Awkward Questions About Beatrice and Eugenie’s Role in Their Parents’ Scandal That Can’t Be Ignored
Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie have so far managed to glide through the chaos of their parents largely unscathed. But this time, things are different.
Prince Andrew and Sarah Ferguson have brought in one royal scandal after another, the most damaging, of course, being their ties to Jeffrey Epstein. Their daughters, Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie, meanwhile, have so far managed to glide through the chaos largely unscathed. But now, awkward questions about the sisters' part in the scandal have surfaced and are impossible to ignore.
Royal commentator Amanda Platell, in her Daily Mail column, asked what role, if any, the two women should continue to play in representing the Crown. When Andrew and, by association, Ferguson relinquished their royal titles over their links to Epstein, many assumed that was the last, merciful curtain call for the Yorks. But no, King Charles and Prince William quickly confirmed that the former Duke’s daughters would remain princesses, with every royal perk intact. “I – and I’m sure many others – am flabbergasted by the decision,” Platell wrote. She added, "Why should we feel a shred of sympathy for the two pampered Princesses who have lived their lives enjoying, unknowingly perhaps, vast privileges and wealth courtesy of their dishonored father and his dodgy millionaire friends?"
The optics are jarring, as per Platell, especially at a time when young Britons are questioning whether the monarchy is “good for Britain” — only 30 per cent of Gen Z say it is. Platell questioned the wisdom of “going out on a limb for two non-working royals who have fed, like blue-blooded leeches, off their parents’ connections.”
In fairness, Beatrice and Eugenie have done their best to edge into respectable territory, launching careers, starting families, and living largely away from the royal spotlight. But even their seemingly ordinary choices can’t quite snuff out the ghosts of privilege. History also has not been in their favor, points out Platell. In 2009, when Epstein had just been released from prison, the then-teenage Princesses were reportedly taken by their mother to meet him in New York. “Not think that it was all a bit odd?” Platell asked. Even taking into account their supposed naivety at the time, it’s a moment that sits uneasily against the backdrop of their father’s later downfall.
Platell outright accuses the two Princesses not of complicity, but of willful blindness. “Ever the loving daughters, they believed their father’s claims that it was all lies,” she wrote. Most damningly, Virginia Giuffre’s memoir Nobody’s Girl, released this week, recalls Andrew telling her, “My daughters are just a little younger than you.”
So where does loyalty end and reputational risk begin? William reportedly wants to ban his uncle from future royal events because of “the message Andrew’s presence sends to the victims of abuse.” If so, Platell argues, the same rule should apply to his daughters. “Every time Beatrice and Eugenie appear in public, they again shine the spotlight on their family’s disgraceful legacy,” she slammed.
She stressed, "If, unlike their parents, they have a shred of decency and indeed care for the future of the royal family, they could completely disappear from royal life and get on with their happy married lives and children, and their successful businesses. That would be the appropriate way to show respect for the enduring pain suffered by Epstein’s victims."
