You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
So a lot of press about Royal Family health issues; Charles and his prostrate, Catherine and her bowel surgery, Fergie having cancer treatment.
Whilst as individuals I wish them best health. I find it incredibly irksome how its reported glowingly that they are receiving excellent care whilst so many are still waiting for treatment. Why are they not going through the NHS like any other normal citizen? I get the comments that they are the symptom of a wider issue. I am not particularly radical, I loathe Corbyn as much as Johnson, Truss etc, but surely the Windsors should lead from the front on this?
What - with their level of entitlement and privilege?
Or more realistically, would you sit on an NHS waiting list for months on end if you had a few million in the bank? I know I certainly wouldn't.
There's an argument for bringing public health care up to a high standard, a very strong one, but I don't think there's an argument for bringing others down to the current level.
People don't vote for higher tax though, and along with monsterous reform, it will need higher taxes all round*
*Unless Google/Facebook/Amazon/twitter et. al. all of a sudden get very generous....good luck with that...
It's not the royals that are the real problem here, they are just a very visible symptom of it.
Why are they not going through the NHS like any other normal citizen?
Because they arent? Thats pretty much the definition of monarchy.
Leading from the front got dropped a long time back and even then it was lead from the front with nice armour, bodyguards and generally being worth more alive than dead balancing the risk out.
Catherine and her bowel surgery
I had to Google to find out who "Catherine" was. I wasn't aware she had bowel cancer either.
How did I miss this vital piece of news?
Hope she recovers anyway.
Edit: Oh perhaps it's not bowel cancer? Whatever the issue with her bowels is then.
She doesn't. They specifically reported non-cancerous. And it wasn't specifically bowel surgery, it's being reported as 'abdominal' and there's a lot of stuff in the abdomen that isn't bowel.
People don’t vote for higher tax though, and along with monsterous reform, it will need higher taxes all round*
We did in Scotland
ooof!
outrageous, but plausible!
Catherine and her bowel surgery
Aye Ernie, dont let a deliberate misquote get in the way of a good narrative....
Because they arent? Thats pretty much the definition of monarchy.
Yeah. That.
There’s an argument for bringing public health care up to a high standard, a very strong one, but I don’t think there’s an argument for bringing others down to the current level.
I personally think there is absolutely a case for bringing decision makers down to the education or health level of everyone else, because see how quickly they stop faffing and sort it out when they have to. Funding is there. I would argue for a big increase in inheritance tax (with the caveat of high value house owners etc) to fund the health care of the same elderly affected.
But this distracts from the lack of leadership of the Windsors
I'm not in favour of the monarchy but, tj, I think your last post is...unnecessary.
Your view may be that, as she's a public figure, we can speculate publicly about an unspecified medical procedure.
I don't agree.
Moving on - and being contradictory/hypocritical - I hope that the appearance of trump's hands is a sign he has 'secondary syphilis' (whatever that is) or something much more serious...and terminal.
Whilst as individuals I wish them best health. I find it incredibly irksome how its reported glowingly that they are receiving excellent care whilst so many are still waiting for treatment. Why are they not going through the NHS like any other normal citizen?
I imagine if they were going through NHS there would be another group of people complaining that they are hogging beds from ordinary citizens when clearly they can afford to pay. They can't win (and I'm no royalist). Can you imagine the security impact of the King or future Queen going in for elective surgery in a local NHS hospital? They would inevitably end up disrupting ordinary cases, possibly having an extra ward opened just for them etc. The media would explode.
I get the comments that they are the symptom of a wider issue. I am not particularly radical, I loathe Corbyn as much as Johnson, Truss etc, but surely the Windsors should lead from the front on this?
Most people with even a fraction of their wealth/income probably have private health insurance for precisely this sort of scenario - a comfortable hospital stay without a long wait. Assuming its OK for me to do that (and I know some people believe that it is fundamentally wrong) then I don't see why its not OK for her.
I’m guessing the royal baby machine is having a hysterectomy.
There are many things it could be. I don't really see any advantage in speculating, or that its any of our business.
Interesting attitude about speculating. They put an amount of info into the public domain. Of course folk will speculate. I wonder what the express and mail will have on their front pages 🙂
I imagine if they were going through NHS there would be another group of people complaining that they are hogging beds from ordinary citizens when clearly they can afford to pay. They can’t win
I differ. I think they would be seen as much more part of the country if they didnt choose privilege. When May was PM she still shopped in Waitrose Twyford every saturday at 1-2pm. People ignored her and let her get on with it. I didn't rate her PMship but I respect that.
Most people with even a fraction of their wealth/income probably have private health insurance for precisely this sort of scenario – a comfortable hospital stay without a long wait. Assuming its OK for me to do that (and I know some people believe that it is fundamentally wrong) then I don’t see why its not OK for her.
The difference is they are exceptional leadership figures, so need to show exceptional leadership. I dont assume its ok for anyone frankly, as it becomes part of the same problem undermining the brilliant health service we should have.
What would the impact have been if any of the Windsors had a good whinge about waiting lists if they had been put on them? Wonder how the Mail/Telegraph would have reported that? Would have massively increased the case for a better NHS?
tj - front pages of mail and/or express are irrelevant to all but committed tory voters.
Are you saying the continued fecundity of the royal womb should be a matter of debate - nationally or on STW?
now he’s just getting universally slagged off by by the Mail, Telegraph, Times, Clarkson, Morgan and everyone else who is grifting big cash on the royal soap opera
FTFY etc
Interesting attitude about speculating. They put an amount of info into the public domain. Of course folk will speculate. I wonder what the express and mail will have on their front pages 🙂
Presumably they felt they had to put the information into the public domain because they couldn't rely on either hospital staff respecting patient confidentiality (presumably a much smaller cohort of people know why she's there than know a VIP was coming and the extra complications that would entail) or that the parazzi who follow them everywhere would soon work out there was something going on and hunt for leaks or make shit up. I'm pretty much as far from being a royalist as you can get without actually joining "not my king" protests and getting arrested etc. BUT I think its a bit of a sad situation that they've had to tell the press.
The difference is they are exceptional leadership figures, so need to show exceptional leadership. I dont assume its ok for anyone frankly, as it becomes part of the same problem undermining the brilliant health service we should have.
There are many problems with private healthcare in the UK and the inequality it creates BUT its a benefit offered by many businesses that it would frankly be bizzare if someone on their income and "level of responsibility" within their respective organisations didn't have some sort of arrangement. Whilst within my company we treat it as an "employee benefit", it is also seen as a business benefit - because we potentially get sick people back at work sooner. I know its difficult to see the Royal's "duties" as work - but if you subscribe to that approach then its a no brainer that their employer should want them back in action doing the "great work they do".
What would the impact have been if any of the Windsors had a good whinge about waiting lists if they had been put on them?
Well then they'd have been accused of political interference too. Monarchists seem to like the fact that they don't interfere. The only way they could have shown "great leadership" would have been to quietly wait in line and say nothing bad... ...that's probably not the sort of leadership that's useful (see Mr X, the King has waited months for his op without complaining, so you should too...; yes Mrs Y you are having the same operation that the Princess had, you are quite lucky you've only been off your work for 3 months waiting for this - she was waiting for 6 months, one of her cancellations because of the strikes actually meant her lady in waiting had to reorgnise the holiday she planned to take when she was in hospital, at least you've no staff to inconvenience Mrs Y!)
Wonder how the Mail/Telegraph would have reported that? Would have massively increased the case for a better NHS?
I doubt it. It would just have made people like me say, "well you've got the money, why don't you stop adding to the burden".
When May was PM she still shopped in Waitrose Twyford every saturday at 1-2pm
No greater sign that someone is down with the commoners than shopping in Waitrose! Personally I'd rather she had been worrying a bit less about what was for tuesday night's tea and a bit more about what brexit meant!
The fact that three Royals are all in the papers for medical reasons means that one of them - probably Kate, is having a op that they don't want talked about (Probably hysterectomy). The multiple press teams they hire are trying to pull distraction stories.
They have the funds to go private, many people do. If they went through the NHS, they'd be torn apart for taking up vital services or queue jumping.
I am not particularly radical, I loathe Corbyn as much as Johnson, Truss etc, but surely the Windsors should lead from the front on this?
I am not sure you understand the concept of Royalty
They have the funds to go private, many people do. If they went through the NHS, they’d be torn apart for taking up vital services or queue jumping.
It would be a logistical nightmare to make an NHS hospital suitably secure. Other in-patients wouldn't be allowed visitors, day cases and consultations might be cancelled, etc, etc, so the HRHs would be slagged off for that.
It makes practical sense that they do as lots of other folk do in an environment that effects fewer of the population
I think the health of the Royal family is very much in the public interest given that creating functioning heirs is 90% of the job description. 9% is to have a pulse. The rest is waving.
I mean, it's a ridiculous state of affairs to be in but it's not one I or many others chose. They also didn't choose to be involved in it but they chose to remain a part of it. Sorry, but having every part of their personal health speculated about is just part and parcel of being a member of the Royal family.
I can think of a solution if any of them don't like this arrangement and want a change.
I am not particularly radical, I loathe Corbyn as much as Johnson, Truss etc,
Just as an aside, the definition of radical is someone who doesn't loathe Corbyn as much as Johnson and Truss?
That bar just gets lower and lower, doesn't it?
I differ. I think they would be seen as much more part of the country if they didnt choose privilege. When May was PM she still shopped in Waitrose Twyford every saturday at 1-2pm. People ignored her and let her get on with it. I didn’t rate her PMship but I respect that.
I wonder how much extra the security detail cost us, so she could have a little bit of "normal" time in Waitrose ?
Or did you think she slipped out the back door of No 10 and skipped over the wall for her bit of freedom ? 😉
Or did you think she slipped out the back door of No 10 and skipped over the wall for her bit of freedom ?
I assume she was home for the weekend.
I would also assume not a huge amount (although I cant see the bodyguards being happy with that sort of routine). Our PMs dont quite get the armoured battalion the US president does.
There are many problems with private healthcare in the UK and the inequality it creates BUT its a benefit offered by many businesses that it would frankly be bizzare if someone on their income and “level of responsibility” within their respective organisations didn’t have some sort of arrangement. Whilst within my company we treat it as an “employee benefit”, it is also seen as a business benefit – because we potentially get sick people back at work sooner. I know its difficult to see the Royal’s “duties” as work – but if you subscribe to that approach then its a no brainer that their employer should want them back in action doing the “great work they do”.
The vast majority if the roles I have had - included private medical cover, some you could opt out of and not be personally taxed - but some you could choose not to use, but could not opt out of that part of the package and associated personal tax. Does the employer pay any tax on private healthcare if it is also a business benefit?
I think the health of the Royal family is very much in the public interest given that creating functioning heirs is 90% of the job description. 9% is to have a pulse. The rest is waving.
Bruce - even if you subscribe to that argument, having provided three potential future heirs, I'm not sure the function or otherwise of her uterus is any longer a matter of public interest, especially given she's 42 with a 5, 10 and 8 yr old so it would be no surprise if there were no further contributions to the family tree.
Certainly Charlie's prostrate would be more notable if it was in perfect working order at his age, and the live-in ex-wife of dodgy andy having skin cancer is similarly noteworthy given I seem to recall she spent a lot of the 80/90s on the beach entertaining the paparazzi.
The remarkable thing is not what may or may not be physically wrong with any of them, but that frankly anyone cares.
The fact that three Royals are all in the papers for medical reasons means that one of them – probably Kate, is having a op that they don’t want talked about (Probably hysterectomy). The multiple press teams they hire are trying to pull distraction stories.
Its a bit weird to me that in 2024 hysterectomy is still something that people feel needs some sort of hush about - half the population have a uterus, some of them will need removed, but its her medical details and I don't see why she should feel the need to tell anyone whether its a hysterectomy, a gastic band, apendectomy, polyp or cyst removal, gaul bladder, or any other procedure.
I'm even more cynical than you. When the third story came out - I assumed it was "well Kate and daddy seemed to get a positive response from this, could we tell them about Sarah and see if it can help make me see more normal please, and if they think I'm supporting my ex-wife in these difficult times then maybe they'll forget about this fuss about the young girls"...
Bread and circuses
If you choose to live a public life and put out press releases all the time about stuff including this medical issue then it hard for me to see that we cannot speculate further. If they were living privately it would be different IMO
Not that I really care at all - it was just a throwaway comment
Wish them well, but folk's health problems are not news.
The remarkable thing is not what may or may not be physically wrong with any of them, but that frankly anyone cares.
Yes, I also can't figure out why anyone cares about the Royal family. Oh, wait a minute, yes I can.
I imagine if you are in favour of having a Royal family at all you would be interested in the current one's health. And as someone who is very much against the concept of a Royal family I'm also interested as their very expensive pampered lifestyle (which in order to qualify for you have to be squeezed out of the right vagina or marry someone who was squeezed out of the right vagina) serves to highlight just how unfair society has become in the UK, particularly when it comes to healthcare.
But yes, if you are neither for or against the monarchy then I guess you wouldn't have much interest in the goings on.
Although if you have no interest in the monarchy then what are you doing on this thread?
They couldn't go into a normal NHS hospital for several reasons, one huge one being that they'll be children there and you couldn't have Randy Andy visiting and putting all those young children at risk. He'd then have to give each one 12 million quid for never meeting them.
I'm sure they will be fine with their gifted wealth, palaces etc etc.
They should be torn apart for their latest harbouring of an abuser of young women/children and paying one of them off while still claiming he's never met her. Only the Royal family could get away with this kind of crap in plain sight of the world. Carry on waving your flags people, that'll make everything ok.
If you choose to live a public life
Arguable point for the Royal family, I don't think Charles, William, or young George chose it, did they? I think the UK royal family must be in that group of world-celebrities that have stuff written/photos taken of them regardless of whether if they chose to try to live as private citizens.
Arguable point for the Royal family, I don’t think Charles, William, or young George chose it, did they?
Yep, one of the things that sucks about being a kid is you have very little say in what goes on in your life. Not even if you are Royal.
If their parents have a problem with that they know what they need to do.
And if the kids themselves have a problem with that they know what they need to do as soon as they turn 18.
Charles and William seem to be cool with it. Guess we'll just have to see what George decides.
they could just renounce the whole thing and live quietly.
I'm not sure they could[ live as private citizens]. I think regardless of whether they want to live as a private citizens that the press would just leave them to it. I think they're like the group of celebrities that includes Britney, or Swift the press would camp outside their houses 24/7 JIC.
The difference is they are exceptional leadership figure<br /><br />
Really. Are you sure about that. I don’t see any leadership coming from the windsors. Lots of hot air but no actual action. Don’t forget that this surgery will have been performed by an nhs surgeon moonlighting at his second job often when they should be seeing nhs patients.
Of course they could. they could just renounce the whole thing and live quietly. They deliberately feed the press. Bread and circuses
I know Harry didn’t do a great job of just quietly saying “this is not for me, please leave me alone” but given the hassle he gets when he’s not even renouncing a right to the throne I don’t think William could simply walk away and live quietly. If he did does that mean his son becomes heir? Not easy to imagine how you’d square that circle. Or does he cut the whole line off then and it pops back to Harry!
@Brucewee I’ve said multiple times in this thread Im very much not a monarchist. But I don’t see how it helps my republic thinking to know if she’s having a hysterectomy or any other medical procedure. Charlie’s prostrate might vaguely be relevant as he’s actually king, so if he dies it causes some minor disruption for us all - but it seems to be a fairly routine op for a man of his age with no unusual threat to life so again I can’t see it helps any republican argument either. So, explain it for me, cos I’m obviously being thick how does knowing there is anything happening make any difference to a republican?
Don’t forget that this surgery will have been performed by an nhs surgeon moonlighting at his second job often when they should be seeing nhs patients.
Moonlighting usually suggest the main employer is not aware - that’s a misrepresentation of the situation. The nhs could just pay the surgeons their fair market rate (on the international arena) and provide them with good conditions and tools and they would soon stop the urge to deal with the hoity toity in pompus hotel/hospitals! Alternatively they could cover the costs of training for a degree in medicine (and the registrar exams etc which the nhs don’t pay for) and then have some legitimate “payback” claim for some period of time. I’m not sure the NHS has ever got it’s model right, they’ve done an amazing job of convincing the public that we are all in it together but the people we have most contact with (GPs) are mostly private contractors, the doctors are not that far off the model pre-NHS of doing some private work to pay the bills and some work for the public good to further your career/knowledge/assuage guilt…
So, explain it for me, cos I’m obviously being thick how does knowing there is anything happening make any difference to a republican?
I didn't say it helped you as a republican. If you have a dog in this fight then I don't see how the story isn't of interest.
If the story wasn't reported in the papers I wouldn't give it a second thought. But it was and so I did.
This is one of those weird situations that only really come about when you try to apply the ethics and moralities of 1000 years ago to today where it is possible to be both the perpetrator and the victim. The Royals are every bit as much a victim of the monarchy (and the thinking that goes along with that) as the rest of us are. Probably more so.
You don't think the specifics should be talked about. Well, I'm sorry, but tough shit, they are going to be talked about. And you are just as guilty as the rest of us by jumping into a thread that is discussing this issue, even if it was only to say you think we shouldn't be discussing it.
Like I said, the Royals are the victims of the very institution they embody. I feel sorry for them and angry towards them at the same time.
I'm sure I'm not the only one who has complicated feelings about this (and I also think you have a point that it's distasteful to talk about people's specific health problems when they have chosen not to share the details) but the best way to work through conflicting emotions is to discuss them. And honestly, the Royals are not normal people even by celebrity standards (or rather, they are normal people who find themselves in extraordinary circumstances) and so part of that is that their lives are public property in a way no other celebrities are.
If you don't like that then can I suggest you take no further part in the discussion so the rest of us can figure things out for ourselves?
I didn’t say it helped you as a republican. If you have a dog in this fight then I don’t see how the story isn’t of interest.
You still aren't really explaining why "with a dog in the fight" its interesting to both know she was getting surgery AND speculate on the type
If the story wasn’t reported in the papers I wouldn’t give it a second thought. But it was and so I did.
Similarly. But other than thinking it slightly odd that the details were sparse I didn't feel a need to make up my own interpretation of the facts. Someone, possibly Catherine herself, chose to limit the information that was shared.
The Royals are every bit as much a victim of the monarchy (and the thinking that goes along with that) as the rest of us are. Probably more so.
I totally agree with you there.
You don’t think the specifics should be talked about. Well, I’m sorry, but tough shit, they are going to be talked about.
Well the actual specifics aren't going to be talked about. People are going to speculate about them. Then justify why they should speculate because they are not normal people, and its in the public interest. But actually it makes zero difference to the public if she's having a hysterectomy or has has a long term bowel issue and getting a colostomy bag.
And you are just as guilty as the rest of us by jumping into a thread that is discussing this issue, even if it was only to say you think we shouldn’t be discussing it.
No - I'm not saying people shouldn't talk about her being in hospital. I'm questioning what the point can possibly be of speculating what the medical procedure was. Why can that possibly matter to anyone?
Like I said, the Royals are the victims of the very institution they embody. I feel sorry for them and angry towards them at the same time.
I’m sure I’m not the only one who has complicated feelings about this (and I also think you have a point that it’s distasteful to talk about people’s specific health problems when they have chosen not to share the details) but the best way to work through conflicting emotions is to discuss them.
Well you say that - but then you close with basically saying "if you don't agree with me don't post again!":
If you don’t like that then can I suggest you take no further part in the discussion so the rest of us can figure things out for ourselves?
We don't know how long Kate's procedure has been in the planning, or why she's been frugal with the details she shared. I'm pretty open about most of my body and its faulty bits, but not everyone is, and coming to terms with a problem is something many people find hard. Doing it under the scrutiny of the watching media is unlikely to be easier. So I'm firmly of the view that I can dislike the institution, recognise that the individuals didn't create the institutions themselves but they have more influence than most on how to fix the issues, and at the same time still see that the intricacies of someones reproductive organs, digestive tract and the rest of their abdomen are their own business.
Well you say that – but then you close with basically saying “if you don’t agree with me don’t post again!”:
If you're just here to say, 'Stop talking about it' then I think there's nothing wrong with telling you not posting on the thread is a better way of achieving that outcome than starting a side debate on the ethics of speculating.
We don’t know how long Kate’s procedure has been in the planning, or why she’s been frugal with the details she shared. I’m pretty open about most of my body and its faulty bits, but not everyone is, and coming to terms with a problem is something many people find hard. Doing it under the scrutiny of the watching media is unlikely to be easier. So I’m firmly of the view that I can dislike the institution, recognise that the individuals didn’t create the institutions themselves but they have more influence than most on how to fix the issues, and at the same time still see that the intricacies of someones reproductive organs, digestive tract and the rest of their abdomen are their own business.
I remember last time I was signed off sick my boss was on the phone to me trying to find out what was wrong with me under the guise of 'accommodating my needs'.
He was just being a nosy ****. I'd already told him when I was most likely going to be back and that no amount of accommodating was going to get me back any quicker.
So yeah, partially we're just being nosy ****s with one of our employees (we're paying her wages, after all). At least we aren't phoning her up in bed trying to find out what exactly is wrong with her like us normies have to put up with.