Should Queen Elizabeth II abdicate if and when she is unable to perform her duties?

[-:Undertaker:-]

Should Queen Elizabeth II abdicate if and when she is unable to perform her duties?

With the latest European monarch - King Juan Carlos I of Spain (above) - to abdicate within a few days, rumours and opinions on whether Queen Elizabeth II and Queen Margrethe II of Denmark will also abdicate in their old age has been rife. The reason? In recent years, abdication for an elderly monarch has become very much the method preferred on the continent with King Albert II of Belgium, Queen Beatrix I of the Netherlands and Pope Benedict XVI of the Vatican all abdicating within the last year.

The rationale behind abdication is that monarchs no longer need to rule until death as the role is no longer one of executive power and that with life expectancy being so long nowadays, barring unusual circumstances, the heir to the throne (Prince Charles is 66) is increasing near pension age when he or she eventually comes to assume the role of King or Queen. There is also the constitutional confusion that is caused by the question of what happens if the monarch becomes very frail and unable to perform duties, or mentally unstable as the former Queen Juliana of the Netherlands did (although long after she had abdicated).

On the other hand, many - including Queen Elizabeth II - view the role of the sovereign as a religious duty that is meant to be fulfilled until death. The notion of serving until death also has constitutional history in terms of Britain and Denmark, with the Netherlands instead having a century long tradition of abdications.

There are plenty of nifty prizes to be won within this forum. Positive contributions towards official debates will sometimes be rewarded with a month's VIP subscription in a colour of your choice as part of the Top Contributor award. As well as this, reputation will be awarded throughout the debate to those who make valid and constructive posts. Those who make the best contributions within a month win the Debater of the Month award and wins themselves a month's worth of forum VIP and 10 reputation points. Finally, those who create debate topics that generate a lot of buzz and engaging discussion will receive 20 reputation points.

The debate is open to you.

[iBlueBox]

No she should not abdicate. I think when Elizabeth became Queen so young she seen this as her duty in life till her death. It's highly rooted in the British monarchy that monarchs rule to their deaths, (I think only one King has ever abdicated) However when the time comes and she does pass away I really think Charles should abdicate to pass to William. This would change the monarchy dramatically giving it a much younger face and I personally think much more popular.

Its also interesting to see what will happen say if the Queen reaches the age of 100 because quality of life and healthcare has never been good and with many people living a lot longer. I mean what I personally find interesting is if she does reach that age and is unable to care / perform basic duties, would she still rule?

[Zak]

I think there is a very fine line. If our monarch is unable to fulfil their duties to the country maybe it should be considered especially if others are waiting in line for the throne. Not sure what history dictates on abdication, though I doubt it is very prevalent within the British monarchy.

Personally I think if the current monarch is still able to perform even the simplest of duties and represent our country then I think they should continue to reign. If not, then I think abdication could be considered a solution.

[Kardan]

Yes.

The only time I would say otherwise is if the Queen was significantly close to matching Victoria's record.

[GommeInc]

Hmm, it isn't necessary as in our monarchy power is shifted around the royal family and any governors or others in power, so it wouldn't be needed. She just needs to sign stuff of if she was so sick. If she was really ill like her grandfather then maybe it would be best to abdicate but that usually only happens if life expectancy is unlikely to go much further.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Hmm, it isn't necessary as in our monarchy power is shifted around the royal family and any governors or others in power, so it wouldn't be needed. She just needs to sign stuff of if she was so sick. If she was really ill like her grandfather then maybe it would be best to abdicate but that usually only happens if life expectancy is unlikely to go much further.

Even then I wouldn't want her to abdicate, indeed if she became mentally ill then she'd be unable to anyway. The last example of such a crisis was King George III who became mentally unstable in the last decade of his reign, and Prince George (later George VI) simply became acting head of state with the title of Prince-Regent, hence the Regency era, Regents Street in London etc. Plus there's council held in such an event too as you say.

There's been rumours of updating the Regency Act as well, I think Her Majesty has made it clear she won't be leaving under any circumstances.

[iBlueBox]

Even then I wouldn't want her to abdicate, indeed if she became mentally ill then she'd be unable to anyway. The last example of such a crisis was King George III who became mentally unstable in the last decade of his reign, and Prince George (later George VI) simply became acting head of state with the title of Prince-Regent, hence the Regency era, Regents Street in London etc. Plus there's council held in such an event too as you say.

There's been rumours of updating the Regency Act as well, I think Her Majesty has made it clear she won't be leaving under any circumstances.

Does the monarchy still have a privy council?

[Alkaz]

Yes there is still a Privy Council ^

The Queen is 88 and she has served faithfully for the past 62 years and in 450 days will become the longest reigning monarch of the British Empire, ever. I am sure that she is aware of the controversies that go on surrounding the Royal Family and what damage such a significant change could do to the country. Charles and Camilla were previously not allowed to marry due to her being divorced, since the change in public opinion towards them they were eventually allowed to marry. They had the public as well as the Queens seal of approval and public perception of them changed for the good. The same goes for other young royals, in my view especially Eugenie, Beatrice and Harry. Public support for them is strong, I don't think there is any need to mention the popularity of the Cambridges. I think that the Queen feels there is a fantastic young Royal family to succeed her and knows that when the time comes, things will be in good shape for the future. However, as I said before, she has reigned for 62 years and is still in good health so I don't see the need for her to abdicate, nor do I see her giving up her life long allegiance to us just yet.

[Zak]

In addition to my previous comment I don't think Queen Elizabeth herself would ever abdicate. As mentioned she is 88 years old and seems to be a traditionalist. Abdication would be the last thing I would expect from her personally.