The controversies and irregularities surrounding Meghan Markle, Prince Harry, and their son, Prince Archie of Sussex, born on May 6, 2019, h...
The controversies and irregularities surrounding Meghan Markle, Prince Harry, and their son, Prince Archie of Sussex, born on May 6, 2019, have fueled a firestorm of speculation, conspiracy theories, and public scrutiny that have dogged the couple since their marriage in 2018. These controversies, often amplified by tabloid media, social media platforms like X, and a segment of vocal detractors, include allegations ranging from Meghan faking her pregnancy to claims that Archie is not a real child or that Meghan had a child prior to Archie. The accusations, which range from plausible concerns about transparency to outright fantastical narratives, have been used to question the legitimacy of the Sussexes’ children and their place in the British royal family’s line of succession. Below is a comprehensive, critical examination of these claims, their origins, the evidence (or lack thereof), and the broader implications, while condemning the perpetuation of unfounded narratives that have caused harm to the family and distorted public discourse.
Origins of the Controversies
The controversies surrounding Meghan Markle and Prince Archie stem from a combination of factors: the intense media scrutiny of the British royal family, Meghan’s status as an outsider (an American, biracial, former actress), and the couple’s decision to step back from royal duties in 2020, which alienated some royalists and fueled distrust. The birth of Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor in 2019 became a lightning rod for speculation, particularly because Harry and Meghan chose to handle the announcement and presentation of their newborn differently from royal tradition. Unlike Prince William and Kate Middleton, who followed the custom of posing with their newborns outside the hospital shortly after birth, Harry and Meghan delayed Archie’s public introduction, opting for a private photocall at Windsor Castle two days later. This break from tradition was interpreted by some as secretive or evasive, planting seeds of suspicion.
The narrative gained traction with claims from Meghan’s estranged family members, particularly her father, Thomas Markle, and half-sister, Samantha Markle. In early 2025, reports surfaced, primarily from outlets like Radar Online, quoting a “highly placed palace courtier” alleging that Buckingham Palace was under pressure to remove Archie and his sister, Princess Lilibet, from the royal line of succession unless Meghan provided “absolute proof” that she physically gave birth to them. These claims were fueled by Samantha Markle’s public statements suggesting that if the Sussexes used a surrogate, they should have disclosed it. Such accusations were not new; social media campaigns, often under hashtags like #SussexBabyScam, had been circulating for years, alleging that Meghan used a “moonbump” (a prosthetic baby bump) to fake her pregnancy.
Additionally, some conspiracy theorists pointed to inconsistencies in the timeline of Archie’s birth announcement and the amendment of his birth certificate as evidence of deception. For instance, Buckingham Palace announced Meghan was in labor seven hours after Archie’s delivery, and Prince Harry’s memoir Spare noted they were home two hours after the birth, which critics argued was implausible for a mother who had just given birth. The birth certificate, initially listing Meghan as “Rachel Meghan” and later amended to “Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Sussex,” was cited as further evidence of irregularity, with some suggesting it was a deliberate snub to other royals or a cover-up.
Perhaps the most outlandish claim is that Meghan had a child before Archie, a narrative with little to no credible evidence but which persists in certain online circles. This allegation often intertwines with the broader conspiracy that Archie himself is not real, with detractors claiming that different children have been used to portray him in public appearances or that he was born via surrogate and thus ineligible for the line of succession.
Critical Examination of the Claims
1. Allegations of a Fake Pregnancy
The claim that Meghan faked her pregnancy with Archie is rooted in a mix of misogynistic tropes, racial bias, and distrust of the couple’s non-traditional approach to royal life. Social media posts on X have repeatedly referenced a “moonbump,” alleging that Meghan wore a prosthetic to simulate pregnancy. A particularly bizarre example came in 2025 when a video of Meghan and Harry dancing in a hospital setting was labeled by some X users as “faked” or “AI-generated,” with critics claiming it was evidence she was never pregnant. These claims lack any substantive evidence and rely on cherry-picked images or videos, often taken out of context, to fuel speculation.
Medical and logistical realities debunk these theories. Archie was born at the Portland Hospital in London, a well-documented fact confirmed by his birth certificate, which lists Meghan as the mother. While critics have pointed out the absence of a doctor’s signature on the birth certificate (unlike previous royal births), this is not evidence of fraud but rather a reflection of the Sussexes’ desire for privacy, as they opted not to follow the traditional public announcement protocol. Furthermore, the notion that Meghan could orchestrate a fake pregnancy while under intense global scrutiny, including during public appearances and a royal tour to South Africa with a four-month-old Archie, defies reason.
The accusation also ignores the couple’s documented efforts to protect their children’s privacy. Harry and Meghan have consistently limited public exposure of Archie and Lilibet, sharing only carefully curated images or videos that often obscure their faces. This approach, while understandable given the couple’s experiences with invasive media and online harassment, has paradoxically fueled speculation that they are hiding something.
2. Surrogacy Allegations and Line of Succession
The surrogacy narrative, amplified by Meghan’s estranged family, hinges on the argument that if Archie and Lilibet were born via surrogate, they would be ineligible for the British throne’s line of succession, which traditionally requires direct biological descent. This claim has been used to question the legitimacy of Archie’s sixth place in the line of succession (and Lilibet’s seventh). However, there is no evidence to support the surrogacy claim, and it relies heavily on speculation rather than fact.
Buckingham Palace has not publicly addressed these allegations, likely because they are considered baseless and inflammatory. The birth certificates for both Archie and Lilibet, publicly available and reported by credible outlets like TMZ and People, confirm Meghan as the mother and Harry as the father. Furthermore, the Sussexes’ decision to amend Archie’s birth certificate to reflect Meghan’s title rather than her given name is not unusual; similar adjustments were made to Harry’s own birth certificate, where his mother, Princess Diana, was listed as “Her Royal Highness the Princess of Wales.” Critics like royal commentator Lady Colin Campbell, who called the amendment “extraordinary,” have been accused of exaggerating its significance to fuel drama.
The surrogacy narrative also reflects a misunderstanding of royal protocol. While the line of succession historically prioritizes biological descendants, there is no explicit rule barring children born via surrogate, especially in modern times when assisted reproductive technologies are common. The insistence on “proof” of Meghan’s pregnancies, as demanded by some sources, is not only invasive but also discriminatory, as it disproportionately targets Meghan compared to other royals.
3. Claims of a Child Before Archie
The allegation that Meghan had a child before Archie is perhaps the least substantiated of all claims, rooted entirely in rumor and lacking any credible documentation or testimony. This narrative appears to have emerged from online conspiracy communities, possibly as an extension of efforts to discredit Meghan’s character or question her suitability as a royal. No reputable source has provided evidence of a prior child, and Meghan’s well-documented life as an actress and public figure before her marriage to Harry offers no indication of such a scenario. This claim seems designed to sensationalize and dehumanize Meghan, reducing her to a caricature of deceit.
4. Racial and Gendered Undertones
A critical lens reveals that many of these accusations are steeped in racial and gendered bias. Meghan, as a biracial woman, has faced disproportionate scrutiny compared to other royals. During her 2021 Oprah Winfrey interview, she revealed that conversations within the royal family about Archie’s potential skin color occurred while she was pregnant, suggesting racial bias influenced discussions about his title and security. The persistent narrative that Archie is “not real” or that Meghan faked her pregnancy echoes historical tropes of questioning the legitimacy of women of color in positions of power, casting them as untrustworthy or manipulative.
The misogyny is equally evident. Meghan’s decision to prioritize privacy, her confident public demeanor, and her refusal to conform to traditional royal expectations have been weaponized against her. For example, social media trolls criticized her for how she held Archie during a 2019 polo match, claiming she lacked “maternal instincts,” despite pediatric experts confirming she was holding him correctly. These attacks reflect a double standard, as other royal mothers, like Kate Middleton, have not faced similar public shaming for their parenting choices.
Condemnation of the Narrative
The perpetuation of these baseless claims is not only irresponsible but also deeply harmful. The Sussexes have been open about the toll of media harassment and online hate, with Meghan discussing her mental health struggles during pregnancy and Harry citing the loss of his mother, Princess Diana, as a driving factor in his desire to protect his family. The conspiracy theories, particularly those amplified on platforms like X, contribute to a toxic environment that endangers the family’s safety. In 2022, the Metropolitan Police’s former head of counterterrorism highlighted “disgusting and very real” threats against the Sussexes from right-wing extremists, underscoring the real-world consequences of such narratives.
The media’s role in amplifying these claims is equally condemnable. Outlets like Radar Online and The Sun have been criticized for publishing inflammatory stories based on anonymous sources or discredited figures like Samantha Markle, who has a documented history of profiting from her estrangement from Meghan. These stories exploit public curiosity about the royal family while ignoring the human cost to the individuals targeted. The lack of accountability for such reporting perpetuates a cycle of misinformation that thrives on clicks and sensationalism.
Moreover, the focus on Archie’s legitimacy distracts from more substantive issues, such as the Sussexes’ advocacy for online safety through their Archewell Foundation or their efforts to raise their children away from the public eye. By fixating on unfounded conspiracies, detractors undermine the couple’s right to privacy and their children’s right to a safe, normal upbringing.
Broader Implications
The line of succession debate also highlights tensions within the royal family about modernization. King Charles III’s reported desire for a “slimmed-down monarchy” has been cited as a reason for initial delays in granting Archie and Lilibet their prince and princess titles, which were only formalized in 2023 after Charles’s accession. This delay, combined with Meghan’s Oprah interview revelation about racial concerns within the palace, has lent credence to perceptions of institutional bias, even if the surrogacy claims are baseless.
Conclusion
The allegations that Meghan Markle faked her pregnancy with Archie, used a surrogate, or had a child before him are rooted in a toxic mix of misinformation, bias, and resentment toward the Sussexes’ divergence from royal norms. These claims lack credible evidence and rely on speculation, inconsistencies in public announcements, and the testimony of estranged family members with questionable motives. The birth certificate amendments, delays in announcements, and the couple’s privacy measures are not proof of deceit but rather reflections of their desire to shield their family from a hostile media environment.
The perpetuation of these narratives is a condemnation-worthy assault on the Sussexes’ dignity and safety, driven by a media ecosystem that prioritizes sensationalism over truth and by online communities that amplify hate under the guise of skepticism. Meghan and Harry have consistently demonstrated their commitment to their children, sharing glimpses of Archie and Lilibet in controlled settings while advocating for their privacy. The public should reject these baseless conspiracies and focus on the Sussexes’ contributions, such as their philanthropy and efforts to combat online harm, rather than fueling a cycle of vitriol that harms not only the family but also the integrity of public discourse.
