The issue is not so much abdication but the fact that people get children later in life.
Willem I became king in 1814 at the age of 42 (same age as Queen Beatrix in 1980 when she succeeded), however he had married at the age of 19 and his heir was born when he was 20.
Willem II was 48 at his succession (Willem-Alexander was 46 hat his so not that far off). He married at the age of 24 and his son Willem III was born in 1817 so 23 and married with a son when Willem I abdicated.
It would, but that would require altering the constitution and that is a lengthy and tricky process in The Netherlands.
The law arranging the income of the monarch, previous monarch, first in line of succession and their spouses dates from the early 1970's and yet it was in 1985 and especially in 2021 that media and politicians at once realised that a very young adult would be getting a serious amount of money and started to protest. In every other year that never gets back to the political arena so the law has not been changed. That will lead in time to a similar situation in the year that Amalia's heir turns 18 (assuming she'll be the reigning Queen at that moment).
The chance of a monarch succeeding at an age under 25 is unlikely so there is no political need to alter the constitution.
I guess that one of the problems with Dutch Monarchs abdicating is that it gives the country a very young heir/ess to the throne.
Message Thread | This response ↓
« Back to index