https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebr...cer-diagnosis/
The British Monarch has been diagnosed with cancer.
First, I would start by saying that prostate cancer is often mild and Charles' doctors probably caught it early enough to treat it easily.
However, inevitably, this development will remind everyone how old Charles is. He is simply not a young man. Thus, I expect his diagnosis will lead to more British and commonwealth subjects to realize that unlike Elizabeth, their new king won't be around for decades.
That said, Charles being diagnosed with cancer just a couple of years in his reign would perhaps strengthen the institution of the monarchy. Even if Charles survives and lives another 20 years, people will look towards William, and from what I gather, William is looked more favorably than his father. He is also significantly younger and has, so far, lived a healthier life so I expect William to survive 45-50 years more.
If Charles' health deteriorates fast, I expect that the pro-monarchy people in the commonwealth won't start discussions about Republicanism, even on the Eve of Prince Andrew's scandals. And Charles having a serious health issue will perhaps push Andrew's scandals out of people minds.
On the other hand, a quick succession of the head of state could lead people to think "if the head of state changes so often, why shouldn't we have a word on who he or she is?" Or Republicans may be emboldened by the monarch being a simple human like the rest of us and capitalize on it. I don't know.
What do you think?