Could King Charles Reconsider the Sussex Titles? The Danish Royal Decision Behind a New Debate

A decision made by Denmark's former queen several years ago has renewed an old and highly sensitive question surrounding Prince Harry, Meghan Markle and their children: should the Sussex family's royal titles remain unchanged?

The issue has resurfaced after royal commentator Richard Eden argued that King Charles III could look to another European monarchy for an example of how royal titles might be handled when a family member steps away from official duties.

Harry and Meghan stepped back as working members of the Royal Family in 2020 and subsequently established their lives largely outside the formal structure of the monarchy. Yet their titles remain part of their public identities.

Their children, Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet, also hold royal titles and remain in the line of succession.

The subject has therefore continued to attract attention, particularly whenever questions arise about the future relationship between the Sussexes and the wider Royal Family.

Prince Joachim's children do not have HRH titles (Image: Getty)

Why the Sussex titles remain such a sensitive issue

Harry and Meghan's departure from royal duties created an unusual situation.

They retained their Duke and Duchess of Sussex titles, while no longer carrying out official working duties on behalf of the monarch.

The couple also agreed not to use their HRH styles for commercial purposes.

Their children subsequently became Prince Archie of Sussex and Princess Lilibet of Sussex following the accession of King Charles.

The official Royal Family website currently lists the Duke of Sussex, Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet in the line of succession.

That distinction is important because royal titles, working royal status and the line of succession are separate issues.

Someone can retain a royal title without being a working member of the monarchy.

That is precisely what makes the Sussex situation different from the ordinary public understanding of who is considered a "working royal."

The argument being made by Richard Eden

Writing in the Daily Mail, royal commentator Richard Eden pointed toward the experiences of other European monarchies when discussing the Sussex titles.

His argument was that Britain's royal family could learn from decisions taken elsewhere in Europe, particularly Denmark.

Eden highlighted the decision taken by Queen Margrethe II to change the titles held by four of her grandchildren.

The Danish decision attracted considerable attention because it demonstrated that royal titles can be changed as part of a monarchy's effort to define the size and future role of its royal household.

Eden contrasted that decision with the continued titles held by Harry, Meghan and their children.

He argued that Charles could consider a similar approach.

That, however, is a commentator's proposal—not an announced plan by the King.

Denmark provides a very different example

In 2022, Denmark's Queen Margrethe announced that four of her grandchildren would no longer hold the titles of Prince or Princess and would instead use the titles Count or Countess of Monpezat.

The change took effect at the beginning of 2023.

The Danish Royal House explained at the time that the purpose was to create a framework allowing the grandchildren to shape their own lives with fewer special considerations and obligations associated with formal membership of the Royal House.

The move became one of the most significant recent examples of a European monarchy reducing the number of people using traditional royal titles.

It also demonstrated that different monarchies approach titles according to their own constitutional arrangements, traditions and family structures.

Why the Danish comparison is attracting attention now

The comparison is intriguing because Harry and Meghan's situation also involves a distinction between titles and official royal duties.

The Sussexes remain members of the extended Royal Family, but they do not perform official duties as working royals.

The current official position also distinguishes their status from that of working members of the monarchy.

In September 2026, a letter sent on behalf of King Charles reiterated that Harry and Meghan remain nonworking members of the Royal Family. It also stated that they would continue to refrain from using their royal titles in the manner established since stepping away from official duties in 2020.

That makes the debate more complicated than simply asking whether Harry and Meghan are "royal" or "not royal."

Their constitutional and family position has several different layers.

Titles, styles and duties are not the same thing

One of the most common sources of confusion in discussions about the Sussexes is the difference between a title, an HRH style and an official royal role.

Harry remains the Duke of Sussex.

Meghan remains the Duchess of Sussex.

Their children are Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet.

But none of that means the Sussexes are working representatives of the King.

The distinction has allowed the monarchy to maintain the family's place within the broader royal structure while keeping official duties separate.

It is also why a discussion about removing or changing titles would be considerably more complicated than simply changing how someone is introduced at a public event.

What would changing the titles actually mean?

Any move involving royal titles would raise questions about precedent, constitutional authority and the future structure of the monarchy.

The official Royal Family website notes that succession to the Crown is governed not only by descent but also by legislation.

It currently lists Harry, Archie and Lilibet in the succession.

That means a change to a title would not automatically mean removal from the line of succession.

The two questions are legally and constitutionally distinct.

This distinction is particularly important when discussing proposals concerning the Sussex family.

A title change, a change in HRH usage and removal from the succession would each involve different considerations.

The King has not announced the action being proposed

Despite the renewed debate, there is an important difference between commentary and official policy.

There has been no announcement that King Charles intends to remove the Sussex titles.

The current official information continues to identify Harry as the Duke of Sussex and Archie and Lilibet as Prince and Princess respectively.

The recent clarification from the King's household also indicates that Harry and Meghan remain nonworking members of the Royal Family.

Therefore, the idea of stripping the titles should be understood as part of an ongoing public debate rather than as an established royal decision.

Why Harry and Meghan's children make the question more complicated

The debate becomes even more sensitive when Archie and Lilibet are included.

Unlike their parents, the children did not make the decision to step away from royal duties.

Their titles are connected to their position within the royal family and to changes that followed the accession of their grandfather.

The official succession list currently places Archie sixth and Lilibet seventh in line to the throne.

That means discussions about their titles inevitably overlap with questions about succession, family identity and the future shape of the monarchy.

It also explains why the subject repeatedly attracts public attention.

The Danish example does not automatically translate to Britain

Although Denmark offers an interesting comparison, the two monarchies operate within different constitutional and historical frameworks.

The Danish royal family made a deliberate decision concerning four grandchildren and their future relationship with the Danish Royal House.

Britain's constitutional arrangements surrounding the Crown and succession have their own legal history.

The official Royal Family website notes that succession is regulated by Parliamentary statute.

Consequently, the Danish precedent can inform a public discussion without automatically establishing what King Charles could or should do in Britain.

The larger question: what should a modern monarchy look like?

Behind the argument about Harry and Meghan's titles is a much larger question facing many European monarchies.

How large should a modern royal family be?

Which members should perform official duties?

Should royal titles automatically continue across generations?

And how should monarchies balance tradition with the need to define a manageable public institution?

Denmark's decision demonstrated one possible approach.

Britain has taken a different route so far.

The Sussexes remain titled members of the extended Royal Family while living and working outside the structure of the working monarchy.

A debate that keeps returning

The question of the Sussex titles has repeatedly resurfaced since Harry and Meghan stepped away from royal duties.

It became especially prominent after Archie and Lilibet received their princely titles.

Every subsequent development involving the Sussexes—from their public projects to their relationship with the Royal Family—has renewed interest in whether their formal status should change.

Yet the current position remains clear.

Harry and Meghan are nonworking members of the Royal Family, while the Sussex titles remain in place. The official succession list also continues to include Harry, Archie and Lilibet.

For now, the debate is therefore less about an imminent royal decision and more about competing visions for the future of the monarchy.

Could the Sussex titles become a royal issue again?

Richard Eden's comments have added fresh fuel to a debate that has never completely disappeared.

The Danish example demonstrates that European monarchies can make significant changes to the titles used by members of their extended families.

But Britain's current arrangement remains different.

King Charles has not announced a decision to remove Harry, Meghan, Archie or Lilibet's titles.

That leaves an intriguing question at the center of the discussion: will the monarchy eventually reconsider how royal titles are distributed as the institution continues to evolve, or will the Sussex family's unusual status remain the established arrangement for years to come?

For a royal family balancing centuries of tradition against a rapidly changing public role, the answer could have implications far beyond one family.