If a ruling monarch did not have biological children but chose instead to adopt, would the adopted child be an heir to the throne?
- Leslie JLv 717 hours ago
Not in modern times, an adopted child could inherit private money and private property, but not the titles as that is all about the bloodline
- PrinceLv 53 weeks ago
Sometimes has been arranged as when Maximilian as Emperour of Mexico adopted the heir of the native royal family.
- Helen HeelsLv 63 weeks ago
Harry will never be the king. Archie's bizarre arrival is completely inconsequential.
- MercuryLv 73 weeks ago
That would never happen.
- What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
- CloLv 74 weeks ago
It depends on the laws of the land. Most monarchies rule that an heir must be a blood relative, so a sibling, aunt, uncle, or cousin would inherit the throne, an adopted child not being eligible.
- RicoLv 54 weeks ago
Only if the adopted child was already the heir presumptive. There is no monarchy left in the world where adoption has the legal effect of giving succession rights to an adopted child not of royal blood.
Until 2002, when the rules were changed, succession rights to the Monegasque princely throne, being adopted by the Sovereign Prince automatically gave the adopted child succession rights
- Anonymous4 weeks ago
Couldn't happen in the UK, it would go to another branch of the family in strict succession (provided they were a non-Roman Catholic descendant of the Electress of Hanover). There is always a relative no matter how distant.
- TangiLv 74 weeks ago
The rules of inheritances of monarchies are different between countries and between eras. And sometimes, monarchs simply ignored or changed the rules according to who they wanted to be their heir.
There is not one answer to your question.
- 4 weeks ago
No, most definitely not, it would go to the next in line and that would have to be, blood line, to the throne.