William & Kate

[viii]

William and Kate are certainly not the brightest pair of individuals but they’re not complete dolts. I imagine they look at their calendar and schedule Maria accordingly - perhaps she works until 10 pm one night but she doesn’t start work that day until 2 pm. 

[prayawaythefundie]

2 hours ago, viii said:

I imagine they look at their calendar and schedule Maria accordingly - perhaps she works until 10 pm one night but she doesn’t start work that day until 2 pm. 

Exactly. There are many jobs that work that way. It‘s not a mystery.

[AmazonGrace]

3 hours ago, Jackie3 said:

 

If Maria gets off at 6--who watches the Cambridge children after that, when their parents go out?

It's an hour and 15 minutes from Bucklebury to Kensington Palace--you really think they've been doing that every single time they needed a nighttime babysitter?

Once the Cambridges move, it'll be a 45 minute drive. I doubt the Middletons want to do this every evening that Kate and Wills go out, and whenever Maria calls in sick or goes on vacation. 

 

 

What if  she doesn't get off at 6pm every day? Shocking worker exploitation, I know... Everyone should be able to make it to the happy hour at the pub. 

 But it happens, there are lots of people who work flexible hours and evening gigs, especially nannies to children of certain years who  wouldn't need a nanny while they are at school.   

[tabitha2]

Who is watching Archie and Lilibet? Doria? The anonymous nanny they must surely have? Because in the past several months H&M have travelled internationally without the children for their cause of the week much more than the Cambridges have for Royal duties. If they can dump a preschooler and a toddler off on grandma who probably has a life, friends and work of her own or the help I don’t think anyone has room to Bash the Cambridges. 

Edited September 7, 2022 by tabitha2

[Jackie3]

On 9/6/2022 at 9:55 PM, tabitha2 said:

Who is watching Archie and Lilibet? Doria? The anonymous nanny they must surely have?

I am quite sure the Sussex also have a couple of nannies. One nanny can't do it all. 

Why do you feel "nanny"=shameful parenting?

[AmazonGrace]

If Harry and Meghan have a nanny  they surround themselves with trustworthy people who care for their children while the parents are traveling out there making the world a better place.

If Kate and William have a nanny they are dumping their poor children in some stranger's lap in order to attend some pointless event and polluted the environment with their choice of vehicles.

[Jackie3]

22 minutes ago, AmazonGrace said:

If Harry and Meghan have a nanny  they surround themselves with trustworthy people who care for their children while the parents are traveling out there making the world a better place.

If Kate and William have a nanny they are dumping their poor children in some stranger's lap in order to attend some pointless event and polluted the environment with their choice of vehicles.

 

I hope both couples have all the nannies they need. Who cares how many nannies they have? 

The Cambridge parents certainly do travel a lot. Someone needs to watch the kids. It can't possibly be done by one nanny. For the sake of the kids, two (or more) stable caretakers is far better than one exhausted one. 

I'm not sure who made the Cambridge/Sussex comparison, but it wasn't me. Unless you have a link.?

I do wonder why the Cambridges try to pretend they just have one. Do they think that makes them like everyone else, lol?

[AmazonGrace]

1 minute ago, Jackie3 said:

 

Who cares how many nannies they have? 

 

You,  because you keep posting about it.

[tabitha2]

It might be a moot point as the new school the children attend offers boarding up for up to a week. If Maria wants to vacation or had a family emergency that seems a the most likely option. 

 

 

[AmazonGrace]

Yeah and surely there must be other staff  who might not have nannying as their job description but who would be able to keep three children alive for an hour or two in a nanny emergency.

[Ali]

1 hour ago, AmazonGrace said:

Yeah and surely there must be other staff  who might not have nannying as their job description but who would be able to keep three children alive for an hour or two in a nanny emergency.

Or help get the three kids ready for school and allow the nanny to only work afternoons and evenings.

[Jackie3]

4 hours ago, AmazonGrace said:

Yeah and surely there must be other staff  who might not have nannying as their job description but who would be able to keep three children alive for an hour or two in a nanny emergency.

An hour or two every day? So Maria works 22-3 hours a day?

Clearly, she clocks out at some point. If she arrives at 7 am, I'd imagine she's off by 5 or 6. Who looks after the little Cambridges then, when their parents are traveling or out for the evening?

I can't believe they just ask any old staff member to watch the kids. Like the chef, who is busy prepping dinner? Or the gardener? What if he has plans, himself? Do they make the rounds of the staff, searching for a sitter?  LOL, doesn't seem very likely. 

Besides, I'd think the Cambridges would want someone skilled in childcare--it's not a job everyone is good at or enjoys. I wouldn't ask my landscaper to watch my toddler.

 

4 hours ago, tabitha2 said:

It might be a moot point as the new school the children attend offers boarding up for up to a week. If Maria wants to vacation or had a family emergency that seems a the most likely option. 

 

Would they leave a four-year old at boarding school for a week? Seems he'd be happier at home, with his regular routine, and a nanny that he knew and trusted. Four is pretty young to spend a week away from home, even for the Brits.

Charlotte and George might like it, or not, depending on their personalities. But putting young children in boarding school for a week is hardly "hands on parenting."

The British people I know have pretty generous vacation allowances on their job. I am sure Maria gets more than 1 week off a year--probably more like 6. What if she wants two weeks to go to Spain? Would the school keep them for that long? Is that best for the kids?

Maybe it's better to just accept that very busy parents and their kids benefit from having backup childcare. So much shame over having two nannies! Yet so unrealistic to pretend there's just one.

Edited September 8, 2022 by Jackie3

[SoSoNosy]

Maybe Maria is the only one who wears the brown uniform and hat; maybe she has trained under nannies herself and there is very sufficient familiar childcare.  There would have to be, but they aren't accountable to us as to what it consists of.

 

[Jackie3]

2 hours ago, SoSoNosy said:

Maybe Maria is the only one who wears the brown uniform and hat; maybe she has trained under nannies herself and there is very sufficient familiar childcare.  There would have to be, but they aren't accountable to us as to what it consists of.

 

I agree, there would have to be other nannies. Probably there is a daytime nanny (Maria) and a nighttime one. And a third, on on-call nanny,  for when one of the regulars is sick or on vacation.

When Kate and William want some family time, they can just send the nanny home. But they couldn't function without 24/7 coverage. And why would they want to, if they've got the money? It takes a village, after all.

I imagine Harry and Meghan do something similar. 

No one thinks the Cambridges are accountable to Free Jinger regarding their childrearing.

[AmazonGrace]

Spoiler

When Kate and William want some family time, they can just send the nanny home. But they couldn't function without 24/7 coverage. And why would they want to, if they've got the money? It takes a village, after all.

Can't function without 24/7 coverage? Why on earth not? Lots of people manage. Why do we assume that the parents are incapable or unwilling to do absolutely anything themselves? 

If they want to have a 24/7 nanny coverage they surely could.  But why does Maria need to come at 7 am every day? Surely  once in a while one of the parents must be in  the same house in the same country  at the same time and could manage to wake up three kids in time to dress for the day. I have done that many times without a nanny and it does not require a degree in early education just an alarm clock, which I am sure they can afford.   Then they could sit down with the kids and  eat the breakfast that they don't need to cook themselves. The parents have been photographed doing school drives so the nanny is not absolutely necessary, and during the school hours, there are the teachers. What is the 24/7 nanny needed for in the night while the kids are sleeping if the parents are close?

It is within the realm of  possibility thet the parents might actually deem their kids worthy of their time occasionally.  

Shocking, I know, almost unthinkable.

But hear me out --this is, not just any kids they happened to birth,  after all, the future King George and the spare heirs we are talking about, not some lowly commoners from the black sheep farm. Lots of people like hanging out with the heirs to the thrones.

[QuiverFullofBooks]

William is made Prince of Wales today! And there’s a Princess of Wales again.

Edited September 9, 2022 by QuiverFullofBooks
Added second sentence

[viii]

I can just imagine how crazy the headlines are going to go with the Princess of Wales title. However, good for William and Kate. 

[Coconut Flan]

1 hour ago, viii said:

I can just imagine how crazy the headlines are going to go with the Princess of Wales title. However, good for William and Kate. 

I'm guessing it's too much to expect people to be grown ups and accept this was going to happen and let it go.  

[47of74]

1 hour ago, QuiverFullofBooks said:

William is made Prince of Wales today! And there’s a Princess of Wales again.

Damn that was fast. I thought it would’ve been at least a few months given how Charles wasn’t named until 1958. 

[SoSoNosy]

I was wrong.

 

Edited September 9, 2022 by SoSoNosy

[47of74]

5 minutes ago, SoSoNosy said:

Is the Prince of Wales already official?  I haven't looked but it isn't automatic like Duke of Cornwall is.  Charles will have to formally give William the Prince of Wales title.

 

Yes it is. Charles announced it in his speech

Quote

"As my Heir, William now assumes the Scottish titles which have meant so much to me. He succeeds me as Duke of Cornwall and takes on the responsibilities for the Duchy of Cornwall which I have undertaken for more than five decades," King Charles added in the speech, recorded in Buckingham Palace's Blue Drawing Room.

"Today, I am proud to create him Prince of Wales, Tywysog Cymru, the country whose title I have been so greatly privileged to bear during so much of my life and duty," he added. "With Catherine beside him, our new Prince and Princess of Wales will, I know, continue to inspire and lead our national conversations, helping to bring the marginal to the centre ground where vital help can be given."

 

[viii]

I'm also surprised by the quickness of it but I think that Prince and Princess of Wales is easier for people than the Duke and Duchess of Cornwall and Cambridge. Plus, he obviously has faith in them and he probably understands the average people doesn't understand how any of this works and so they're going to wonder why the delay. 

[AmazonGrace]

I am sure i am missing something but I don't really understand what the big deal is ? I thought The Prince of Wales is reserved for the first heir... but William was the first heir yesterday regardless of lacking the Prince of Wales title, , so what difference does it make?

Edited September 9, 2022 by AmazonGrace

[SoSoNosy]

I'm sorry I deleted my comment, because I thought I was fast enough.  I had thought it would be a while before William became Prince of Wales, and questioned QuiverfulofBooks. While I was hitting "submit" a person came into my office who had listened to Charles' speech and confirmed the PofW titles so I deleted because he and I were still talkin

Edited September 9, 2022 by SoSoNosy

[viii]

7 minutes ago, AmazonGrace said:

I am sure i am missing something but I don't really understand what the big deal is ? I thought The Prince of Wales is reserved for the first heir... but William was the first heir yesterday regardless of lacking the Prince of Wales title, , so what difference does it make?

I've wondered this as well. I've tried to google it but I think ultimately it's really just a status thing. It doesn't change anything - William was the heir apparent before he received the POW title so I think it's just a thing of honour, really.