Not ALL Brits Agree With Charles's Method
KirkVin
Daily Mail
1/14/02
Peter McKay
What Harry Needs Is A Firm Hand
Prince Charles's method of dealing with the errant Prince Harry is agonisingly
correct - but was it sensible? After it emerged that Harry had been drinking
alcohol and smoking cannabis, Charles arranged for Prince William to have a
word with him and for his younger son to visit a rehabilitation clinic which
deals with heroin addicts.
No doubt the theory was that Harry would pay more attention to William than he
would do to his father. Visiting a rehab clinic would also serve to remind him
that many other young people have problems with drugs.
But William can't be a substitute father for Harry; and Harry, whatever he said
at the time, is bound to have seen the South London clinic visit as an
embarrassingly symbolic gesture.
Most parents of teenager children will sympathise with Charles; how can they be
kept under surveillance at all times? But Prince Charles has a better chance
of doing that than most of us.
For reasons of security, Harry and William enjoy (or otherwise) round-the-clock
police protection; besides (as Richard Kay discussed in Saturday's Mail)
Charles has a staff of 85.
Personally, I'd have been happier to read that he'd given Harry a right royal
roasting, reminding him of his privileged position and then taken strong
measures to tighten up his son's private life and friendships. Futile, maybe,
but better than the New Agey concept of visiting Featherstone Lodge
rehabilitation unit in Peckham.
Was Charles over-concerned about how *he* would be seen in light of Harry's
misbehaviour? Perhaps so.
Certainly he was well rewarded for his candour by the newspaper which first
carried the 'Harry's drugs shame' story yesterday.
The News of the World editorial comment, headlined 'Courage of a wise and
loving dad', concluded: 'As a shining and enviable example of wisdom among the
Windsors, he emerges as a modern King in the making.'
Talk about snatching victory from the jaws of defeat.
brit
>
> >Here is a dissenting view of Charles's method of handling Harry:
> >
> >Daily Mail
> >1/14/02
> >Peter McKay
> >
> >What Harry Needs Is A Firm Hand
> >
> >Prince Charles's method of dealing with the errant Prince Harry is
agonisingly
> >correct - but was it sensible? After it emerged that Harry had been
drinking
> >alcohol and smoking cannabis, Charles arranged for Prince William to have
a
> >word with him and for his younger son to visit a rehabilitation clinic
which
> >deals with heroin addicts.
> >
> <snip>
>
> But of course not everyone agrees! Surely you didn't think they
> would? ;-)
>
...and secondary to that...how does the writer know that Charles DID'T read
Harry the riot act in PRIVATE, at home???..(as most parents would
do,..?)...There is far too much surmising about this subject!
brit
Susan T
@INREACH.COM says...
If Charles did read Harry the riot act, it didn't do much good, because
the day before Harry's visit to rehab, Harry attended a polo match with
his father and Harry was photographer chatting to Guy Pelly, the same
bloke who has been named as having introduced Harry to cannabis in the
first place.
--
Susan T
This Just In! - Links to the latest on-line articles about the Royals
http://croneprincess.home.att.net/news.html
KirkVin
> >
> >Daily Mail
> >1/14/02
> >Peter McKay
> >
> >What Harry Needs Is A Firm Hand
> >
> >Prince Charles's method of dealing with the errant Prince Harry is
agonisingly
> >correct - but was it sensible? After it emerged that Harry had been
drinking
> >alcohol and smoking cannabis, Charles arranged for Prince William to have
a
> >word with him and for his younger son to visit a rehabilitation clinic
which
> >deals with heroin addicts.
> >
> <snip>
>
> But of course not everyone agrees! Surely you didn't think they
> would? ;-)
**********************
But then doesn't this put McKay in league with us ignorant Yanks?!?!
Ellie
**********************
...and secondary to that...how does the writer know that Charles DID'T read
Harry the riot act in PRIVATE, at home???..(as most parents would
do,..?)...There is far too much surmising about this subject!
brit
==========
If Charles did read Harry the riot act, it didn't do much good, because
the day before Harry's visit to rehab, Harry attended a polo match with
his father and Harry was photographer chatting to Guy Pelly, the same
bloke who has been named as having introduced Harry to cannabis in the
first place.
*************************
Plus if Charles HAD read Harry the riot act, Bolland would have told us! In
fact, it was specifically reported that Charles DID NOT read him the riot act.
I believe *quiet questioning* was one of the terms used.
Ellie
Mackerelcove
controls. There is nothing wrong with punishment for his illegal acts, I'm not
talking about jail time but of firm parental controls. I know it's not a
popular theory these days, but our children are our responsibility, they have
been given into our care and need our attention. Obviously he isn't getting
it. And while I know that old story of his father is a busy man, I'd only ask
which is more important his son or his activities. Lets face it, his job is
little more than cosmetic at this point in time and his responsibility to his
sons should take pecedence..
Tom
> If Charles did read Harry the riot act, it didn't do much good, because
> the day before Harry's visit to rehab, Harry attended a polo match with
> his father and Harry was photographer chatting to Guy Pelly, the same
> bloke who has been named as having introduced Harry to cannabis in the
> first place.
Which Pelly denies. So, who really knows the truth? The only truth
is the media again is showing an "odious exhibition of... dabbling
their fingers in the stuff of other peoples souls..."
Susan Cohen
Mackerelcove wrote:
You ouldn;t say that if you had to do it, even for a few days.
Of course, neither you nor I *would* be *able* to do a
great deal of it, we knowing nothing about (just a ferinstance)
internecine Duchy affairs.....
> and his responsibility to his
> sons should take pecedence..
It does. Just not as publicly as other people seem to demand.
SusanC
"I'm so happy, I could scalp someone!"
Mark Twain
Susan T
toml...@hotmail.com says...
===========
And the other man named, James Mulholland, has also issued a denial and
feels he's being made a scapegoat.
From the Mail on Sunday:
(the reporter is referring to James's father)
He said his son had not been in contact with St James's Palace. But it
is thought that a friend of William or Harry - or an intermediary - had
advised James to contact Guy Black, chairman of the Press Complaints
Commission. However, rather oddly, he had apparently been advised not to
make a complaint against the Press.
The article also mentions that James had been invited to celebrate New
Year's Eve with William and Harry, but had declined the invitation
because he was going to Scotland.
So he's been named as part of the bad crowd that led Harry astray, yet
invited to spend New Year's Eve with Harry and William.
http://www.femail.co.uk/pages/standard/article.html?in_article_id=95701
&in_page_id=2