As her doctor, should you be revealing her medical history?

A good friend of mine has a condition which means she doesn't have regular periods, if at all. Two weeks ago she discovered she's 6 months pregnant and due in February. Unfortunately for her, and more importantly the wee bairn, she's a massive drinker, a 'socialite' on the wine at lunch and every night with the soaps, and plenty of beer at the weekends. She even went to Oktoberfest.

My Mrs is currently 4 months pregnant.

She only vomited once or twice but suffered oodles of retching - any smell would set her off. Seems to have calmed down and all going well.

Well actually that's not true. Spondylarthritis, 2 slipped discs, hypermobility and fibromyalgia and the fact a stupid consultant needlessly took her off all medication straight away means she can barely walk without crutches and is in constant agony, but fingers crossed it'll all be worth it. Baba is fine & growing nicely.

As for Kate & Wills - good luck to 'em.

Careful, if you're not nice he'll accuse you of being a sheep, make some strange noises, have a paddy and then lock the thread.

The crock comes from you supposing that once she's had a baby or 2 then she will be surplus to requirements. Charlie may have been a complete lover and was in love with Camilla, but Diana did naively actually love the guy. Everything that I've read about William is that he's nothing like his father and this is a couple that do actually love each other.

Congtats Cronus. And for the very reason you have quoted about Mrs Cronus is why I am chosing not to have children (apart from the fact I have no maternal bone in my body

). I totally understand what she must be going through, its hard enough looking after yourself with the condition let alone a dependant baby. Good luck to you both and hope she can get back on her meds soon after the babys born.

I think that's exactly the sort of behaviour currently being addressed by Leveson. It's far from a thing of the past.

Well congratulations to them and I hope it goes well.

As someone sarcastically added in the comments to the Daily Mail website's story - they will be pleased - makes life easy for them for the next 6 months! (I would suggest rather more than 6 months if things go well with the pregnancy / birth).

Sure enough, today their website is in over-drive - even computerised mock ups of what the child might look like if it's a boy or a girl. Quite frankly, I think that is distateful. What about Leveson?

Leveson is an attack on a free press and the ability of newspapers to commoditise the private lives of others, and sexualise underage girls for profit.

I thought he wasn't allowed to marry Camilla because she's a Cathoilc.

He wasn't allowed to marry Camilla because she was married.
At that time.

Ah yes, the old "But you're already married!" ploy.

What about Leveson?
I wasn't aware that it covered taste.

Thank you White Star!

Aye, it's hard going and she's only about halfway through. We had a plan of medication and pain relief worked out with our rheumatologist who then retired, and the new chap has decided he's not interested and dismissed her entirely. Amongst other things he said, "I know I've only seen you once but I won't be seeing you again." I've complained and we're hopefully being referred elsewhere.

She had chosen medication that allowed us to try for a baby but wasn't the strongest. Once she's given birth she'll be able to go on the strongest medication which is the difference between being able to walk, care for the baby and perhaps even go back to work, or hobbling around on crutches and being bed-ridden. I know you understand this all too well - just wish our bloody rheumatologist did!

Sounds to me hounding (intrusion of privacy at an emotional time) of the would be parents and the potential offspring (in advance of being born).

Mores the pity.

It's certainly the child's future assuming the country remains a Monarchy but what has them taking the throne got to do with the future of our country? What the future holds for the UK will be decided by events such as the referendum on Scottish Independence, what our relationship with the EU becomes, what sort of government is elected and the rise of other economic powers such as China and Brazil and similar issues. So the future of our country certainly isn't a reason to take any more interest in this pregnancy IMO than that of any other "celeb" which is basically what these young royals are.

It's just more "celeb" culture that manages to rope in those who would ordinarily shy away from taking an interest in the Beckham's, Jordan's and whoever else you care to think of.

Sounds like you've got a diamond woman there.

Spot on.

Being the UK's monarch does not require any special skills these days beyond that of not killing the goose that lays the golden eggs.

Well said.

And like any celeb that doesn't like the press intrusion into their private lives, they have the means to remove themselves from the public eye, if they so choose.

It is mere speculation of what a child is going to look like, not hounding of anyone.
It is not possible to hound potential offspring.

They're alive from the moment of conception, don't you know?

Congrats to them both.

Well, a child won't have that option.

And I would also say that being in "the public eye" does not mean you should have to face intrusion.

Write a book – lose all privacy?

Make a film – lose all privacy?

It shouldn't be seen as a logical process that simply being in the public eye means a loss of privacy.