Was it Money that got between Meghan, Duchess of Sussex and her father, Thomas Markle?
No one seems to know for sure because the Duchess of Sussex has yet to write her memoirs or do a sit-down interview where she really tells all. But if one could surmise a probable reason for the breakdown in that father/daughter relationship, one would surmise that it all came down to money.
Here is how we think it went down:
Thomas Markle is a proud, hardworking man who had three children. His last daughter, Meghan Duchess of Sussex was by far the most successful financially. Of his three children, she chose a career in show biz where Mr. Markle had worked for years as a lighting director on top TV shows and a couple of soap operas.
Indeed, it was on the set of one of these soap operas, General Hospital, that a young Meghan made her acting début. By all accounts, Thomas was a father who, at a minimum, provided financial support to his children, including Meghan. He provided food, clothing, tuition fees, and perhaps even a vacation here or there.
Normally, these types of expenses are his legal obligation as the parent. Even if he and Meghan's mother Doria Ragland had never married, and he lived in another state far away from them, he would have been liable for child support to cover costs such as food, clothing and, if both parents wanted their child to have a private school education, he would have had to cover those too. Typically, the financial support of minor children is the responsibility of both parents by law. It is not an option but a legal duty. So for example, if Thomas did not pay these expenses for Meghan or any of his other children, he could have been tossed in jail.
And it seems he paid because there is no evidence that he had ever been brought up for child support arrears or anything of that sort.
Normally, when a parent pays these expenses for his or her child, the child is under no obligation to repay these expenditures. It is not like the parent had "loaned" the child these monies. The law requires the parent to pay and the child has no further obligation to the parent to repay. In part, because the child never entered into a loan agreement with his or her parent. But also because it is the parents' duty to provide for his/her children as it is their choice to reproduce and bring children into the world.
In Meghan's case, we think that the normal rules did not apply. It is our opinion, based on many representations made in the media by members of Meghan's family, that Meghan was expected to repay these expenditures to her father. He has talked a lot about the tuition fees he paid for his daughter and his eldest daughter has done so too. Again, even assuming he did pay all these fees for Meghan, and presumably, for his eldest daughter and his son, none of these children are under any obligation to repay these amounts. There is no indication that his eldest daughter and his son repaid him for any expenditures he made during their rearing.
But it appears that all parties expected Meghan Duchess of Sussex to repay the tuition fees and other expenditures that were made on her behalf by her father. Correct us if we are wrong, but this is the impression we get, based on all that was said by the other members of the family.
The question we have is why are the normal rules not applicable to the Duchess of Sussex? No parent is normally entitled to be repaid for school tuition and other expenses that were paid while the child was a minor and under their care.
It is true that Meghan achieved some success on her show, Suits. It seems this was her first big break. At the time, her father was living in his own home in Mexico. He had retired from a very successful career as a lighting director on some of TV's most successful shows so presumably, he was receiving a pension as well as social security and he presumably also had some money saved up after his lifetime of work. So, when he said on camera once "I don't care, time to take care of daddy," when asked about making money on his daughter's newfound fame, what did he mean?
Did he mean that he expected Meghan to send him a monthly stipend from the money she got for starring on Suits? If so, why? Because he did not have any money to care for himself? Or because he felt she needed to pay back the tuition fees and other expenditures he had made while rearing her? And did he put the same obligations to provide him with a portion of their income on his other two children? If not, why not?
Whatever the real reason is for the breakdown in this father/daughter relationship, the world will probably never hear it directly from the Duchess. But this is our hunch. This is what we think is at the bottom of it. MONEY.
Comments
Post a Comment