Ferguson previously admitted to receiving £15,000 from Epstein. Photo Credit: Everett Collection/Shutterstock
Sarah Ferguson, Duchess of York, has faced considerable backlash from several British charities following the emergence of an email in 2011 that described convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein as “the best friend.” The email contradicts her previous official statement, distancing herself from Epstein and rekindled scrutiny about her past associations. In the correspondence, Ferguson praised Epstein’s support, expressing regret over her previous statements, describing him as “still” and “generous.” Her representative said the email was sent under legal advice to address the threat of potential honour and loss from Epstein.
As a result of the revelation, at least six charities have ended their relationship with Ferguson. These include the Teenage Cancer Trust, Julia’s House Children’s Hospice, Natasha Allergy Research Foundation, Breast Cancer Prevention, Children’s Literacy Charities, and the British Heart Foundation. The organizations highlighted the inappropriateness of her relationship as a reason to link her relationship with Epstein. Julia’s family said it was “inappropriate” for Ferguson to continue as a patronage given new information, but the Natasha Allergy Research Foundation described the email as “intrusive” and concluded that maintaining the relationship is no longer acceptable. Other charities also expressed concern that her continued involvement could undermine their credibility and mission.
Ferguson previously admitted to receiving £15,000 from Epstein, calling it “a huge mistake in the sentence.” She publicly apologized and promised to cut off all ties with him. Nevertheless, the leaked email showed that Ferguson may have maintained some contact with Epstein after publicly distancing himself. This disclosure prompted new questions about her judgment, transparency and the responsibility of public figures who hold charitable positions.
The scandal surrounding Ferguson is similar to the previous controversy involving her ex-husband, Prince Andrew. He faced mass scrutiny and was stripped of his royal duties due to his relationship with Epstein. The Ferguson situation draws attention to the challenges charities face when evaluating associations of well-known guests. In particular, when public trust and fundraising can be affected, organizations are expected to act more rapidly when inappropriate relationships and revelations of action become apparent.
At the moment, Ferguson has not publicly commented on the decisions the charity has made. The situation remains fluid and further development is expected as both public and charities continue to consider the meaning of her past connections. This episode reminds us of the risks of potential reputation for charities engaged with public figures and highlights the broader debate about accountability, ethics and responsibility in prominent relationships. The controversy again raised questions about how past actions and private communications influence public roles and charity involvement, particularly when involved in controversial figures. For the charities involved, the decision to break ties underscores the importance of protecting reputation and ensuring alignment with ethical standards.
