The daughters left holding the damage: What the Epstein files mean for Beatrice and Eugenie

CTV’s Royal Commentator Afua Hagan on the consequences Andrew and Sarah Ferguson are facing after the recent release of Epstein documents.

Afua Hagan is a contributor to CTVNews.ca, focusing on the Royal Family. Based in London and Accra, Hagan is a regular commentator on the royals across a variety of international outlets, and is a leading voice on diversity in Britain.

For years, the Epstein scandal has been framed as a story about one man and his catastrophic judgment. But with the latest release of Epstein-related court documents, the fallout has shifted – quietly, but unmistakably – onto two women who never chose the spotlight they now inhabit.

• Charity founded by Sarah Ferguson shuts down after release of Epstein emails

Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie have not been implicated in any legal proceedings, nor do they face accusations of any wrongdoing. However, as new revelations emerge, they have inevitably been drawn into the public discourse – not due to their own actions, but because of the burdens they bear as part of a lineage still grappling with past mistakes.

Recent reports indicate that the sisters feel “aghast” and “embarrassed” by the renewed and continuing scrutiny of their parents thanks to the latest dump of emails, pictures and documents that make up the Epstein files.

A turning point

This reaction is significant; it’s a turning point in this narrative. This is no longer a scandal from the past that was haunting the family, but a story that continues to evolve.

A source close to the York sisters told me Beatrice and Eugenie “are aghast at what they have read” in the Epstein files. The princesses feel “mortified by the emails their mother has sent to Epstein.” The insider adds that this has become “so embarrassing for them.”

The emails show Ferguson gushing over Epstein, calling him “the brother I have always wished for.”

The messages paint an even darker picture, suggesting Ferguson brought her daughters to lunch with Epstein in Miami during July 2009. This happened right after his release from prison on child sex offences.

Ferguson wrote to Epstein, “I have never been more touched by a friends (sic) kindness than your compliment to me in front of my girls.” The emails get worse, with one containing an awkward reference to Eugenie’s personal life.

Prince Andrew has been linked to Jeffrey Epstein for 20 years or more enduring the fallout from his disastrous 2019 interview with BBC’s Newsnight and subsequent withdrawal from royal duties, as well as a civil settlement reached with Virginia Giuffre thought to be to the tune of £12 million (C$22 million).

At the end of 2025, Andrew was stripped of his royal titles and is being forced to move out of his home Royal Lodge, to a private residence on the Sandringham Estate. This marks the biggest removal of royal titles since 1919. Andrew still holds eighth place in the line of succession, though public opinion strongly favours more punishment.

An October 2025 YouGov poll found that 91% of Britons have a negative opinion of Andrew, with 81% viewing him “very negatively,” representing the lowest popularity rating for a royal on record. Each of these moves was intended to clarify the issues surrounding his controversial associations, leading the monarchy to officially declare the matter “resolved.” Yet, the public has not collectively moved on.

With Epstein’s shadow once again looming large, the focus extends beyond Andrew to include his daughters, who, while not performing official royal roles, are navigating the complexities of being part of the royal family and being caught up in a very public scandal.

Many can relate to the challenges of reconciling their parent’s failings while feeling a mix of loyalty, anger, shame, and affection. Beatrice and Eugenie’s experience is distinct, however, as their family transcends being merely a household; it embodies a national institution steeped in symbolism.

The repercussions

The British monarchy does not govern in the conventional sense. Instead, it relies on public sentiment and trust, grounded in the belief that the family at its core embodies shared values such as duty, restraint, and decency. When this moral framework falters, the repercussions are not legal but profoundly emotional.

This is why Beatrice and Eugenie occupy such a critical space in the current narrative.

Although neither sister occupies an official working role or receives public funding, they remain inseparable from the royal narrative, visible at significant family occasions like the family walk to church on Christmas Day and integral to the imagery of the Crown. Beatrice, now married and expanding her family, conveys a sense of quiet stability.

In contrast, Eugenie has emerged as a more vocal presence, championing causes, including a charity that works with victims of sex-trafficking, and community efforts beyond the confines of royal duties.

Eugenie is reportedly devastated by her father’s actions and has “cut him off” not even visiting at Christmas.

Beatrice on the other hand is trying to toe a very fine line of supporting him privately whilst maintaining her relationship with the wider Royal Family.

Their differing paths underscore a central truth: there is no definitive guide for royal offspring confronting the fallout from their family’s crises. In the past, the monarchy tended to address disgrace with resolute actions – Edward VIII’s abdication being a prime example.

Others deemed problematic were often exiled, erased from public consciousness, or discreetly distanced from royal matters. The modern stance, in contrast, leans toward a softer, more therapeutic approach, yet also one that feels increasingly unclear.

A significant challenge

Andrew’s removal from official duties has not entirely severed his ties to the royal narrative. The lingering ambiguity surrounding his status creates a protracted and unresolved predicament. He is still Queens Elizabeth II’s son, the brother of the King, a member of the Royal family. He may not have the titles, but those facts remain. For Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie, this uncertainty presents a significant challenge.

Growing up in the wake of the #MeToo movement, they are part of a generation that prioritizes accountability and transparency – concepts that the royal institution has historically struggled to address.

They remain close to the Royal Family and were firmly at the centre of the walk to church at Sandringham on Christmas morning.

The optics were of a family pulling rank around two members who were vulnerable through no fault of their own. Their charity work and personal professional lives remain untouched – for now – but they run the risk of being dropped from charities they work with or business ventures they are pursuing if they are seen to be supporting their father in any way.

Beatrice and Eugenie did not create this crisis. The continuous drip feed of the Epstein files means they are stuck in a story that keeps renewing itself, whether they like it or not.

It also means their personal choices in how they navigate this ongoing crisis are seen as public statements. Standing alongside their father reads as loyalty – but could be interpreted as complicity, to some. Creating visible distance risks being interpreted as disapproval or family fracture. Saying nothing is no longer neutral; it invites interpretation.

But they are now front and centre of this scandal’s its most revealing chapter. In watching how they navigate it – with restraint, discomfort, and a conspicuous lack of public voice – we see the cost of royal inheritance laid bare. Not in titles or privilege, but in the quiet burden of being left to hold damage that was never theirs to begin with.

And that, perhaps more than any court filing, is why this story still resonates.