Meghan and Harry: Royal Baby

[BlondeIdol]

The tabs are always overblowing what is or isn’t tradition or protocol. There are no hard rules for births with the BRF whatsoever. 

What Meghan and Harry are doing is actually a lot more in line with what the Queen and those in the family before her did. Especially if the baby is born at home but still holds true even if it is in a hospital. 

Good for them for taking some private family time. Hope everything laber and delivery related goes as smooth as possible

[tabitha2]

You do realize of course that if she gives birth at home it’s going to popularize, justify  Homebirth even more and more people are going to use her as an excuse when they really  should not? If a 37 year old first time mother  can do it successfully, why can’t I? If the British Royal family think it’s safe, why shouldn’t I?  

But Meghan is not going to be giving birth in her bed with just a lay midwife and Harry and then be expected to be up and care for home and children in 2 days  and that is the difference. Won’t want to think that far I suspect. 

Edited April 12, 2019 by tabitha2

[singsingsing]

21 hours ago, tabitha2 said:

You do realize of course that if she gives birth at home it’s going to popularize, justify  Homebirth even more and more people are going to use her as an excuse when they really  should not? If a 37 year old first time mother  can do it successfully, why can’t I? If the British Royal family think it’s safe, why shouldn’t I?  

But Meghan is not going to be giving birth in her bed with just a lay midwife and Harry and then be expected to be up and care for home and children in 2 days  and that is the difference. Won’t want to think that far I suspect. 

I’m pretty sure the people who are inclined to give birth at home with a lay midwife and immediately resume all home making duties don’t need Meghan Markle to encourage them.

[Kailash]

1 hour ago, singsingsing said:

I’m pretty sure the people who are inclined to give birth at home with a lay midwife and immediately resume all home making duties don’t need Meghan Markle to encourage them.

I agree. Do people really make decisions based on what members of the BRF do? That’s bizarre to me. Maybe because I’m American. ??‍♀️ 

[Destiny]

I agree. Do people really make decisions based on what members of the BRF do? That’s bizarre to me. Maybe because I’m American. [emoji2372] 

No. They don’t.

[ihaveanexamintwodays]

On 3/7/2019 at 1:55 PM, viii said:

Alice would be lovely. I had originally guessed Victoria, but I'm wondering if Kate and William want to keep that for their fourth child, in case it's a girl. Charlotte and Victoria are lovely sib-set names. 

Alice Elizabeth Frances would be a beautiful name. 

Oooh, i like that name! 

I'm not sure if I've made an FJ-offish guess at Baby Sussex yet....I'm dead set on girl, and I really like Eleanor Margaret Alexandra. For a boy I like Frederick Anthony Albert (though given Prince Phillip's age and condition I could see a boy-Sussex carrying his name).

[viii]

Yeah, I'm 90% sure it's a girl. I'd be very surprised if it was a boy. 

If it IS a boy, I'd also be very surprised if the name Philip isn't included. Harry seems quite close with his grandfather, and given his age and their relationship, I can see him being honored. I don't think it would be a first name, but for sure a middle name. 

[tabitha2]

Why exactly is everyone so damn sure it’s s girl?  I don’t get it. The Windsor’s usually have their sons first FWIW

[formergothardite]

On 4/13/2019 at 1:50 PM, Destiny said:

No. They don’t.

Does this mean I should cancel my plans to change my name to Meghan and copying everything she does? 

[viii]

6 hours ago, tabitha2 said:

Why exactly is everyone so damn sure it’s s girl?  I don’t get it. The Windsor’s usually have their sons first FWIW

Because I don't believe them when they say they don't know. Meghan's baby shower was pink themed, and her friend was quoted as referring to the baby as she. Perhaps some of it is just a coincidence, but there are enough things that make me think that they're aware of the sex that they're having, and that baby Sussex is a girl. 

I could be wrong, and it could EASILY be a boy, but I just don't think that it is. 

[omilona]

And Harry has said on multiple occasions he's 'hoping for a girl'. In his position you dont go out on a limb saying that so that it can be trotted out when your son is born. Also, at her age, for sure an amniocentesis.

 

Edited April 18, 2019 by omilona

[singsingsing]

Funny, most of the gossip I’ve seen has pointed toward it being a boy! Obviously it’s going to be one or the other, so... 

And doesn’t an amniocentesis carry some pretty significant risks? I didn’t think they were routinely performed just because of advanced maternal age.

[Gobsmacked]

1 hour ago, singsingsing said:

Funny, most of the gossip I’ve seen has pointed toward it being a boy! Obviously it’s going to be one or the other, so... 

And doesn’t an amniocentesis carry some pretty significant risks? I didn’t think they were routinely performed just because of advanced maternal age.

In Britain us older Mothers are offered amniocentesis but can refuse. We did. They are not routinely performed. Just offered. 

[WhatWouldJohnCrichtonDo?]

1 hour ago, Gobsmacked said:

In Britain us older Mothers are offered amniocentesis but can refuse. We did. They are not routinely performed. Just offered. 

When I was pregnant at 38 and 40 (in the US), amniocentesis wasn't even mentioned. I didn't have any real risk factors except "advanced age" (  ), so that may be part of it. And I suppose that most insurance here may not cover amnio. I did pay myself for a test involving extra measurements at my second ultrasound, but that payment counted towards my deductable for the year, so it wasn't a big deal. It gave me peace of mind that my babies weren't at a high likelihood for having Down Syndrome, Cystic Fibrosis, and one other thing. It was ~$60 well spent.

[viii]

My sister needed that when she was pregnant with her twins, and it was awful. Not recommended unless absolutely needed. 

[front hugs > duggs]

I know my mom had one with me, she was 39 (just shy of 40) at the time. I'm not sure if there was a reason other than her age. However, I kind of believe my parents to be the type that couldn't have handled a special needs baby/child. They couldn't really parent non-special needs kids very well, I think extra needs would have really thrown them for a loop.

*I hope this doesn't come across as ME thinking there's a "problem" with special needs people. But neither of my parents should never have been parents period and were pretty poor parents to all three of us, that I truly believe they would have lacked the skills to give a special needs child the kind of home and upbringing needed.

[VelociRapture]

My mom had an amnio when she was pregnant with me back in late 1987. If I remember right the Doctor had concerns about my spine - I think whether it was being enclosed properly? Anyways, she had it done shortly before Christmas. I think they got a call either on Christmas Eve or Christmas Day from the Doctor’s office saying that the Doctor missed and took a sample from her bladder by mistake. They had to redo it and everything came back normal, but I can tell my mom is still a bit pissed about it. She and dad spent that Christmas worrying that something was wrong with me when they should have been able to relax and enjoy their last Christmas as a family of three. She’s also still very relieved that he wasn’t the Doctor who wound up delivering me. 

[KnittingOwl]

Amnio isn’t routine as a first test in moms of advanced maternal age (>= 35). Usually you’d get other tests done first: nuchal screen, cell-free fetal DNA, quad screen. Depending on the results, you’d be offered an amnio to be sure. 

ETA: the DNA test will tell you if it’s a boy or girl. I knew at 13 weeks because of it with baby 2. 

Edited April 20, 2019 by KnittingOwl
Added more info

[TheOneAndOnly]

On 4/17/2019 at 10:32 AM, tabitha2 said:

The Windsor’s usually have their sons first FWIW

Are Prince Edward and Prince Andrew aware of this?

[tabitha2]

That’s why I said usually   but it’s true.

[louisa05]

12 hours ago, TheOneAndOnly said:

Are Prince Edward and Prince Andrew aware of this?

On another forum I use, several people actually did not know Prince Edward actually existed. And I saw an article about the Queen's birthday yesterday that noted that "both" of her grandsons were present at church, referring to William and Harry. Actually, all four were there. But, okay. 

I pointed out to someone somewhere in the past few days that all eight of the Queen's grandchildren made the leaving the hospital appearance to the press. A poster informed me that the Queen only has four grandchildren. I assume Anne and Edward's children are the four lost there. 

11 hours ago, tabitha2 said:

That’s why I said usually   but it’s true.

Really, it's not. 

Queen & Phillip: Boy

Anne: Boy

Charles: Boy

Andrew: Girl

Edward: Girl

Peter Phillips: Girl

Zara Phillips: Girl

William: Boy

Currently, 50/50. Girls leading for the Queen's great grandchildren ( in total numbers, as well--there are five girls and two boys among them). This one breaks an overall tie for sex of firstborns.  

[tabitha2]

Ahh see,  I was also talking about from Edward VII to Elizabeth’s father. All sons first born.  Also you forgot Margaret who had a son first . My statement stands. 

If you want to go into Grandchildren I might mention all George Vs surviving children but  George VI and Edward VIII had boys first

This is all in fun you know. It does not really matter as the kid is not really important dynastically and will most likely end up as an extremely wealthy socialite fringe member of the family seen publicly only on rare occasions . 

Edited April 22, 2019 by tabitha2

[singsingsing]

52 minutes ago, tabitha2 said:

Ahh see,  I was also talking about from Edward VII to Elizabeth’s father. All sons first born.  Also you forgot Margaret who had a son first . My statement stands. 

If you want to go into Grandchildren I might mention all George Vs surviving children but  George VI and Edward VIII had boys first

You're not working with a very large sample size there. Out of George V's six children, two had no children, one had two girls, and three had boys first. If you look at the Queen's children, two of them had a boy first, two of them had a girl first. So I definitely wouldn't say the Windsors 'usually' have boys first. There's a lot of confirmation bias there if you're choosing which specific Windsors you're basing the argument on, haha. It's generally a 50/50 sort of thing.

[catlady]

i don't readily have stats on Queen Victoria's nine children, but she herself had a girl first.

[louisa05]

4 hours ago, catlady said:

i don't readily have stats on Queen Victoria's nine children, but she herself had a girl first.

Eight firstborn boys and three firstborn girls. 

Although, this feels like useless accounting as sex is determined by the father and we're looking at children both fathered by Windsors and fathered by others who married into the family. So there has to be something in that. 

It looks like Victoria had more granddaughters than grandsons. But I didn't count carefully. Got distracted by names. There are some intriguing girl names in the family tree among Victoria's grandchildren that very well could appear in the new generation and perhaps inspire Harry and Meghan. Beatrice and Eugenie's names were sourced from that list, after all. 

Some unused for some time include Helena, Maud, Patricia, Marie, Alexandra and Alice. Of course, the latter two have been brought up a lot by those speculating about names. 

Boys names unused for a long time include Richard, Ernest, Leopold, Maurice. 

Edited April 22, 2019 by louisa05