Is the Queen too old to reign?

[Ibelieveinfairytales]

The Queen will be 82 in April. Is she too old to reign?

If not, how old is too old?

[janet]

I don't think a number can be put on this. The key is the capacity to reign, not an arbitrary number, IMO.

[janet]

Somewhat to topic is this article
tinyurl.com/2ckpzu
Europe's Septuagenarian Sovereigns Are Staying Put

[paulchen]

George V said he hoped nothing would come between Lilibet and the throne. And he was right. She has been the perfect Head of State, the perfect person for the job. She will know when it is the right time to hang her tiara up Then she will appoint a regent.

[janet]

Paul, appointing a regent is out of her hands, isn't it? It's covered by regency acts passed by Parliament.

[paulchen]

I'm not sure Janet. I've had a look and can only find legislation covering a regency in the case of a sovereign being under the age of 18. I can't find anything at the moment about a regency in the case of an aging or frail monarch or, specifically, for HM King George III.

Maybe, as in the case of the Abdication. there would have have to be specific legislation passed.

[janet]

The act in presently effect for this states:
"If a Regency becomes necessary under this Act, the Regent shall be that person who, excluding any persons disqualified under this section, is next in the line of succession to the Crown."

Note: Being under age 18 is a disqualification per the act. One of the possible necessities per the act is the incapacity of the sovereign. Under those terms, should a regency be needed in the future during the reign of Elizabeth II, Prince Charles would automatically be the regent per the act now in force.

[queenk]

That's the beauty of politics and monarchial institutions. You can get as old as you want and old age and wisdom is prized. However with generations growing up on a media soaked diet of the entertainment industry that requires a certain amount of youth, it's not surprising questions like these are popping up.

For instance in the US we are now asking if 71 year old John McCain is too old to become president and I'll admit it gets tiring watching the same people run election year after election year but let's put into consideration that in the US you have to be at least 30 to run for elected office in your state and 35 for president. And remember most people who run for these offices usually take internships in their youth to prepare for this job and you may not get into an elected office the first time you try. So in the US and other countries we should consider this and accept old age.

And yes capability should always be an issue. If the Queen was in really bad shape I would suggest she'd step down for her son or grandson but in her health it's almost like she's 20-30 years younger,

[rjbanks]

I don't think she's too old at all, but the waiting must be agonizing for Prince Charles. I'm inclined to think that the Queen should retire, and let a younger generation move up to the seat.

[HRISMH Duke Rico]

Why question her ablitiy to reign solely on her age, when it is her state of mind that matters. Until she is no longer able to sign her name or think for herself, there is no reason to either depose, ask her to abdicate in favour of her son or put a regentcy in place.

[Ibelieveinfairytales]

True people shouldn't question her ability solely on her age, but it happens. Let me change the scenario:

if she were:

85 but using a walker
90 but using a wheelchair
98 but hard of hearing

In all of the instances I'm offering she is still sharp as a tack. I'm wondering whether the age number with using a walker or a wheelchair or being hard of hearing makes a difference.

[Cinderella]

Personally, I don't think those kinds of disabilities should make a difference if she wanted to keep working. If her energy level started to flag, however, maybe it would be better for her to have the option, if she wished, to retire and enjoy a well-earned rest?

[HRISMH Duke Rico]

Jun 9, 2008 4:12:25 GMT Ibelieveinfairytales said:

True people shouldn't question her ability solely on her age, but it happens. Let me change the scenario:

if she were:

85 but using a walker
90 but using a wheelchair
98 but hard of hearing

In all of the instances I'm offering she is still sharp as a tack. I'm wondering whether the age number with using a walker or a wheelchair or being hard of hearing makes a difference.

None of these would have an effect on ability to do any of the things that she would need to do as soverign.

Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Queen Victoria use a wheel chair near the end of her reign?

[Ibelieveinfairytales]

True, if she was still sharp as a tack it wouldn't affect her ability to reign. My question is whether it changes your perception of her ability to reign. I don't think people, and I'm referring to North America, respect the elderly, regardless of who they are.

Not to start a political discussion, nor am I trying to, but haven't people questioned presidential candidate John McCain's age? He's 72. Running for, arguably, the most powerful position on the face of the earth. He could be the most on the ball person but his age seems to be very important to people when it comes to the job.

I hope the Queen does live a long and healthy life, but if she were 98 it would change my perception of her regardless of her capabilities.

[Aidan Work]

Of course Queen Elizabeth II isn't too old to reign.As for the idea that she should abdicate,that is absolutely preposterous.I've always loved the monarchy,as it is the only institution in New Zealand (as well as in the other Dominions) that is worthy of the respect that it deserves.To me,the monarchy itself represents continuity,& breaking that would spell disaster,as has happened in countries such as both Nepal & Zimbabwe.

Aidan.