Meghan want to announce to the world that Archie is not coming with them? They didn’t last time, and I doubt they would this time.

  37. Well-Wisher says:

    This is the typical situation if one goes abroad and one answers ” I am from Toronto” which will be enjoined with the following – “I have a friend who lives in Maple Ridge BC”
    There is bewilderment since Toronto is 5 hours away in direct flight to British Columbia.

    King Archie will probably remain in BC because of the virus. He is under 2 years old and have an undeveloped immune system.

  38. Elizabeth says:

    How can it possibly cost more to protect him in Canada than in the UK?

    • ME says:

      I think maybe they mean it costs more because Harry flew separately a week ago to the UK and needed security. Then Meghan will be flying separately and needs security. Archie will also need security while his parents are away. If all three were together they would need less security men working at one time.

  39. L4frimaire says:

    The “ but her emails” analogy is perfect. I really don’t understand how with Coronavirus spreading everywhere they expected them to bring an infant for “ nonessential “ travel. Now there will be the bad mother headlines because Meghan, who was requested be the Queen, will have a very busy schedule while over there. I have never seen this much interest in the other Royal kids. Did they expect a photo op with Archie or something?

  40. MeghanNotMarkle says:

    GOOD. As much as I selfishly want to see pictures of that little chunkamunk, he doesn’t need to be in that environment.

  41. Alexandria says:

    He’s not the heir, he’s not important blablabla…leave Archie in Canada away from these wretched people! As much as I want to see Archie’s pics I only want to see them from HM Instagram (royal or not). Bless this family.

  42. RoyalBlue says:

    I am in the camp of ‘they don’t know so they are just fishing’.

    Every Monday morning they toss Jessica’s name in an article and you have the psychos screaming that she is thirsty. Hence the reason they never told them who the god parents are.

    archie will Either stay with grandma D and the nanny or he will come along with them. It’s that simple. It’s just that the Fail are milking them as long as they can and trying to bully them into bringing archie back with them by shaming them with the Made up cost of security.

  43. tarynfox says:

    I don’t blame Meghan one iota for leaving Archie at home.
    Sleep schedules… toxic family… coronavirus… yeah, no.

  44. Emmitt says:

    Neither the Queen nor Prince Phillip are dying to see Archie or any of their great grandchildren except for George. It’s nothing personal, it’s nothing racial. Most people over 90 are not trying to deal with small children & babies at their age. If they see them, cool. If not, cool. Neither Elizabeth nor Phillip will go on their deathbeds wishing they had more time with Archie (or any of the great-grands including George).

    2. Coronavirus is floating around. If Meghan and Harry brought Archie on a commercial plane the rags would claim she’s a bad mother for exposing Archie to coronavirus. Regardless of how they brought Archie, they’d claim Archie exposed the Cambridge kids/Royal Family to coronavirus.

    3. Cambridge kids will not suffer from not knowing Archie as a cousin. Remember, William considers Pippa’s kid to be his nephew…Archie not so much. Kids get their clues from their parents so if William and Kate* are dismissive of Archie, their kids will be too.

    *I think if it were left up to Kate, she’d be snuggling and cooing with Archie because she loves babies and kids. But it’s not up to her, so…..

    • amy says:

      Ummmm, Pippa’s son is William’s nephew…..

      • Emmitt says:

        Archie is also William’s nephew, yet when asked about the birth of his brother’s child, William answered “Well I already have a nephew.”

        The point is William likely sees Pippa’s child as his nephew (nephew by marriage), not Meghan’s child (who is his blood related nephew).

    • Beach Dreams says:

      Agreed with everything except the asterisk. I think Kate would still cheerfully ignore Archie because of her clear antipathy towards his mother. She (generally) gets a pass far too easily; in truth, she is likely just as spiteful and petty as William.

      • Nic919 says:

        Kate has only ever shown interest in her own babies. It’s a fallacy to say she cares about babies otherwise since all she does a few scary faces at them in photos for a few minutes at engagements and then doesn’t bother with them ever again.

        She showed zero interest in Archie when she saw him at the polo match.

      • GloryS says:

        Have you got evidence of this antipathy?

  45. bitchy architect says:

    soo she didn’t seem to care when Archie was called a chimp but she’s super disappointed not be able to see him on this visit… yeah I’m not buying this for one second.

    • GloryS says:

      Ho do you know she wasn’t bothered by the fact that one person showed a pic of a chimp and was immediately and rightly sacked for it?

      The RF have a general policy of not responding to media stories. They wouldn’t have time to respond to all of them

      • Nic919 says:

        They responded to the botox story and hair extensions. And they responded to a variety of other stories. The Queen chose to remain silent for the chimp photo. It was offensive enough to warrant a response.

      • GloryS says:

        Nic have you got a link please.

        I have tried to post another answer to your post at 48 but it has gone

      • Olenna says:

        @Nic919, and let’s not forget:

        1. Willie’s lawyers sent out letters to the BM about the Rose affair: “In addition to being false and highly damaging, the publication of false speculation in respect of our clients’ private life also constitutes a breach of his privacy pursuant to Article 8 of the European Convention to Human Rights.”

        2. BBC aired a show that portrayed the Duchess of Sussex as a knife-wielding trailer trash psycho who threatened to hurt/stab the keen duchess.

        The BM has invaded and trashed as much of the Duchess of Sussex’s personal life as they can get their nasty hands on or fabricate without going to court. And, no one, absolutely no one, from the RF has stood up for her but Prince Harry.

  46. Awkward symphony says:

    I hope this is true. Why bother bring him and him being near these people+for fear of the virus I hope they dont.
    This is their last handel over the Sussexs, after march 31st these trolls will have nothing. Even that spit face piers even “debated” this this morning🤬Lizzy didnt even bother attend his christening yet we are expected to believe shes “heartbroken” over this!!

  47. Dee says:

    When I travel for work, I don’t take my kids along either. Screw the royal rota and their racist conspiratorial comments. I hope they never get to take a photo of Archie ever again.

  48. kellebelle says:

    Why is everyone SO obsessed with where Archie is going to be? Why would she bring him to the country that compared him to a chimp and wanted to see how “white” he was, and when there’s a virus flying around. Why? Bloody vultures. She’s brave enough herself to go back there.

    • Gogo Girl says:

      @KelleBelle: A country did not call Archie a chimp. An unknown DJ who worked for the BBC did and he was sacked and rightfully vilified for it. The UK is a very racially diverse country, have you ever visited? Would you let the opinions of one no-name racist from your country (wherever you’re from) brand your entire country as racist? Please find a reasonable perspective on this subjective before you brand an entire country as racist.

      • GloryS says:

        Thank you Gogo Girl, nice to know someone has a sense of perspective, unlike the person above who used the term coronavirus-ridden Britain for 40 cases out of 66m people. :roll:

      • Nic919 says:

        We don’t need to brand the country but the royal family itself is certainly racist. There is ample evidence there. So again why would meghan and Harry subject their child to a family that does not care about their son?

      • GuestOne says:

        I’m in Britain and I do think like every country- it’s got a racism problem. The Prime Minister has a history of racist comments& the Brexit referendum’s discourse on immigration leaned into racism with a rise in racist incidents after the result. The problem is a lot of Brits are in denial over its racism hence the shallow TV debates when it comes to racist press treatment for Meghan.

        Danny Baker is a well known DJ. He got a standing ovation in his first comedy show after the royal baby tweet got him fired and he is still in demand turning his BBC show into a well rated podcast.

      • kellebelle says:

        Fair enough, but yes, sacked and then re-hired three weeks later. The UK is guilty of racism and now everyone knows it. Not every person IN the country is racist, but there are certainly some there, aren’t there? The RF and the press. Thankfully the whole world has seen how the RF and the British press has treated Meghan and they look like hell.

      • MeganBot2020 says:

        Danny Baker is hardly an “unknown DJ” and while I agree that of course plenty of Brits are not racist, it’s a sad fact that our country has a serious problem with racism and that problem has become significantly worse over the past few years. As a British WOC I no longer feel safe in my own country, and am actively considering emigrating.

        As for Coronavirus no we don’t have many cases yet but I wouldn’t fly anywhere with a baby during a global pandemic.

  49. Lisa says:

    I am not going to jump to any assumptions because it was also assumed that Meghan left Archie in the UK when she went to the USOpen and that was not true. They will make the best decision for their son and that is all that matters.

  50. morrigan01 says:

    Since the Sussexit announcement I’ve *been* saying that Archie will not set one wee foot in the UK until maybe he’s a tween, and I’m sticking by that prediction. And when that kid hears the story of how the UK press treated his mom (and him when he was a baby) and how no one in the BRF stuck up for her (or him – even when he was in utero for goodness sake) except for his dad, he will have little to no use for the BRF or care much for going there as he gets even older, especially if the UK tabloid press remains as it is.

    While he’s still a young’un, he’ll stay in Canada every time when his mom and dad have to pop over to the UK for work. And Meghan will only stay a few days. Harry will either arrive before her – like he did this time – or stay a bit longer if they go over together (like what happened in January). Only if they ever have to do some kinda tour thing would they ever bring him along (and I don’t think they’ll be doing those anymore once they step back anyway).

    Archie is the main reason they left. I am firmly convinced of that. So no way were they going to make such a bold move as to leave to get him out of that environment, and then turn around and take him right back into it.

  51. lili/lirael/whatever says:

    The virus, jet lag, stress – let Archie stay. Of course it’s sad probably TQ will never see him again. I think bringing Archie would be a great PR press. She chose not to – great respect from me – which shows how done she is.
    As for Jessica, she was unlucky. Press needs to pick on someone. They were seen together and it’s the easy prey for the press – they can call her thirsty. That wouldn’t fly with Serena.

  52. Shannon Bullock says:

    I think Meghan and Harry have some very practical reasons for wanting to protect Archie from the public spotlight, one of which may be that he hasn’t grown out of his strabismus. It runs in the family (Lady Louise needed surgery to correct it, William also had it as a baby). I don’t think anyone will bother to remember that it’s heriditary on Archie’s father’s side and Meghan/Harry don’t want to put Archie in a situation where all of his early childhood “issues” are memorialized permanently – Harry hated that this happened to him and doesn’t want to put his son through it over something that ultimately isn’t a big deal at all but could cause him to be bullied by the press and public. If Archie isn’t present in England, the press can’t dictate the narrative about him. Makes a ton of sense to me!

  53. Valerie says:

    Putting aside the decision (which is likely for the best), I really can’t stand Jessica Mulroney, lol.

  54. Reece says:

    I’m just here for the Archie photos.
    That Face!!

  55. ejodee says:

    Good decision

  56. blunt talker says:

    As most people remember when Archie was born and that DJ called him a chimp. I read from a reliable source, that was then when Harry and Meghan decided that it would not work trying to raise their child in Britain. That is when they started to develop plans for a different future for their family. I also read where Harry said-the royal family really did not accept Meghan into the family fold and did nothing to protect her. Any normal thinking human being can understand their decision to change their status within the royal family. As far as bringing Archie let say this-Great grandma and grandpa did not attend his christening-Meghan and the baby living at Frogmore Cottage provided ample opportunity for them to see him and visit. That includes all royal senior members-no response from any senior royals about Archie being called a chimp-no response from any senior royals during Meghan’s pregnancy with the bullying with racial overtones. The royal family let Harry down in this respect and they will have to live with their inactions. Forgiveness is a two way street. Are they so tone deaf to see how this looks to the outside world knowing this is how Harry’s wife was treated and noone in the royal family said or did anything about it. History is coming for everybody let’s see how everybody stacks up.

  57. aquarius64 says:

    The BM is mad because they were banking on pictures of Archie for the papers. And it’s too dumb to see past its vindictiveness and greed. The bigger news is why the Cambridges are out and about in Ireland when their kids’ school may have exposure to coronavirus? If there has been a positive result and it’s covered up the BRF can’t come back from that.

  58. cluces says:

    I can’t believe these IDIOTS are upset with the Sussex. No mother would subject her child to 10 hour commercial flight at this time.

    What are they saying? “Well we failed at the miscarriage! But there’s hope yet, get that melanin baby on a commercial flight with a lot of coughing. Once on the ground we’ll expose the child to a 🦠. We win no melanin child to in line for the throne!

    What PRICKS!

  59. Sofia says:

    Well if you’re truly a lawyer why don’t you sell your information to the DM. You can even be their go to lawyer! They’ll call you whenever they want a story to sell! Make some extra cash! You might even get to be on TV! I’m sure your family will be so proud, they’ll tell everyone about you as the lawyer working for the daily mail and telling everyone about that bitch Meghan’s evil plans!

    And I’m sure your law firm wouldn’t mind! They’ll probably be suuuuuper happy that one of their own has such a prestigious job working for such a serious newspaper!