St James’s Palace announced that the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s baby is set to be born in six months’ time.
Note: This article is from the Guardian.
After more than a month of speculation, scientific calculation and plain guesswork – not to mention thousands of visits to bookies – it has finally been confirmed that 2013’s most eagerly anticipated arrival is due in July.
In a statement issued on Monday, St James’s Palace announced that the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s baby is set to be born in six months’ time.
“Their Royal Highnesses the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge are delighted to confirm they are expecting a baby in July,” said a palace spokesman.
The palace also said that the duchess, who is suffering from hyperemesis gravidarum or severe morning sickness, is feeling better following her stay in hospital last month.
The news of her recovery will quell speculation over whether the duchess is carrying twins: hyperemesis gravidarum – which is most common in the first trimester – is more often suffered by women expecting more than one baby.
If the new prince or princess arrives early, he or she could share a birthday with William‘s mother, the late Diana, princess of Wales, who was born on 1 July.
The duchess was last seen in public on Friday when she visited the National Portrait Gallery in London with William for the unveiling of her first official portrait.
A spokesman for the couple said they were unlikely to undertake any engagements in the next few weeks as William would be concentrating on his flying with the RAF search and rescue force.
He added that Kate was likely to return to engagements “in the near future”.
The bookmaker William Hill said confirmation of the approximate due date had proved costly.
July had been the even-money favourite with the firm and its odds now suggest that the baby could be born in the third or fourth week of that month – both offered at 9/4.
“The royal baby is starting to cost us a small fortune; we have already paid out on the year and now the month that the baby will be born,” said a spokesman.
“We can only hope that they don’t have a baby with ginger hair as that would break the bank.”
William Hill is also taking bets on the name William and Kate will give their child.
Among the favourites are George, Victoria and Diana, all 10-1, followed by Elizabeth at 12-1, and Charles, John and Phillip, all 14-1.
Babies born in July – whose ranks include Nelson Mandela, Tom Cruise and Sir Richard Branson – tend to fare less well in their educational careers than those born in September.
Claire Crawford, a programme director at the Institute for Fiscal Studies, said the English academic year, which runs from September to August, favoured those born before the summer.
“It means that the July- and August-born babies are the youngest in their year and they tend to take the exams when they are slightly younger than those born earlier in the year,” she said.
“Because of the way the education system is set up in England they are the youngest in their year and what we’ve shown is that puts them at a disadvantage on average compared with the children who are born at the start of the year.”
Crawford said the results gap between July-born children and their September-born peers was wide to begin with, but narrowed as time went on. She said July-born children were about 33% less likely to reach the government’s expected level in reading, writing and maths at key stage 1 (around the age of seven), about 10% less likely to achieve 5 A*-C grades at GCSE, and around 5% less likely to go to university at the age of 18 or 19.
guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010