Meghan Markle denies ‘offensive’ claims she removed her name from Archie’s birth certificate as a ‘calculated family snub’

  • We earn a commission for products purchased through some links in this article.
  • Meghan Markle has claimed that the removal of her non-royal names from baby Archie's birth certificate was not her own decision.


    Duchess Meghan, who shares one-year-old Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor with Prince Harry, explained in a recent statement that the removal of Rachel Meghan from the document was “dictated by The Palace”.

    When Archie was born in May 2019, his birth was registered with the former Suits actress’ Christian names, however this was later removed and replaced with Her Royal Highness, the Duchess of Sussex.

    A spokesperson for Meghan has now claimed that “the change of name on public documents in 2019 was dictated by the palace” and not by her or Prince Harry.

    The duchess has also said that it was “offensive” to assume she wanted to be “nameless” on her son’s birth certificate.

    While it hasn’t been confirmed exactly why the changes were made, it’s been considered that Meghan’s title on the document may be a sweet nod to Harry’s mother Princess Diana, who always used her full title of Her Royal Highness the Princess of Wales.

    While other royal correspondents suggested it could’ve been an early part of her and Prince Harry’s “plan” to leave the royal family.

    However, Meghan hit back at speculation that the name change had been a calculated decision in her recent statement.

    “The change of name on public documents in 2019 was dictated by The Palace, as confirmed by documents from senior Palace officials. This was not requested by Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex nor by The Duke of Sussex,” her spokesperson told The Telegraph.

    “To see this UK tabloid and their carnival of so-called ‘experts’ chose to deceptively whip this into a calculated family ‘snub’ and suggest that she would oddly want to be nameless on her child’s birth certificate, or any other legal document, would be laughable were it not offensive.”