This special was mentioned during the commentary on "The King's Speech" and has proven to be an interesting addition to that movie. Thank you for posting this.

Beautiful child and young man. I'm sure being a child of royals is lonely at its best. At least he had friends and a loving Nanny and staff. It's more than some children have today.

I have met more then one person from the 1930s who was forced to be right handed and did develop and stutter.. they tied the left hand behind their backs and often would hit them if they tried to use it at other times. Very traumatic.

he is missing from early books on the windsors. most people only got to know about this child through the series 'the lost prince'.

Wow. Thank you for finding and sharing this. I'm having a bit of a cry for this poor little boy. I saw the TV show and am heartened that, whatever else my opinion may be of the royals that there were more than a few flashes of family love.

The only thing "Tragic" about this is the King & Queen. Their relationship with eachother, and their children is Tragic... As for Prince John, He was and always be "Johnnie." Someone who did live and by all accounts was someone everyone enjoyed being around. Being a Prince is just a title. He needed no title..

Yikes, his parents were a mess. It's no wonder the other sons had issues. This actually explains (in a roundabout way) why Edward chose an unsuitable woman as his wife.

god, these people were ruthless. maybe he was cared for but to be wiped from history as if he never existed is cruel.

I have to wonder whether John, because of the seizures was maybe allowed a little respite from the authoritarian rule. I have come away from this documentary with a much better picture of the way that he was cared for. I have to wonder whether the king and queen, who were not allowed to show love and emotion, simply quietly grieved and maybe this is why he was not later listed on the family tree. Things were so different then and the king and queen probably knew as much as there was to know about Epilepsy at the time, it makes me think that his parents' maybe had a very soft spot for John as he really was beautifully cared for.

It seems we haven't made huge advances in terms of how we treat those with learning disability when the 'institution' I worked in from the late 80s to the late 90s didn't close until 1999! Now,of course,it's all 'community residential homes' with private health companies making massive amounts of money off the back of such people.The average life-span of,(elderly),residents who'd spent many years in institutions who were subsequently moved into the community was less than 1 year! Go figure!

he was loved very much by everyone and his parents . the times and understanding were against them . they gave him what freedom they could . they showed him love the only way they could without harm to him . it was a protection without the hurt .

He seemed to be such a sweet little boy. A bit of a handful but still, much loved by those who knew him. Does anyone know if his older brother, Prince Edward, was aways such a self absorbed, cruel, heartless douche nozzle?

Princess Anne is a dead ringer for her great aunt, Princess Mary.

This is so sad 😕.People don't know that whatever they hide would be found out sooner or later and whe the truth comes out no one would trust you no more because yoy hide things like this...

You know, all of you people who are judging the Royals about this, I would just point out that you are using both today's morals and "common" morals to do so. I'm certainly not in agreement with how The Prince was treated, but I think it's important that you take a moment and understand how things were different then, and even more so how they were for Royals at that time....

Thank goodness things have progressed since the late or end of, Victorian ages (or should I say the Edwardian ages?). I certainly wouldn't have wanted to be born into the royal family. They're lives were so regimented and under constant scrutiny, they were held to almost impossible standards by society. It was expected by everyone they had to be perfect in every aspect of their public lives, it's no wonder some of them were 'bad boys and girls' behind closed doors. I'm glad that today many illnesses like Epilepsy, Autism and others are better understood but the social stigmas still exist to a lesser degree. We are making progress but it is too slow for my liking. Since I was not born into that era and have no real idea of all of the nuances of the times, I am not one to judge how this was handled. To me it seemed that given that time in history and being the Royal Family on top of it, they did more to see that Prince John was well cared for, and treated with some degree of understanding, than would have previously been done. I feel that most of the family did love, and grieve for, him each in their own way regardless of how it may seem to us today.

Sheis almost 100 years old and has had a stroke. Think about yourself at an old age.

I pity Prince John's Parents for being so narrow-minded to see what special child they had. I saw the movie "The Lost Prince" He was a very intelligent child, more than the parents gave him credit for. And how cold can that Mother be to do that to her child?! So very sad!!

Thanks.I know there are many,the majority even,who do a stirling job to look after those with various 'learning disabilities'.But as with any money-making venture this will usually dictate what is available & how effective the service will be.As to Queen Mary,there seems to be a conflict of opinion as to how she 'dealt' with the Prince's epliepsy/learning disability.Open displays of any emotion would be frowned upon back then.We can only speculate to a degree.

how true what you say. i worked in the 'institutions as well.. i was under the impression that john was epileptic...i cannot see queen mary dealing with any less then perfect.

Don't British royals have a thing against naming people John, because King John I, was such a poor king, or is that just a rumor?

NONO not the wee old lady, my good god, i mean Sarah Bradford silly billy. I think that wee old lady is brilliant, amazing what she must have seen in all her years.

Why are the patients naked? This was so stupid.

@docufans1

9 жыл бұрын

Allie S There was another question about that posted to comments. I tried to approve but erased by mistake. Sorry to that commentator. Anyway the whole point of showing that recording was to show how patients at the time were treated, no better than lab animals. Let me be super clear. The documentary is not saying Johnny was an animal, it's saying people of his time would not have thought to treat epileptics with human dignity, and the awful recording is an example of that.

@kathybrisky

9 жыл бұрын

This is very common in medical photography until the 60's. In some cases it as necessary but in most cases not. Little thought was given to the feelings of the patients.

@kaseyhudak6658

9 жыл бұрын

Allie S Please refer that ? yo your Mom ot Dad,

the other brothers were of little use. they would not inherit the throne. even bertie had little preparation for the role. although george v. had no faith in david ( edward 8) he did nothing to 'save' the throne.

Some of the family trees only include the main members of the family, if it included everyone the tree would go on & on.

even if the movie about John was a bit wrong...it's still a GREAT movie. and the only one about him. it's the only movie that I watch a LOT. I've rented it from netflix nearly 5 times now...so yeah.

15.02 looks like young Prince Harry

Im sure he was a normal young boy,who had epilectic fits.(spelling!)

What a surprise, seeing Sir Martyn Poliakoff's brother!

Why do the British have so much trouble pronouncing "Roosevelt"? They live much closer to the Netherlands than Americans do.