Apparently, when Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have kids, they won’t have full custody based on a very old rule dating back to King George I. Is this outdated? Scroll down to see how people around America voted.
According to a royal expert, when you join the royal family, you must abide by many rules and traditions that the Crown has set in place. Many of those rules often sound shocking, strange, eccentric and a bit wild, but this one may take the cake, or at least must top the wow factor list.
To better put it, imagine getting married and having children, only to know they aren’t “legally” yours. In fact, any kids you will ever have will never legally be yours. It doesn’t end there, you do not have full control on decisions regarding your children. Unfair? Maybe, but it’s the price that comes with being a part of the royal family. According to royal expert Marlene Koenig, “The sovereign has legal custody of the minor grandchildren.” Apparently, this bizarre rule dates back to the 1700s when King George I decided he wanted full control over his grandkids.
Koenig adds that the law has never been changed since then. So, why did King George I set such a law in the first place? “He did it because he had a very poor relationship with his son, the future King George II, so they had this law passed that meant the King was the guardian of his grandchildren,” Koenig added.
The law is more than 300 years old and was passed by a majority of 10 out of 12 judges, according to Koenig, who has written two books on the history of the British royal family and has tons of published articles in the “Eurohistory Journal.” It has affected the way the Royal parents raise their children, because the Queen has the final say on decisions regarding education, custody upbringing and the right to say where the princes will live.
The children legally belong to “the sovereign,” which is why custody is never included in divorce documents. This explains why Princess Diana’s wishes to have her brother and mother become legal guardians of Harry and William after she passed, was instantly ignored by the Palace. Princess Diana, did not have final say on her boys’ “upbringing” or anything to do with the “care and control” of her two sons. The mother’s say is only a matter of preference and negotiation, according to Constitutional expert, Michael L. Nash.
According to Joe Little, managing editor of Majesty Magazine, “This isn’t an Act of Parliament, but a royal prerogative established in the early 18th century, so it is not legally binding.” That may be true, but Koenig says the palace “doesn’t make a big deal” out of the law to this day and doubts Charles or the Queen would ever overshadow important or meaningful decisions. Once the Queen passes away, legal custody of any grandchildren in the palace will be passed on to the new reign, grandfather Prince Charles.
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will have to abide by the same rules as others before have, including Prince William and Kate Middleton. Is the law outdated? Perhaps, but the same can be said for many rules the royals must abide by. However, given that royals have recently been seen going off book from their strict royal rules, perhaps this rule may see a new modern light. Read more about this story on Cosmopolitan here.
Here’s how people on the Zip app are weighing in on this all over the country!
Apparently, when Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have kids, they won’t have full custody based on a very old rule dating back to King George I. Is this outdated?