The renown of a royal child with a disability

Those eyelids don't lie.

These are some inspiring stories of children with Downs.

The sad story of Prince John. Apparently John is considered unlucky as a name in the British royal family.

Yikes! R3, is this what you had in mind?

37 is awfully old to be having your first child.

[quote]Down syndrome is the most commonly occurring chromosomal condition. Approximately one in every 700 babies in the United States is born with Down syndrome, or around 6,000 births per year. ... However, the likelihood of having a child with Down syndrome increases with the age of the mother, especially after age 35.

Here's a lovely story about a girl with Downs. Imagine how much her condition could be promoted with more information and a higher profile.

Jamie Brewer from American Horror Story has Downs.

R6 - If their child had Down's Syndrome, they would have announced it.

Archie doesn't remotely look like a Down's Syndrome baby, despite attempts to assert that his eyelids give it away - the eyes of DS babies are slanted upward, his are not, and their faces are flattened, his is not; and DS babies also exhibit widely spaced first and second toes on the feet that also show heavy wrinkling; Archie's feet were shown in closeup in the Mother's Day photo; they did not show either characteristic.

And 37 is not "awfully old" to be having a first child, it is somewhat old, which is why all pregnant women over 35 routinely undergo amniocentesis, whether or not it's a first pregnancy. Do you seriously believe the Sussexes would not have known after the test and had a private termination that is announced as a "miscarriage"?!

Women in their twenties and early thirties also have babies with Down's Syndrome. The prevalence rises at 35 to 1 in 350. It is by no means a certainty.

But regardless of all that, I suggest googling images of Down's Syndrome newborns before posting nonesense like this.

They tried to say the same thing about Prince Louis. He isn't a DS baby, and neither is Archie.

Are you sure, R9? After all, if you wear your pregnancy dress at the 11th week to your cousin-by-marriage's wedding, it's a wee bit early for those genetic test results. Maybe karma came for ye?

[quote][R6] - If their child had Down's Syndrome, they would have announced it.

I never said he was although I can see why you might infer that.

The little guy's eyelids definitely look like a genetic syndrome is in the mix! Between the eyefolds and the low ears, anyone in healthcare can see this coming.

Of course, if it is just an awkward release of photos, that would be easy for the Sussexs to correct. However, if the wee fellow is the new prince of special needs, I for one would love to see his status elevated if only for that reason.

This thread may have just hit a brand new low.

Because we hate people with special needs, R13? Isn't Invictus close to Harry's heart? Didn't Diana love everyone regardless of their abilities?

Do people with disabilities embarrass you? Should they be ashamed of themselves? Are they not good enough for your consideration?

Perhaps you want to rethink what's "worthy" and what's "low"?

R1 - No, they aren't lying - because they aren't the eyelids of a DS baby.

Epicanthic folds are not ipso facto evidence of DS. I know Hungarians with epicanthic folds. In fact, a friend who emigrated here from Hungary has one eye with an epicanthic fold and one without. He jokes about it and refers to himself as "half Mongol" as the Mongols swept down from the steppes of Central Asia and left quite a bit of DNA in the region.

If you google images of Doria Raglans, you'll see a slightly similar hint of Asiatic shape to her eyes. That's the only "genetic syndrome" in the mix.

There is no way to hide a DS baby. He isn't the new "prince of special needs" because1) he isn't a SN child, and 2) he isn't Prince of anything at all and he's guaranteed not to be after his parents' ridiculous hysteria over his "private citizen" status.

Unless you want to add a new SN classification: a mother with NPD obsessed with control, and a father using her to stick it to his family.

On those characteristics, Archie definitely qualifies.

There is nothing wrong with that baby.

Just stop.

R15, with all due respect, you're wrong. Between the eyelids and the ears, Archie looks like a Downs baby. And that's wonderful! It is a community that could use an adorable champion!

Sure, it explains why they're so reticent to share details, but at the end of the day it's best for all. The families of children with Downs are delighted to welcome Archie Harrison.

In the absence of other photographs or news from Buckingham Palace, the visual evidence is very convincing.

R10 - amnio is performed between the 14th-20th weeks. The BRF announced she had just had her 12-week scan. There was no bump visible, she wore the coat because she was unable to resist claiming some of that televised attention for herself.

There's no karma, there's no mystery, women over 35 have non-DS babies all the time, which is what this woman did; epicanthic folds are not unique to DS babies; and if she and Harry had had a DS baby, they would know they couldn't keep it secret and would have either announced it or had a termination that would have been presented as a miscarriage.

No flat face, no upward slanting eyes, no unusual spread between first and second toes, no excessive wrinkling on soles of feet, no announcement by BRF or Sussexes . . .

But hey, go ahead, insist he's got DS, and we'll talk in a few years after it's become obvious that you were blowing smoke up everyone's arses with this.

BTW, where did you say you studied paediatric medicine?

R16, How dare you?! There's nothing wrong with any baby! Downs babies are as loved as any others!

This was likely posted by a Markle fan. They are attempting to get the BRF threads shut down for good. All because those posters do not kiss Markle's ass enough. Ignore.

Not on DL. We hate retards.

Ha ha ha! You're all vile cretins looking for any kind of validation.

R21, And fags.

All the hate. All the time.

R17 - Oh, ffs, just stop it. He's missing every single obvious sign of DS, from the feet to the face. He's got round eyes, folds or no folds, a full not the tell-tale flat face, and perfectly normal hands and normal feet.

The photographic evidence is only convincing to people determined to see what they want to see. You'll have to find your royal representative somewhere else.

The secrecy bullshit was just that: bullshit. Archie has a controlling narcissist for a mother and dim-witted spoilt petulant prat for a father.

FFS, the kid's got enough problems.

OP is the author of half the posts on this ridiculous thread.

Don’t feed the (obvious) troll.

Just because you hate people with Down Syndrom doesn't mean that the BRF does, or that everyone else does.

* Archie's eyefolds look like Downs * Archie's ears are low like Downs * Meghan is still fat - which would make sense if Archie has Down Syndrome and can't breastfeed

Maybe he doesn't have Down Syndrome, but it wouldn't be the worst thing in the world if he did. He would be loved and cherished by millions and would bring a smiling, important face to an underappreciated condition.

Of all people, Diana's son would be an excellent father and honorable face for the condition.

You have to wonder what's wrong with yourself to suggest anything otherwise.

If her child did have DS, do you think the public would back off the MM hate? I believe they would.

Down, not Downs or Down's. At least get it right, OP.

[quote]If her child did have DS, do you think the public would back off the MM hate? I believe they would.

Or would they blame her for introducing another undesirable, flawed, or otherwise not esteemable element to the already-faltering and imperfect royal family.

They want their royals to be picture perfect - that's why they love the tidy picture William and Kate have created.

You queens are ridiculous with this D'S shit. Memory serving, you said the same bs about baby Huey.....er, Louis.

[quote]37 is awfully old to be having your first child.

No, it’s not.

The 70 year old Nurse Troll has been on a psychotic break since DL made the BRF threads subscriber only. Very young babies have eyes buried in fatty folds. Their faces in general tend to be plump. The eyes become more prominent as they get a little older.

Archie's gaze is far too direct and sharp for him to be a Down Syndrome child. His face is round and full, not flat.

It's disgusting that the Nurse Troll has gone off like this.

Gone off her MEDS like this!

R33, yep!

Her Seroquel script ran out over the weekend and she's having a full blown episode.

Hey, Nurse Troll! Check out this photo of your beloved Charlotte. She also has a big fold over her eyes!

Lots of different genetic mixes have the epicanthic fold. My daughter is platinum blonde with ice blue eyes and has the epicanthic fold. Nordic genes, not Downs.

R36, true. All Chinese, Korean, Japanese and Thai people have it too. A very common cosmetic procedure removes it and opens up the eyes.

Who goddamn knows with Magic Marker and Prince Hazard if the kid has a disablility? Because we've never seen a wriggling, blinking Master Archie only stage-managed PR bullshit.

Tell me that I'm lying have you seen Master Archie squirm, cry, or wriggle? Nada. Stills only so as far as I'm concerned they're still running the Harkle show and we really have no fucking idea what is real and what isn't. Sure, the kid is cute and could and possibly be their DNA spawn incubated by a surrogate, again, who the fuck knows with them.

Will's bitchy prissily sour mug brought "the scarfing" back to life, he's his mother's son for sure.

As I predicted, Magic Marker is on a downward sloppy middle age spread spiral but don't worry she'll be back on the Adderall in no time.

The fact that no one knows anything for sure doesn't ipso facto mean it's anything but the simplest, most obvious truth: Harry and Meghan had a baby and the baby looks like both of them and perfectly healthy, there was no surrogate, the legal implications in Britain would have made it more trouble than it's worth to hide when she obviously was able to do it on her own.

We already know most of the family cannot stand her, especially William and Andrew, so all William's expression says is what we all expected: "I'm taking one for the side otherwise I wouldn't be here."

The Harkle shitshow has nothing to do with DNA, surrogates, or conspiracies. The only things it has to do with are an angry spoilt confused younger brother who found a woman who could make him feel that he was entitled to be just as important as Big Bro and with her help, that's what he could be. She just happened to forget that the people whose permission and status she needs to pull it off have the money without which she can't turn herself and Harry into Bill and Melinda Gates or George and Amal Clooney. Gates and Clooney made their own money, but Harry has to turn to Papa and Gran for his, and there they are, fobbed off with that third-rate official residence, no real base in one of the starriest hoppin' capitals in the world, and the UK press that they so unwisely threatened at Meghan's urging before they were even engaged are now running a vicious PR war against them. And, they're being booted out of the UK as far as is decently possible to leave the home turf to the far more important Cambridges, who now look golden thanks to Harry's and Meghan's really staggering ability to turn gold into straw.

That's all it is. The secrecy nonesense is Meghan playing the only role she really does well: Drama Queen, using Harry's resentful persona as the engine.

They alienated the UK press before they were even engaged, started alienating the Queen before the wedding even took place, alienated the rest of the family in the ensuing months, particularly William and Andrew, and like all narcissistic paranoids, they're now blaming everyone (including the Cambridges and the UK press) for their woes, instead of themselves.

There's no surrogate, there's not DS baby, although I wouldn't be at all surprised if recreational drugs of varied kinds weren't part of their home entertainment system.

They probably can't wait to leave the UK, and the BRF probably can't wait to see them go.

That's really all there is to this story.

[quote]After all, if you wear your pregnancy dress at the 11th week to your cousin-by-marriage's wedding, it's a wee bit early for those genetic test results. Maybe karma came for ye?

Absolutely insufferable. You're a whole mess and you don't even realize it.

R20 has been claiming that all the nasty shit her pals post on here is actually written by secret Meghan fans trying to get her precious threads shut down. No one has ever believed it, yet she keeps peddling it.

I wouldn't say no one has ever believed it. The speed with which some of those threads got greyed out and shut down when criticism of Meghan Markle was to the fore was quite suspicious. As I also check in with the meghanfraustands on CB regularly, I recently happened onto one post in which the poster stated that she read DL.

It's a much more likely scenario than Archie being a DS baby or having been incubated by a surrogate, or secretly adopted, or, gawd 'elp us: a lifelike doll.

This thread got greyed out because: 1) it’s disgusting; 2) it’s disgusting especially since it involves an innocent kid and 3) it’s obviously created by a troll. Nothing to do with anything but that.

R43 - Nn my end, at least, the thread isn't greyed out. It was the Dangling Tendrils threads, morphing into the BRF threads, that somehow got mysteriously greyed out as soon as heated criticism of Meghan Markle began to emerge.

I agree, however, that the attempt here to use a two-month old infant to serve a sociopolitical purpose is revolting, not least because it is obvious to anyone with eyes that Archie isn't the poster child they wish he were.

Someone tell 501 on the BRF 84 thread that, yes, someone has managed to take down the Sussexes, Cambs, etc. thread already. This is war. Someone put up another with a different name - you know, Windsors Galore or Crowns Moulding, something we can recognise.

[quote] This is war.

Oh my.

R45 We don't need prefects or Head Girls telling us what we can and cannot discuss on DL. It's one thing to close a particular thread to all but subscribers. It's quite another to close a particular topic completely, or to allow hysterical fraus of a particular member of the British Royal Family to dictate terms, as well. Whichever it is, it's wrong.

Little Archie Christening Photo Part 2 thread is gaining traction.

A lot of the BRF posters are gathering there..

This feels...almost....tribal.

Thank God the Tiara Troll and that fishwife who peppers the thread with random pictures of royal personages haven't found the Christening threads.

'This is war.'

Stupid Welp Troll.