Bizarre reason Meghan and Harry will not have custody of their children

The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge have a few unconventional obstacles to jump in raising their three children George, Charlotte and Louis.

First of all, there are the insatiable paparazzi, who are always keen to have the children pop up on their way to school.

Then there are the many confusing royal etiquette rules. Then there are the official royal events, which were not exactly planned with impetuous toddlers in mind.

And finally there is the unusual detention with the queen.

Even the most knowledgeable fan may not know this, but according to royal historians, Prince William and Kate Middleton have no legal custody of their own children.

That belongs in fact to the 92-year-old great-grandmother of the children, Queen Elizabeth II.

"The sovereign has the legal custody of the underage grandchildren," royal expert Marlene Koenig told news.com.au.

"This goes back to King George I [who ruled in the early 1700s]and the law has never changed. He did it because he had a very bad relationship with his son, the future king George II, so they had adopted this law, which meant that the king was the guardian of his grandchildren. & # 39;

The law is more than 300 years old and was adopted by a majority of the 10 of the 12 judges in 1717, who decided the "prerogative of the prince" to his grandchildren and this right of right belongs to His Majesty, King of the Empire even during the life of their father ".

According to Koenig, who has written two books on the history of the British royal family and published dozens of articles in the Eurohistory Journal, the law was re-established in 1772 when King George III was in power and never replaced by new legislation.

The guardianship law still stands and has had an influence over the past decades on how the children maintain their children, especially when it comes to education, travel and education.

"When [Princes Harry and William] small, Prince Charles asked the queen if both children could fly to Scotland together, whereupon the queen said yes, "Koenig said.

"Technically, they needed permission to travel, the queen has the last word about parenting decisions."

It was not the only time that the approval of the queen was asked.

Due to the absence of the Queen's permission, Princess Diana was not allowed to fly to Australia with her children shortly before her death, and Prince Charles had to ask permission before sending William, then a teenager, to a US holiday camp in the late 1990s. .

Another subtle nod to the unusual detention was in the divorce agreements of 1996

between the Duke and Duchess of Wales, Prince Charles and Diana, and the Duke and Duchess of York, Prince Andrew and Sarah Ferguson.

"Storage is not included [in those divorce documents] because they did not have legal custody of their children, "Koenig said.

The law also explains why Princess Diana's wishes for her brother and mother to be Harry and William's legal guardians, as set out in her will, were quickly ignored by the palace. Put simply, Diana did not have the last word about the boys' upbringing or anything to do with the care and control & # 39; from her two sons – the queen did it.

Perhaps frustratingly enough, William and Kate should not expect to get legal custody of their three children legally.

According to Koenig, in the case of the death of the queen, the legal custody of George, Charlotte, Louis and other grandchildren in the palace will be transferred to their grandfather, Prince Charles, who would then be king.

The situation will be the same for future children born from the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle.

Fortunately, Koenig says that the palace in 2018 "does not make a big deal" of the law, and doubts Charles, whom she describes as "very respectful of the parental work of his son", would once again overshad important or meaningful decisions.

He understands that they only want to raise their children … the only thing that Charles could ask for is more photos, & # 39; she joked.