His or Her Royal Highness

Two great questions!

If the child is mentally handicapped, I'm sure the world will know, and William and Kate will have another baby!

A law has recently been passed permitting a daughter to become monarch, if she had been born first. The same will apply if the next child is a girl. When the Princess Royal (Princess Anne) was twenty-five, she signed a document officially resigning her right to become monarch, in favour of male family members.

Likewise, to your second question, the Queen's other children (Princes Andrew and Edward) are both heirs to the throne, and both have offspring who are inline, in the same way as Queen Elizabeth's father found himself becoming king, when she was just a teenager; and there are plenty of other royal relatives in Europe on both sides.

looks like it is a HIS

Once it was understood that an heir was not psychologically capable of doing the work of the monarch, yes, it would be the next in line who would fill that role. It would not be a Regent (I don't think), because that only happens until a child comes of age. Whoever ascended would keep the crown.

In the last century there was a lady - not sure if she was a princess - who was not of normal intelligence. I think she died quite young but she had a reasonable life being cared for appropriately.

I don't think there is an 'age of ascendancy', because it's not like becoming eligible to be elected for President.

Historically, when the monarch died, the first in line became monarch immediately, no matter how young he or she was, as long as those in power were willing to support that child's right to the throne. Thus, you have someone like James VIth of Scotland becoming king in Scotland when he was 1 year old, (I don't know who managed state affairs for him until he was older.) and eventually taking the English throne as an adult, after the death of Elizabeth I of England. Technically, today's Queen is Elizabeth I of Scotland and II of England, because the aforementioned James (Jacob, actually) was instrumental in creating the 'united kingdom' (a biblical phrase). Since then, the person on the throne has always been physically related to the previous monarch, although not necessarily the son or daughter. For instance, when Charles II died, his brother James was king for three years, before William and Mary. James did not last as king because he was a Catholic, and Parliament wanted to keep the monarchy Protestant.

Only relatively recently (that is, after 300 years of Protest monarchs) has there been the attempt by a lone member of Parliament to have a Private Member's Bill passed to say that the monarch should be given back the right to marry a Catholic if so desired. There is no real appetite for this kind of change yet, since we are still dealing with violence in Ireland over the differences between Catholics and Protestants. The latest twist in that saga, is that Norther Irish Catholics have voted to remain loyal to Britain, rather than support a united Ireland under a Catholic burocracy. You couldn't make it up!

When I mentioned a Regent in a previous post, that was an allusion to an adult standing in for a young king (usually) until he was considered able to take over.

But (not that this is likely to happen these days), historically, there have also been children who had a right to the throne, disappearing for ever.

The age of majority was reduced from 21 to 18 in 1967 across the UK, with the age of minority being 16 everywhere except Northern Ireland where it is 17. These numbers have never had a bearing on the age of the monarch, historically. It would be a constitutional change, if they did. You probably know that the UK does not have a written Constitution, although every so often someone suggests it's high time we did.

dragonfly said:

A law has recently been passed permitting a daughter to become monarch, if she had been born first. The same will apply if the next child is a girl. When the Princess Royal (Princess Anne) was twenty-five, she signed a document officially resigning her right to become monarch, in favour of male family members.

Click to expand...

It has been proposed that the law be changed to allow a girl to become monarch if she preceeds a boy. However I understand this needs complicated changes to the law not only in the UK but in all the other members of the Commonwealth (16 countries I think). This has yet to be agreed and worked out.

Now that the Duchess of Cambridge is married to a Prince, she is a Princess. She is one flesh with her husband, remember?

It's the same principle in every marriage - the wife is elevated to the same status as her husband, no matter how low-ly she was born.

I don't think there would be just two people involved in bringing up the Prince if something happened to his parents. An older generation would be involved almost without doubt - Prince Charles, his brothers and sister, as well as Catherine's parents.

John S said:

His or Her Royal Highness, the Prince or Princess of Cambridge.

That is going to be the title given to the future monarch of Britain when he or she is born - possibly today. Kate is supposedly in labor as I write this.
This soon to be one day old child, will be 3rd in line to the Britiah throne - behind the child's grandfather, who is already fairly old and the child's 31 year old father. Of course, the present Queen is still alive but rather old. I guess that Uncle Harry is 4th but he doesn't really want to be king.

The American media, and I guess, a large group of the American public are waiting for this blessed event to happen. I have no idea why. Maybe they love Kate.

I do have 2 questions for anyone who knows this.
1. What happens if the child is mentally handicapped (What we used to call retarded)?
2. What happens if the great-grandmother, grandfather, and father all die BEFORE the child is old enough to ascend the throne? Who becomes the temporary monarch? What is the age of ascension?

Click to expand...

"One of the strongest natural proofs of the folly of hereditary right in Kings, is that nature disapproves it, otherwise she would not so frequently turn it into ridicule, by giving mankind an ASS FOR A LION..."

UK press in a frenzy over royal baby, but Thomas Paine's Common Sense wanted to change the system.

As a Canadian we are still considered part of the British Commonwealth and recognize Elizabeth as "our Queen"

In my school years we sang ... "God save the Queen" ... every day

I have always had a great deal of respect for Queen Elizabeth .... she is a true Christian .... during the 1990's when it was politically incorrect to even say "Merry Christmas" .... she used her Christmas Television broadcast to tell the gospel of salvation through Jesus Christ ... it was fantastic .

Having said all that .... if Prince Charles ever becomes King .... it would make me ill to even think about it .

I think after Queen Elizabeth is done .... the monarchy will see a rapid decline in importance and popularity

So in the meantime I will continue to sing .... "God save the Queen" .... and pray God will keep Her around for a long time .

Arnie Manitoba said:

As a Canadian we are still considered part of the British Commonwealth and recognize Elizabeth as "our Queen"

In my school years we sang ... "God save the Queen" ... every day

I have always had a great deal of respect for Queen Elizabeth .... she is a true Christian .... during the 1990's when it was politically incorrect to even say "Merry Christmas" .... she used her Christmas Television broadcast to tell the gospel of salvation through Jesus Christ ... it was fantastic .

Having said all that .... if Prince Charles ever becomes King .... it would make me ill to even think about it .

I think after Queen Elizabeth is done .... the monarchy will see a rapid decline in importance and popularity

So in the meantime I will continue to sing .... "God save the Queen" .... and pray God will keep Her around for a long time .

Click to expand...

'God save us from the Prince'?

Hi aspen,

I will leave you to beef up on 'Defender of the Faith', (which is on all our coinage). Prince Charles wants to change it to Defender of Faiths. :mellow:

John S said:

dragonfly - Thanks.

Mungo - The U.S. media has been saying that a girl WOULD have become Queen.

Click to expand...

I've been looking this up and the situation is a little complicated.

It seem that the Succession to the Crown Act was passed in the UK Parliament and gained Royal Assent on 25 April. However it does not come into effect until all members of the Commonwealth have passed similar laws to amend their constitutions. This was agreed at the Commonwealth Conference in October 2011. When it does come into effect it will be backdated to 28 October 2011.

See http://uk.news.yahoo.com/royal-baby-faces-succession-legal-wrangle-055612404.html#Way5CZ7

Hi Angelina,

The Prince must be getting on in age now?

Click to expand...

I think he's about 65, now, but his grandmother, the Queen's mother, lived to 102, and Her Majesty is still in fine fettle.

Hi John,

There is literally decades of prophecy, locally in the UK, that Charles will never be king. All we can do is wait and watch.

Baby named - George Alexander Louis


His official title will be - His Royal Highness Prince George of Cambridge.