Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

....to still want to go to the wedding?

112 replies

HeldTogetherByGafferTape · 09/09/2016 11:24

I've recently moved out of London up to Scotland. I'm 39 + 1 weeks pregnant (first pregnancy), and I have a wedding invite tomorrow in London town.

I booked an paid for everything months ago in the hope that my either my brain or biology would have made it clear by now whether I was going to be able to go or not. But here we are 1 day before and I'm still in a muddle about what to do.

First class tickets on the train journey (4hours) are booked and paid for, travelling down tomorrow morning, and back up Sunday morning, as is a room at the hotel where the reception is happening, and husband is also booked to come along for the trip and the wedding, so I'm likely to be pretty comfortable and well looked after all day, and able to rest should it all become a bit too much.

Pros of going are - seeing a really dear group of friends I won't see for probably a long time after the baby arrives, plus maintaining some important work contacts which is critical in my industry, especially as I'm freelance. Also of course having a nice day at the wedding, and not letting the grooms down by flaking out at the last minute (though obviously we had a chat when they invited me that I couldn't guarantee attendance and were happy to keep me on the list) + I guess not losing money on the train and hotel (though tbh I'm far less bothered about that last aspect).

There's only one big Con - what if I go into labour? Either on the train or in London.

All my maternity care up to 8 months was in London, so the idea of giving birth down there isn't terrifying...though I'd really rather not! What really worries me is the logistics of getting back to Scotland again with the baby were this to happen, and we don't have a house there any more to spend some time in while we sorted ourselves out.

The midwife didn't seems too alarmed when I spoke to her about it 10 days ago. She just said to take the book and a hospital bag just in case. Since then the bump seems to have dropped a little, but I'm still pretty mobile, no twinges, can cross my legs etc, but a few more experienced friends have made it clear that they think I'm mad to even consider it.

So - what do you think? Am I mad/unreasonable to even consider doing this?

OP posts:
Smartiepants79 · 09/09/2016 17:47

If it's only tomorrow and you've had no indication so far of imminent labour and that continues to be the case overnight then I think you're fine to go.
You're not travelling to a third world country it would be fine should it all go tits up.
it sounds like a lovely last hurrah before your whole life changes!!

passingthrough1 · 09/09/2016 17:51

Rolling my eyes at everyone saying first babies are always late.
It's not true at all. I think statistically the standard deviation from due date is a little higher for 1st babies than 2nd- so more likely to be early or late - or more early or more late than the following babies - but that doesn't mean that most will be late at all. I had mine just over 37 (I know one anecdotal examples doesn't prove or disprove a theory) and hasn't had twinges, wasn't even engaged at last MW app etc .. However I think in my gut I knew the baby wouldn't be long.
Only thing to consider - and I do think worth considering. A LOT of babies have to stay in for an extra few days for jaundice and things like that. If your baby stayed in for a few days and you were basically stuck in the hospital, unable to nip home for supplies or even worse if you were discharged before the baby so visiting back and forth from a hotel that wouldn't be ideal and might be a bit stressful. I know the ideal is go in, uncomplicated labour and take baby home 12 hours later but there can be so many minor complications with the birth or additional checks for the baby where being far from home might not be great.
That being said, I think people do often just know as I did .. And a few days isn't a big gamble I guess.

suspiciousdelicious · 09/09/2016 18:01

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE GO!!!!!

Have a brilliant time. Other half will take care of you. The pictures will be so special and the bride and groom will be so touched you made the effort. And there will probably be CAKE!!!!

TragicallyUnbeyachted · 09/09/2016 18:04

No one said that first babies are always late (I've just checked the whole thread and you are the first person to mention that). A couple of people have said that first babies are "often late" or "probably late", which is true. IIRC median birth date for first babies where there is no intervention is 41+1, so chances of having the baby at 39+2 are relatively low, compared to if we'd had the same OP starting with "I'm 41+1" or "I'm 41+5". Not so low that they ought to be discounted, but low enough that a "probably won't happen, but if it does..." is quite reasonable.

PervyMuskrat · 09/09/2016 18:06

What neolara said (although the sub 1 hour second labour has meant we stopped at 2) Grin

WhisperingLoudly · 09/09/2016 18:14

My babies were all early but I'd absolutely go to the wedding.

There's really no downside - on the off chance the baby arrives it's all fairly easily manageable.

Have fun Grin

VerbenaGirl · 09/09/2016 18:18

You sound well prepared, are not travelling alone, and can access maternity services as and when required. Go and enjoy your last outing before parenthood :-)

Hobbes8 · 09/09/2016 18:36

I moved house at 39+2. moving day involved a 1.5 hour drive on my own. I was fine - excited about the new house and full of beans. I made sure I knew where the new maternity ward though.

Ilovenannyplum · 09/09/2016 18:39

Id probably go Grin

Although DS (my first born) was actually 9 days early so not all first baby's are late!

LunaLoveg00d · 09/09/2016 18:45

With my second baby I went from London to Scotland for an important wedding at 39+ 4. I was more concerned about going into labour on the M6 than at the wedding. I had my hospital bag and essentials with me, had sussed out where the hospital was and knew how to get there from the venue. I travelled back home after the wedding on the day before my due date. (Baby was 9 days late).

Midwife was horrified, although I think she was the typical Londoner who wonders if there's even electricity in Scotland, let alone maternity wards. The journey by car wasn't great, train would have been much easier. I say that if you're feeling well, and if it's important to be at the wedding, then go.

But then don't go into labour at the wedding or the bride will be on here on MOnday about a wedding guest who stole her thunder when her waters broke as they were cutting the cake.

Strokethefurrywall · 09/09/2016 19:21

I'd go, even though my babies were at least 2 weeks early.

In your case, with no twinges and feeling well, I'd be there to celebrate like a shot. Enjoy!

Crunchymum · 09/09/2016 19:37

If I really wanted to go I'd go. Both my pregnancies were pretty easy though.

It would be highly unlikely you'll go from not single sign of labour to delivery in the 4 hour train journey!!

Karoleann · 09/09/2016 19:45

Nah I really wouldn't go (and all mine have been so late that I've had to be induced). Why?
Well - you do feel knackered, sore and odd afterwards, especially just before your milk comes in.

You may have a nice sleepy easy one - or you might have a complete screaming nightmare.
Bfing is really difficult to begin with, your nipple is enormous compared to their mouth and latching on can be hard initially and you can feel self-concious if you're not used to exposing to your breasts.

Public transport is not clean AT ALL

So, I really wouldn't want to be either driving, flying or training up to Scotland with a tiny newborn.

ecuse · 09/09/2016 19:52

I'd go! (That is - I can't imagine being arsed/wanting to, but if I did, I would)

readyforno2 · 09/09/2016 19:56

Definitely go! You might have to hit the sack early but what a lovely treat!
Although beware, there are sure to be bump touchers at a wedding!

MrsHam13 · 09/09/2016 20:04

I wouldn't but my first was four weeks early and labour was an hour and ten minutes. Came totally out the blue at five am in the morning after being at my friends new year party the night before.

To be fair though. If you do go. And did go into Labour whilst there. Just buy a sling in London if baby comes and wear the baby home on the train in that. Take extra pjs and your dh can stay in hospital if allowed or hotel.

BennyTheBall · 09/09/2016 20:07

I'd go, in fact I did go to a wedding at 39 weeks, although it was only about 30 miles away.

GlitteryFluff · 09/09/2016 20:08

I'd go if I felt up to it.
If definitely take notes and maybe not the entire hospital bag but things that would be difficult/expensive to buy if I already had them (tens machine for example) but DH could nip out for pjs, maternity pads, baby grows, nappies etc if baby came early.
I'd also Google what hospitals are en route.

Xmasbaby11 · 09/09/2016 20:11

The thing that would worry me, apart from going into labour on a train, would be delivering so very far from home. You'd be in at least overnight but often it's longer. And then you'd have to travel back with a newborn.

When my waters broke it took at least 6 towels to mop up and the contractions were immediately painful, even though the baby didn't come for 27 hours. I was then in hospital for a week with feeding problems.

Obviously I'm biased because of my experience though! And I was 13 days over. But lots of mothers do need to stay in after the birth.

GlitteryFluff · 09/09/2016 21:06

Her waters could break in Tesco or in a taxi or on a bus to the high street,or a coffee shop or cinema or restaurant - all local. She's not going to stay indoors from 37weeks til her waters break incase it's inconvenient where they break. Also don't some people waters break drop by drop rather than a gush?

imwithspud · 09/09/2016 21:17

Yes they do. Mine went with a 'pop' both times. Once during slow labour and once during full blown labour. But lots of people have a 'trickle' which is easily absorbed with a pad. Some don't even notice it.

LunaLoveg00d · 10/09/2016 09:17

I have never had the waters breaking before contractions start thing, with three labours each time the waters went I was about 9cm dilated and almost ready to push.

Hope the OP is on her way to London - let us know how it goes OP.

Mirandawest · 10/09/2016 17:57

Hope you're at the wedding having a lovely time Smile

HuckfromScandal · 11/09/2016 14:31

Did you go OP?

Nonameyet1 · 11/09/2016 18:37

I hope she did, I just came to check the thread to see if she did?

Swipe left for the next trending thread