In sickness or health, a new path will be needed for the British monarchy and the nation | Martin Kettle

Against the backdrop of the King’s illness, Britons remain divided: should our royal family be subject to evolution, reform or abolition?

On this, at least, everybody can identify with King Charles. His cancer diagnosis this week is a traumatic moment, and not just for him but for his family. It has also triggered instinctive public sympathy, not least for the monarch’s refreshing relative openness about his condition. All this has fired up a powerful media story, made more irresistible by the Prince Harry subplot, that will be part of our national life for months.

But do this week’s events actually have institutional implications for the monarchy? The instant reflex of many will be to say no. The British monarchy’s recent history of adaptiveness, under Queen Elizabeth II and now Charles, points that way too. After all, “the firm” is hardwired for continuity. Seamless adaptation is what the monarchy does. It has been doing it again this week, albeit wrapped in the privileged language in which going back to work becomes the “resumption of duties”. Few politicians have any interest in questioning any aspect of this.

Martin Kettle is a Guardian columnist

Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please .

Continue reading...