One day old baby in pub

And the point is?

Unfortunate timing but the risk of him contracting it would be extremely low due to maternal antibodies. My older child brought home chickenpox when younger DC was 5 months old- he caught it but it was very very mild. The dr said this was due to still having some antibody protection (although it would have worn off a fair bit since birth). It’s very fascinating.

My DS came out in chicken pox the day after we brought DD home from hospital so she was one day old. Our GP was very concerned and I had to check in daily in case she caught it because chicken pox in a baby under two weeks has a high risk of death/brain damage, and newborns can develop sepsis from the mildest of infections in the first few days of life.

So to me it makes sense to limit exposure in the first few days (not for months like people are saying). It would be impractical to eliminate all risk, you can’t banish older children to relatives. A walk and some fresh air would be low risk. Sitting in a crowded indoor space at the height of flu/cold/Covid season would be less sensible.

Can I point out to the posters pointing out the risk between hospitals and a pub. If Mum or baby are in hospital post-delivery, there’s a bloody good reason why they need to be there. They don’t give you a hospital bed for a rest. And a hospital and pub are not the only options of places to be, it’s not an either/or.

It’s no skin off my nose where a mother chooses to take her baby, but saying “A pub is no more risky than a hospital” is a facile argument when in fact they both carry risk. The fact is that you have to be in one for medical reasons, but there’s no need to be at the other.

With DS2 I was turfed out of hospital within a few hours of having him, and later that day DH and I walked into town with him and had a coffee. Don’t see how that’s any different to lunch in Wetherspoons or wherever.

We went to the supermarket and an elderly gent said “oooh that’s a fresh one” 😆 made me laugh. Just wanted to get out for a bit, I don’t see any harm in it.

again in this scenario, it is regarding a Day old baby, new born

What happens if there is an older child? Do they have to stay in the whole time too because there is nobody to take them to the park or a toddler group.

Also the fact that toddlers and young children are constantly bringing home germs and bugs from their school or nursery anyway. We’ve been through phases where it felt like a new illness was in our house every fortnight or so due to toddler at nursery.

if a mild cold is ‘dangerous for newborns’ wouldn’t we be advised to keep our older children elsewhere since they’re attending settings every day with multiple other kids.

@AussieManque

staying at home for weeks on end would be sooooo bad for the mothers mental health.

A new baby staying in for weeks on end just isn't practical in the real world. Even assuming that the mum has a fully supportive husband, he still has to go back to work after 2 weeks.

What happens if there is an older child? Do they have to stay in the whole time too because there is nobody to take them to the park or a toddler group. There are so many reasons to leave the house even aside from keeping sane. Most people don't have family or a nanny 24/7 that can get stuff done for weeks. I would have gone crazy if my mum or MIL had to move in for the best part of 2 months (assuming we are waiting for jabs) not that they could since they lived miles away and worked full time.

It might be the recommendation in some countries but it isn't in the UK. NHS doesn't have any recommendations for new mums to stay at home for weeks on end.

pub the ideal place then - have first shots while there

Sounds a healthier attitude than the pregnant women that post on AIBU seeking confirmation that it's normal to expect a three month period with no visits from close family or the dreaded in laws.

@bigcushionloverBut teenagers are only less emotionally resilient nowadays because they have been brought up so differently to the way slightly older generations were. I was economically independent at 16, as were many of my friends, and was completely able to support myself at that age. I had friends who just wanted to have children and bring them up, and as I said in an earlier post, we have many friends who had completed their families by thwir early twenties. I didn’t want children when I was younger, but if a child is planned and wanted, and younger parents are able to support it, I really don’t see an issue in general with a 17 year old having a baby.

IMO it is not ok for a 17-year-old to have a child because "that's what they want from their lives" - if they want a child they should ensure they can financially support that child and there are not many 17-year-olds who are economically independent, never mind the emotionally resilient enough to take care of a baby 24/7.

Says who? It is still very much recommended by paediatricians around the world.

The real danger that's arisen from COVID is the mistaken belief that you need to be exposed to viruses to build immunity to them - this is fine if your exposure is through vaccines, but it's really foolish to expose yourself to infections in the hopes of gaining immunity. People seem to now be conflating exposure to a bit of dirt (good) with exposure to viral pathogens (bad). Chicken pox parties were always a terrible idea.

Thinking logically, how does it make sense to 'get sick to avoid getting sick'? And all the more dangerous for a newborn with a very fragile respiratory system, where the slightest cold can be extremely dangerous, not to mention flu/covid/RSV/measles etc.

But why? The baby will be in her mother's arms, babies have always gone with their mothers to whatever the mother is doing. A 17 year old is likely very resilient and able to be out and about.

I was discharged just 8 hours after having my second baby. We had no food in so H and I ended up going into supermarket on the way home from the hospital, with baby. Felt very surreal but I was happy to do it. I think I was very very hungry.

I didn’t mean it quite like that. I don’t agree with people having to marry out of a sense of shame because they’re pregnant, and that wasn’t what my friend who got pregnant very young did. I was meaning it in a more general way, that I think some people don’t take their marriages seriously enough nowadays and don’t realise how hard you have to work at them at times. But of course some people make mistakes when they marry or find themselves in impossible situations where they can’t continue with a relationship, and have to end it. I would never suggest that it’s ideal to have a baby at 14 or 15, but i do think teenagers are far less mature than they were in the 1960s and 197Os. I don’t see 17 as necessarily being so young that it would be a disappointment to their parents, if that’s what they want from their lives.

Some of you guys don’t live in deepest, darkest Sussex like I do. The pubs round here are so bougie you’re most likely to bump into a famous person-turned-country-gent.

Sorry, I don’t understand your point.

@Growlybear83 I'm in my 50s, it was too young when I was 17 - more was expected of me and my peers. My mother was educated and started her family at 30 - had 6 kids and then continued her career. She always encouraged us to get our life sorted before starting a family, live our lives before settling down if that's what we wanted - she was a catholic so in no way was she suggesting we slept around but she did not want us to get stuck at home with a baby when we had so much more to see and do - too many women had kids too young.

I’m with you op. I think it’s crazy to bring a 1 day old baby to a pub.

Im not sure thats necessarily a good thing on either counts. 15 year olds should be immature. My eldest is 15. I shudder to think of him as a father. Hes got years ahead of him to have fun before he settles down to have kids.

With regards to sticking with someone you’ve had to marry because you got pregnant,
regardless of whether you’re happy or not - yeah I think it’s a good thing that people don’t stay married because of any sense of shame. I married the wrong person when I was 23. Thank fuck I divorced him with no shame and met my current husband who I’ve been married to for 16 years.

@SwingTheMonkey Yes, I agree it’s rare nowadays, but it was far more common when I was a teen, and people generally took marriage much more seriously and if they had problems, which I’m sure most people experience, they used to work at their relationship and not walk away for the sort of daft reasons that so many people do now. I think that in most respects, 15 year olds were way way more mature in the 1979s than they are now.

I felt invincible after having DD1 and would certainly have gone out for tea!! Good for her! DD2 I don’t think I got out of bed for a week, the child ruined me!

I agree. Remaining with the father of your baby as a 15/16/17 year old is extremely rare. Teenage years should be spent being educated, travelling or just generally living the life of a single, carefree young person. Not raising a child.
I’d be incredibly disappointed if any of my children did this. I’d support them, but I’d privately be devastated for them.

ETA I was agreeing with you @bigcushionlover - sorry if that wasn’t obvious!