Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to think if you're going to update your fb status during labour..

107 replies

judgeypantaloons · 09/01/2011 10:24

you should try not to be too vague?

A work colleague was induced early yesterday morning. About an hour ago, she posted her first post in labour: she "feels like she is in someone else's bad dream".

Having close family experience of stillbirth, I felt absolutely sick to read this. I don't know her that well, but had this awful sinking feeling.

Cue a lot of comments from her other fb friends clearly indicating worry e.g. "thinking of you", "hope you are safe and well","hope all is okay?" etc

10 minutes ago, update from her husband: "Good luck love, I'm off home, have left you money for the taxi, no need to get cash out".

a) Ill-advised to discuss labour like this
b) Husband is a twat.

AIBU?
So I am assuming that no catastrophe has occurred.

It all seems horrendous to me.

OP posts:
usualsuspect · 09/01/2011 12:09

I felt like I was in a living nightmare when I was in labour

Original poster
judgeypantaloons · 09/01/2011 12:10

Yes, so did I.. surprises me that you would be physically able to post about it at the point you were enduring it, though. Or that you would want to.. which is why I thought it must be over and that there were complications.

Apparently others are better at multi-tasking than me!

OP posts:
usualsuspect · 09/01/2011 12:12

I wouldn't post anywhere but my labours were in the olden days before fb Grin

BuzzLightBeer · 09/01/2011 12:15

Yes clearly, while in labour, she should have thought of a contact (you say you don't know her well) who might have read something into her status that wasn't there. How awful of her not to think of you at that time.

Original poster
judgeypantaloons · 09/01/2011 12:24

Yeah, that's what I said Buzz Hmm.

My point was that it was worrying for those who did know her and that I find it ill-advised to post about labour during labour to people who know you when it's all still to play for... but yes, you are right, having any thoughts about the actions of anyone at any point implies intractable self-absorption.

OP posts:
BuzzLightBeer · 09/01/2011 12:29

yeah thats what I said judgey Hmm apt name by the way.

wannaBe · 09/01/2011 12:29

it's not the status you should judge IMO but the fact she even posted.

Let's face it - posting on facebook (or mn for that matter) while in labour is nothing short of self-indulgent attention seeking.

I think it's very sad that people need to post quite that much detail about their lives on facebook, especially given that the majority of people on fb aren't generally the types of people you would share your most intimate life details with.

And the risk you run is that people will get sick of it and will just switch it off, meaning they might then not pick up something that could be important.

I had a friend who posted every intimate detail about her pregnancy on fb. So much so that an awful lot of people got so sick of reading her status updates that they blocked them. And then her baby was born prematurely and had to go into scbu and very nearly died, and she posted all that on fb as well, but you know what? because so many people had blocked her status updates, an awful lot of people didn't even know she'd had the baby (she was early so not expected) didn't know that he was seriously ill in scbu, didn't know that he wasn't expected to survive.

And for me personally, reading those status updates felt like I was being voyuristic. I was an aquaintence, certainly not a close enough friend that, had I not had her on fb, she would have felt she could ring me and tell me all this, iyswim. I think people have lost the plot as far as fb is concerned tbh, and have forgotten that, not only do the majority of people really not care when you got up/had breakfast/conceived/went into labour etc, but people make their lives an awful lot more public than they otherwise would do but because it's on the net they don't seem to see it the same.

BuzzLightBeer · 09/01/2011 12:37

I've never understood that about facebook. You are not compelled to read anyones page, or follow their lives. If you don't like how they post you delete them or hide them. If you are looking at someone's status it is because you have chosen to, not because anyone has made you.

You can't complain that you feel voyeuristic when you have chosen to be a voyeur. Don't like it, don't look.

ZillionChocolate · 09/01/2011 12:39

The difference between posting on here and on facebook is that facebook tends to be the people you know in real life. I could have accurately updated fb on Friday with "ZillionChocolate has refused to go to hospital and has sent the paramedics on their way". I didn't because to do so would be attention seeking and only gave half the story and would have caused the people who care about me to worry, more than they needed to.

I accept that people might behave irrationally/unusually during labour but the vague attention seeking post is a regular fb phenomenon. It wouldn't have killed her husband to reply explaining that all was well.

YANBU

Original poster
judgeypantaloons · 09/01/2011 12:48

Buzz, I primarily use fb to stay in contact with family here and abroad.

I have acquired other friends along the way, and as a great number of my work colleagues are on fb it would have seemed rude to ignore friendship requests.

As I mentioned, this girl has only posted twice in one year so I have had no reason to hide her status updates. As such, this came up in my newsfeed, first item when I opened it today.

It is somewhat disingenuous to take the "if you don't like it, turn it off" approach that seems to be so prolific on MN right now with regards to fb. As Zillion says, these are people you know.

She's not my best friend, by any means, but I would not want any harm to come to her or her child and I did find it upsetting. I don't think she was thinking of me when she wrote it, or any of her 150+ friends.. and yes, I too see that labour makes people behave unusually.

I still find "vaguebooking" uncomfortable, particularly when referring to things that might relate to real-life negative experiences. I don't think that means I think this girl should have been thinking of me but there is increasingly less and less self-editing and awareness of audience. I see teacher and other public sector friends posting about being off their trolleys when friends of theirs are friends with parents of their pupils etc.

If you are going to share about something so personal, it might be best to restrict it via text to people you know will give a shit. Or else risk being judged for it..

OP posts:
usualsuspect · 09/01/2011 12:53

The only people I have on fb are people I could text and say are you ok if they have a worrying status...I wouldn't accept just any one as a friend ...in fact I have only 28 friends on there Grin plus one irritating cousin whos posts I have hidden

CamelToeAndWine · 09/01/2011 12:54

Haven't read all the thread but it's an attention thing. Like the people who post "Feeling really sad/fed up/insert negative emotion here" and when people go "Oh, what's up hun/babes" they go "Can't really talk about it on here"

WELL DON'T BLOODY POST ATTENTION SEEKING STATUS UPDATES THEN!

BuzzLightBeer · 09/01/2011 12:55

well more fool you for having people on there who you'd rather not. Perhaps she didn't know her audience didn't want to listen to her.
I tend to assume that if someone wished to add me its because they actually want to hear me. But perhaps thats why I have a small select contacts list of people I know well.

and if you don't like it turn it off is good advice. Not if you don't like it complain and bitch about it while still looking at it.

Original poster
judgeypantaloons · 09/01/2011 12:57

See, in that instance it would be very different, don't you think? I suppose I am viewing it in the context of broadcasting something risky, personal and intimate that hasn't even reached its conclusion to your entire social network, when you don't know how that will be perceived. I don't really update myself for this reason. Pictures of ds every six months or so, and I often filter work colleagues out of these albums.. but none of these would be particularly private. It just seems so.. private.

OP posts:
Original poster
judgeypantaloons · 09/01/2011 13:03

Above comment directed to usual suspect.

Buzz.. really? The point is that it is a basic social skill to choose your audience, so "not knowing" that they don't want to know is somewhat irrelevant. I shouldn't use fb for the many reasons that I do and should disengage because I have an opinion on one particular post? No one can have any thoughts on anything that they can opt out of, ever? Why?

I have a select contacts list too, and she is a work colleague that it would have been difficult to ignore a request from while simultaneously approving others. Surely that is not that difficult to understand?

What's your actual opinion on providing updates while in labour on fb? That might be more interesting to read than your tired attempts to prove I am wrong to even have a thought about it.

OP posts:
JamieLeeCurtis · 09/01/2011 13:06

Sorry - have not read whole thread as I have a rant to get off my chest.

This seems, to me to highlight a basic problem about how people use fb ie totally thoughtlessly and without recourse to the normal conventions of social interaction

Serendippy · 09/01/2011 13:06

Is there a need to post a fb status during labour?

I'm pretty sure there is no need to post a fb status EVER! When can you think that you would need, as in a life and death matter, to update your status.

YABU. She is keeping occupied.

JamieLeeCurtis · 09/01/2011 13:09

wannaBe - I agree with youu last post on the whole. Maybe not about MN though. MN is anonymous and can be of support to people who are perhaps alone in the middle of the night labouring.

BluTac · 09/01/2011 13:11

The whole thing of posting your status at any time is, imo, beyond arrogant. Why the fuck do you think anyone cares anyway?

Original poster
judgeypantaloons · 09/01/2011 13:17

JamieLeeCurtis
"This seems, to me to highlight a basic problem about how people use fb ie totally thoughtlessly and without recourse to the normal conventions of social interaction"

Exactly! And it is not particularly relevant that a) the words make objective sense; b) she is keeping busy; c) I don't have to read it, d) I shouldn't be friends with anyone who is not my nearest and dearest or e) I don't have to be on fb.

It exposes her in a way that she has no control over. It is a personal and intimate reaction to a major life event, broadcast to the masses.. and it's not even over yet.

MN is fascinating in that mere hints of "judginess" can be rounded upon (and I am not particularly referring to this thread), yet gross breaches of normal social convention applauded and understood (again, not making this point specific to this thread).

Does anything go, these days, just because you can "switch it off"?

OP posts:
BuzzLightBeer · 09/01/2011 13:18

because they have chosen to look at it. You are showing a fundamental misunderstanding of it all. You aren't broadcasting to everyone sayong look at me, aren't I interesting. You are talking to people who have sought you out or have accepted you.
Thats like complaining you are listening to a boring radion show when you have looked it up, picked the programme and won't switch it off.

BluTac · 09/01/2011 13:23

This sort of thing is why I'm not on facebook anymore. Only people who are doing really boring things seem to post status updates (or perhaps that's just my friends, I don't know)

Original poster
judgeypantaloons · 09/01/2011 13:28

Buzz, you are speaking about it as if it were a MN forum topic or a blog that you specifically seek out.

A great many people use facebook as a means of staying in contact with a particular group of people, but have additional "friends" that for one reason or another, they felt they had to accept as friends. Saying "oh but you could have chosen to ignore their request" has the potential to deny the basic social conventions of RL e.g. accepting one SIL but not another, or three out of four work colleagues.

Fb is different to fora and blogs in that it is quite specifically linked to real life and has potential implications in real life e.g. a "defriending" can have real-life repercussions and usually reflects real-life trouble. It simply isn't like television or other media in this respect.

OP posts:
usualsuspect · 09/01/2011 13:32

Fb to some people is about updating their status ...you can't ask people to use it in such a way as you approve of, or only post acceptable statuses ...some mn threads bore me to tears but I hide them or ignore them ..if you use either you have to accept the way other people post

JamieLeeCurtis · 09/01/2011 13:32

But, I thought FB was about communicating with your "friends" Buzz. When you ring or write to, or talk to someone you know, you think about what you are saying and how it will be understood.

So writing things on FB that you don't intend to be genuinely give-and take (ie, you have thought about what you are saying, how, and to whom), is inherently just attention-seeking