King Charles should meet with Harry quietly and privately because as the van Straubenzee family shows, you never know when you might lose a child... or anyone you love, writes ANGELA MOLLARD

Of all the things Claire van Straubenzee might have wished for today, I'm sure chief among them was not an MBE.

Of course she's likely deeply grateful for the honour recognising her services to children's education in Uganda but she'd doubtless give it away in a heartbeat to spend just one more day with Henry, the son she lost in a car crash in December 2002.

You have to wonder if this sad irony is not lost on Mrs Straubenzee or on her dear friend King Charles. 

After all, he is - according to Prince Harry's spokesman yesterday - a father too busy to see his son, while she is a mother who will never see hers again.

It's with that dreadful loss in mind that Charles should meet with Harry, quietly and privately, because as the van Straubenzee family shows, you never know when you might lose a child. Or, indeed, anyone you love.

It's not as if the monarch can't join the dots. Both baby boys were christened Henry and they were childhood best friends. According to the Duke of Sussex's memoir Spare, Henry 'Henners' Straubenzee was the only boy who asked him about his mother, Diana, Princess of Wales, after she was killed. 

How heartbreaking that just five years after her death, the then 18-year-old died in equally horrible circumstances in a car crash near Ludgrove Prep, his and Harry's former school. 

It was in her son's honour that Mrs Straubenzee worked so tirelessly to give other children a meaningful life even if it was one denied her beloved middle son.

Knowing this, I'm astounded the monarch isn't meeting with his own son, even briefly. Our children's safety is never guaranteed and having been diagnosed with cancer I would've thought the King might have had cause to consider the fragility of our existence. Thoughts of mortality typically lead families to at least attempt to heal wounds.

If ever there was a moment to tentatively extend an olive branch, it is this. A meeting with Harry could've been both a kindness and a test: the former because parenting is an act of unconditional love; the latter because Harry, quite rightfully, needs to earn back his family's trust.

How simple, how soldering, it might've been if the pair had enjoyed a pot of tea and a short chat about his grandchildren without any of us knowing. After all, any reconciliation could only occur via small steps and a commitment from Harry not to blab about it.

Instead, are we left to believe that this is it? That the relationship is beyond repair? That there will be no reconciliation or certainly not until the Duke of Sussex has been made to consider more deeply, and for a longer period, the consequence of his actions?

Fair enough, Harry's behaviour and his betrayal of the royal family has been monstrous. His criticism of Queen Camilla and the Prince and Princess of Wales particularly so. But we never know how long we have to make amends. We only ever have right now.

Instead, right now, even though Harry is just two miles from his father's home, there is no invitation. The monarch is hosting a garden party at Buckingham Palace and his son, whether in an act of clarification or self-pity, has announced he will not be seeing his father.

As a spokesperson for the Duke said: 'In response to the many inquiries and continued speculation on whether or not the Duke will meet with his father while in the UK this week, it, unfortunately, will not be possible due to His Majesty's full programme.'

Then lest this 'unfortunate' situation be seen as a dig, the spokesperson continued: 'The Duke of course is understanding of his father's diary of commitments and various other priorities and hopes to see him soon.'

Prince William, who earlier today conferred the Member of the Order of British Empire (MBE) on Mrs Straubenzee at Windsor Castle, has every right not to want to see his brother. His wife's health is paramount and even the slightest stress is not something he would wish to invite into his family.

But parental love is different. It demands that we forgive. It demands that we are the bigger person. It demands an examination of the reasons for Harry's anger and a recognition that, as parents, we can injure our children in ways we fail to understand until years later. Harry has used both books and preferred media factions to get back at members of his family but didn't both his parents do likewise? In any case, as parents tell their children from toddlerhood: 'I love you, even if I don't like your behaviour.'

I'm certain the late Queen would've seen Harry if she was still alive. She wouldn't necessarily have been effusive or enquiring and he may have found himself getting shorter shrift than some of her Prime Ministers. But in the same manner she continued to love and support Prince Andrew, she would've kept the door open to her grandson.

Busy or not, this was an ideal opportunity for the King to see Harry. The Duke is here without his wife and he is celebrating 10 years of the Invictus Games which in anybody's eyes is a meaningful and moral triumph.

Just like Claire van Straubenzee, the competitors in those games know that life can change in an ordinary instant. It's in their honour and in the memory of a teenage boy who was 'all heart', according to Prince Harry, that the monarch should find a moment for his son.