Prince William ignored questions about Earl Spencer’s book on Diana, Princess of Wales on its publication day today, after almost a week of palace efforts to undermine the memoir.
On an official engagement where he served popcorn and sold tickets to moviegoers to celebrate grassroots cinema in Acton, west London, William studiously avoided a reporter’s questions about whether he had read the book and what he felt about it.
The heir to the throne, it has been made clear, is incandescent about its publication.
But displaying a classically ambivalent attitude towards the controversy, the Prince of Wales did not serve up anything publicly to royal watchers waiting with their metaphorical popcorn at home.
How bereavement leave is changing
From April next year, employees’ entitlement to unpaid time off work after suffering a bereavement will extend to step and half relatives, as well as foster, kinship care and adoptive relationships.
A change in the law
The new legislation will include employees who lose a spouse, partner, parent, adult child or sibling. Those who suffer a bereavement will be entitled to up to two weeks’ unpaid leave.
- The Government had already confirmed the new rights will apply to parents who experience a miscarriage before 24 weeks of pregnancy.
What was previously covered
A legal right to unpaid leave for employees who had suffered a bereavement was only introduced under The Employment Rights Act of December 2025.
Before that, only parents who had lost a child under 18 or stillborn from 24 weeks had a legal right to bereavement leave.
5 min read
4 min read
Support for those grieving
No one should have to fight for time to grieve. These changes back people going through some of the hardest moments of life, whoever they are and wherever they work.
Minister for the Future of Work, Kate Dearden
Why babies infected in the womb are ‘more likely to have autism’
Babies could be at a higher risk of autism and intellectual disability if they contract infections such as rubella and herpes in the womb, a new study has suggested.
What you need to know about the study
Researchers from Sweden’s Karolinska Institute analysed health records from 3.7 million people born between 1987 and 2021.
- 975 of these had been diagnosed with a so-called congenital “torch” infection – a group of parasitic, bacterial and viral diseases.
- Children known to have had one of these before birth were around three times more likely to be diagnosed with autism, and seven times more likely to have an intellectual disability.
- The researchers also found that those who had been infected, but had neither of these tended to have slightly lower school grades at 16.
Family circumstances not a factor
To check whether genetics or family circumstances might have affected the result, the researchers compared the affected children with siblings who had not contracted a congenital infection, but the associations with autism and intellectual disability remained.
4 min read
7 min read
A low chance of infection
Experts emphasised that infections are very rare, occurring in only around 2.5 per 10,000 births.
- The authors said the study strengthened the case for vaccination and other measures that stop infections being passed on to the foetus.
Limitations to the study
- The observational study cannot prove that the infections caused autism.
- It also relied on clinically diagnosed congenital infections, meaning that milder or symptom-free infections could have been missed.
Why CNN thinks it can sue its way back into White House
After reporters from CNN, MS Now and were denied entry to the White House, the media organisations headed for the courts to get their access back.
The rest of the media suspended some coverage of Donald Trump in sympathy, but he has not backed down, setting up his own “Trump TV” live channel.
What happened?
Mid-afternoon Friday, DC time, Trump officially banned CNN, MS Now and from the White House, explaining it was “a result of their constant ‘reporting’ FAKE NEWS!”
He threatened that “Other Fake News Media Outlets [are] to follow”, adding “[t]here’s something wrong with a country that can allow people to write purposely negative stories”.
Why might ban be illegal?
The media companies’ legal argument rests on three grounds: that the ban did not follow “due process” such as allowing notice; that it violates a constitutional right to free speech and that it also violates free speech by denying access to a “non-public forum” (the White House).
- Washington DC’s district court judge Timothy Kelly ordered that the defendants file a response the next day, with a hearing set for Wednesday.
What did Trump say?
Trump claimed to have “expected” the lawsuit, and again attacked the media organisations, saying the Oval Office “should be treated with Decorum, Respect, and Dignity, not defiled by Third Rate Clowns”.
But he seemed to anticipate being ruled against in the court, saying “we’ll go for appeal”.
3 min read
5 min read
What does the law say?
Timothy Kelly previously ruled on a similar case. In 2018, he ordered that a CNN reporter should get his White House press pass back after he was banned following a contentious exchange with the President.
Experts note that because a system has been created that allows journalists access to parts of the White House, courts have placed limits on how access can be withdrawn.
But, an appellate court previously ruled that presidents retain substantial authority over who they allow into limited-access settings.
Are other media taking sides?
- Major US television outlets agreed to suspend some video coverage of Trump, in a demonstration of solidarity with the banned channels.
- No broadcaster covered the ribbon-cutting for the White House’s new helipad, and the President’s remarks were inaudible on a hastily-arranged live stream.
- Media organisations also joined in a boycott of the photographic pool at the White House.
- There was normal media coverage for the President’s visit to meet New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, who said he had told Trump that all members of the press would be present.
Analysis reveals why Kent meningitis outbreak was so severe
Scientists have revealed what made the bacteria behind a deadly meningitis B outbreak in Kent in March particularly dangerous.
The context
Twenty-one people were diagnosed with invasive meningococcal disease (IMD) in a week, in the outbreak which was linked to a nightclub in Canterbury.
Two teenagers died and nine required intensive care.
3 min read
3 min read
Why it was so dangerous
Experts from the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) and University of Oxford found that the bacteria underwent a process called horizontal gene transfer – where it picked up small pieces of DNA from other bacteria.
This means the bacteria can borrow genetic traits without reproducing and changes how it interacts with human cells. The change made it particularly effective at causing severe illness and may have affected how the immune system recognised it.
How the UK is trying to prevent future outbreaks
Following the Kent outbreak, a one-off menB vaccination programme was launched as universities start again.
What else is being done?
The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) has also recommended that teenagers be offered the jab on the NHS at the age of 15.
2 min read
4 min read
How PIP claims for ADHD are rising for teens in richer areas
The number of 16- to 17-year-olds claiming personal independence payment (PIP) for ADHD and autism has more than tripled in richer areas over six years, according to analysis by the Nuffield Trust.
What is PIP for?
PIP is the main benefit paid to people who have a long-term physical or mental health condition or disability and is intended to help with everyday tasks and living costs.
According to government statistics from July, there were 4.1 million claimants entitled to PIP in England and Wales.
5 min read
4 min read
A closer look at the figures
While the amount of teenagers claiming PIP in deprived areas is higher, the number has grown at a slower rate, from 2.1 per cent in 2019 to 5.1 per cent last year.
This compares to a rise from 0.8 per cent to 2.5 per cent for teenagers from the least-deprived neighbourhoods.
- The think-tank also found that PIP recipient rates for ADHD and autism for white people were higher overall than those of other ethnicities.
The new claims about Lucy Letby – and what it means for appeal
Lucy Letby has failed – twice – to get judges to overturn her convictions for murdering seven babies and attempting to murder seven more. However, fresh claims that her prosecution is a major miscarriage of justice have been made in the new documentary, Lucy Letby – Scapegoat?, a collaboration between and Channel 5.
A doctor who worked alongside Letby at the Countess of Chester Hospital says he believes the evidence used to convict her is “extremely poor” and that there was no killer on the neonatal unit, saying instead she was a “scapegoat” used by hospital bosses to cover up the unit’s poor performance.
- Individual failings and sub-optimal care at the hospital were discussed at length during both of Letby’s trials, but prosecutors insisted they did not explain the deaths.
Some details ‘not shared with jury’
The documentary claims there was a set of results relating to a baby who was poisoned by Letby that were not shared with the jury.
- Letby was convicted of attempting to murder two babies by secretly injecting insulin into IV bags which were being used to treat them.
- During the trial, jurors were told how a blood result for Baby F pointed to insulin coming from an external source rather than being produced by the body.
- now claims that there were a further 14 glucose readings which were “normal” at the time Baby F was poisoned but that this evidence was not shown to the jury.
- Retired detective Stuart Clifton, who investigated killer nurse Beverley Allitt, said the result should offer “clear grounds for appeal”.
Baby died ‘after Letby left the unit’
A mother has said her baby suddenly collapsed at the hospital and later died, six months after Letby was taken off the unit.
The statistics around the unusual number of collapses and deaths at the Countess of Chester between 2015 and 2016 were a key part of the prosecution case.
There were a total of 12 deaths from 2010-14 and then eight in 2015. Since Letby left the unit in July 2016, there has only been one.
3 min read
5 min read
Expert questions method of alleged murders
One of the methods by which Letby was said to have murdered babies was injecting them with air to cause an air embolism.
However, vascular surgeon Dr Colin Ferguson told : “The fact that in no case was air found in the heart at post-mortem means that this is just not true.”
Following her retrial, Letby was convicted of attempting to murder a baby by removing her breathing tube.
- Senior doctor Ravi Jayaram claimed that he walked in to find Baby K having collapsed with Letby standing over her cot doing nothing.
- However the documentary obtained a contemporaneous email written by Jayaram which said that Letby called him for help.
- The discrepancy over whether Jayaram went in because he was worried or because Letby called him for help was highlighted in the Thirlwall public inquiry into her case.
What happens now?
Letby remains in prison and her only avenue to clear her name is an application to the miscarriages of justice watchdog the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC).
The CCRC is currently considering her application but there is no timeline as to when it will decide whether it believes Letby’s case should be referred back to the Court of Appeal or not. Only a fraction of all applications submitted are successful.
4 min read
3 min read
At one event last week, senior aides were forthright in explaining why he would not be drawn publicly into reacting to claims made in the book.
But at the same time they were also able to convey his anger that once again lurid allegations about family matters were distracting the public from seeing the impact of the monarchy’s official work.
It is the royal way, according to insiders. The book’s publication was also greeted with stony silence at Buckingham Palace, where the mood music was that enough had been said about Earl Spencer’s criticism of King Charles in his memoir, Swan Song: Diana, My Sister, and it was best to try to move on.
Declining to comment, a spokesman for the monarch also avoided addressing questions about whether, after immediately authorising a statement last Wednesday suggesting that Earl Spencer’s recollections of conversations had been clouded by his grief, the King had approved of subsequent attacks attributed to his “allies”.
One report last Sunday, citing people who had spent the week with the King, in a publication regularly favoured by Buckingham Palace, looked like a concerted effort to damage the credibility of Earl Spencer. It accused him of hypocrisy for peddling her privacy despite previously accusing the media of hounding Diana to her grave.
But officially at least, Buckingham Palace has made only one statement: “While we do not comment on books as a matter of principle, His Majesty is mindful that the pain of fraternal grief can cloud reason, affect judgment and colour memory in ways others do not recognise, even many years after such a loss.”
Inside the palace defences
What has come into the public domain since has at least partly been royal aides, friends of the family, and former aides giving their views privately. The topic has come up naturally at events but, as is so often the case, the family has managed to get its message across regardless of Buckingham Palace’s public stance.
That can happen naturally with so many people in royal circles but, in truth, the palace mantra of “never complain, never explain” has always been something of a myth.
The late Queen and Prince Philip tried not to let much bother them. Asked by his police bodyguard why he had not complained about an untrue story alleging he had said something controversial and offensive, Philip famously told one of his police bodyguards he had not bothered because “it’s the sort of thing I would say”.
But royal aides can also be pretty adept at getting their version of events over on background. They are also not averse to using the threat of legal action, public denouncements or referrals to the press regulator to persuade editors and reporters that it would not be in their interests to cover some stories, especially when it deals with what they consider the family’s privacy.
In this case, the palace’s efforts to undermine Earl Spencer have also been helped by journalists independently pointing out inaccuracies in the book. The author had to apologise to Piers Morgan on Tuesday after wrongly implying he was partly responsible for running photos of Diana in a gym in 1993.
There has been no such criticism from Prince Harry, who is closer to Earl Spencer than his brother William is to the peer. But Harry too has ignored questions about the book. Sources close to him have insisted that, while he knew that his uncle was writing a book, he had no prior knowledge of the contents.
In an interview with magazine in the US, Earl Spencer, 62, said he had told his two nephews, William and Harry, and his sisters Jane and Sarah all at the time that he was writing the book. “And I can say that Harry is completely fine about it,” he added, without discussing William’s reaction.
Harry had said he hoped there was nothing embarrassing about him in the book and had been reassured but Earl Spencer’s account also backed up the suggestion that he had been light on details when explaining it to his family.
His sisters, he said, were hurt that he hadn’t told them earlier, but he had been determined to do it without their input.
He added: “I wanted them to be able to put their hand up and say, ‘Well, we didn’t know he was doing it,’ in case there’s backlash or whatever. So they’re totally innocent parties in this.”
William and Harry are still not thought to be on speaking terms but honouring their mother’s legacy is at least one topic on which they have failed to fall out over the past few years. Both see their day-to-day charity work as part of her legacy and each has worked to perpetuate her memory via The Diana Award, the charity set up after her death, even though they have not felt able to do so in the same room since their big fallout.
Some friends have wondered if their mother’s memory could yet prove something on which to build some sort of reconciliation. But the picture is set to get more complex after sources close to Harry finally admitted that there is some truth to reports that he is planning his own television documentary about Diana.
Earl Spencer said that part of the reason he had decided to write his book was that a nephew, thought to be Harry, had approached him about taking part in a programme about her.
It is understood that Harry’s idea is just one of many projects under discussion about how best he could honour her memory in the run-up to the 30th anniversary of her death in August next year and no final decision has been taken.