Podcast: Psychologist analyses Prince Harry

Award-winning author and psychologist Peter Quarry joins John Deeks to discuss Prince Harry through his memoir, Spare.

Mr Quarry reviews the book with a psychologist’s eye and examines sibling rivalry, institutionalised favouritism and even post-traumatic stress disorder.

It’s a fascinating discussion that may challenge your views.


  1. So great to listen to a fair, unbiased opinion on Harry and his book from someone whose opinion I respect. I have also read Peter’s book (the one he mentions in the podcast) and found it very easy to read and understand. I find it very difficult to understand many people’s negative view of Harry and Meghan, and believe that they, especially Meghan, have been extremely harshly treated by both the British media and the Royal Family. If the Family want to ever have Harry back in the fold, then they are going about it in a very strange way.

  2. The problem I have with articles about the Royals, regardless of who writes them, is that they are always one sided. If members of the royal family were to be interviewed and shared openly then we would have a fairer picture of what actually transpired. As it is, it is only Harry and Meghan’s view that is given. Who knows how much of it is true, biased or skewed for effect. I don’t think we will ever get to the bottom of this story. What I do take issue with is Harry making a buck (millions) by feeding the public’s need for gossip about his family, I find that repulsive. I don’t and won’t join the band taking either side.

    • I don’t think Harry’s motivation was to feed the public’s need for gossip about his family. Both he and Meghan were treated appallingly by the British tabloids who are largely responsible for the hate which is now being directed at them. They were also poorly treated by the Royal establishment, if not by some of the royals. Anyone subjected to this kind of relentless criticism which resulted in mental health problems as serious as suicidal thoughts and which led them to believe their only course of action was to leave the country will quite naturally feel that it is important to get their side of the story out to the public. What would you have done? Limped away and kept quiet? What I find truly “repulsive” is the deliberate and callous attempts by some individuals and media outlets to destroy them. You would have thought that the example of Diana would have given them pause.The fact that they made a lot of money out of it is due to the public’s interest in their story and the fact that they are Royals. The “market” literally threw money at them. And I think we should acknowledge their work for charity and the donations they have made. I see them as sincere people who want to change the world. More power to them.

  3. The world is in such a mess, disasters everywhere, so why on earth we are having to hear about these useless oxygen thieves all the time? We should be talking about solving the most urgent problems…..

  4. I personally believe that Harry is a young man who was sadly and badly damaged by the death of his mother and the Royals’ apparent inability to recognise that he needed help in dealing with his grief. I suspect that they would have dismissed any thought of that anyway. I don’t agree with everything Harry has done in recent years, but that doesn’t give me – or anyone else – the right to pontificate about it. Whatever happened to minding our own business!

- Our Partners -


- Advertisment -
- Advertisment -