Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Parenting

For free parenting resources please check out the Early Years Alliance's Family Corner.

Flip

1 2 3 4

Original poster

MN POLL: would you go abroad for 2 weeks, if your daughter was 36-38 weeks pregnant with her 1st baby?

94 replies

robinredbreastnestbuilder · 28/05/2008 13:47

would you ?

OP posts:

Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

ephrinedaily · 28/05/2008 15:50

Yes definitely. Unless she wanted me to be there at the birth. My Mum didn't come to see my son till he was 5 days old and we're really close. My baby was early but I couldn't have thought about anyone else to be honest. I bet it would have been nice for my mum and dad to have holiday before the 10 lame phone calls a day about whether or not baby's breathing funny, what should he wear outside etc. etc.

MissingMyHeels · 28/05/2008 15:52

No, my Mum went to Las Vegas when I was 37 wks preg and Ireland when I was 39 wks. We are very close but we both thought it was unlikely that I would go into labour early (we were right) and first labours are often long enough for the Mum to fly back and still make it!

MissingMyHeels · 28/05/2008 15:53

I mis-read question, I thought it was would you cancel, hence the no! Yes I would go abroad

Interested in this thread?

Then you might like threads about these subjects:

Families General parenting

dizzydixies · 28/05/2008 15:57

my PIL have booked to go away in july when I'm due dc3 and they know full well that my own mother can't help because she's ill (and useless even before that to be honest)

still not sure what I'll be doing with dc whilst in hosp but seeing as nobody has offered to help I'll no doubt sort something

I personally think its a matter of priority

oh and after baby is born, they'll do what kitty's do turn up, want to be fed, brought endless cups of tea then fark off for 9months again

TigerFeet · 28/05/2008 16:01

kitty / dizzydixies - my Mum did that too. She turned up to coo over 6 day old dd for a couple of days and then fucked off until dd was 3 months old. She works in a school. It was the summer holidays. Bitter? moi?

cheesesarnie · 28/05/2008 16:04

i think nothing wrong with it.

MrsBadger · 28/05/2008 16:22

yes

dd was early and my parents were in Austria

couldn't have mattered less

sweetkitty · 28/05/2008 16:48

Luckily this time I have friends here now who have offered to take the DDs at short notice (even if I do manage to have a HB don't really want them here).

My Mum and StepDad came up less than 2 days after I had DD2, it was DD1's lunchtime so out of politeness I offered to make them something they said yes and sat there whilst DP and I made it then my Mum complained because she thought it was bacon sarnies she was getting and it wasn't it was ham, I was too at the time. This from the woman who keeps going on about how in her day you were in hospital 10 days after having a baby and weren't allowed out of bed to pee for the first 7 but entertaining her 2 days post partum is fine.

Oh I could be here all night - this time she is coming nowhere near the baby for a good few days.

SixSpotBurnet · 28/05/2008 16:49

Yes, in answer to the OP, although probably not to the other side of the world. But anywhere in Europe, yes.

eeeelectra · 28/05/2008 16:57

Yes I would....but not if daughter was not going to get help from dh for whatever reason and had specifically asked for me to be around when baby arrived.

PortAndLemon · 28/05/2008 17:26

Yes, probably. Not if I already knew that DD was likely to need help for some reason, and probably not if we as a family had a history of early births, but I wouldn't be particularly expecting the baby to turn up at that point.

Tinkjon · 28/05/2008 20:14

I definitely wouldn't go. And I was really sad and frightened when my mum did

berolina · 28/05/2008 20:19

I am with Cod.

I laboured alone in hosp with ds2 (okay, twas half an hour...). We didn't have support rom family with either ds. And I do agree with tsap that support a couple of weeks in (which we didn't have either) can be more invaluable.

HaventSleptForAYear · 28/05/2008 20:24

I don't see what it has to do with the grandmother???

My mum lives in a different country and came over for 3 weeks after each birth but not till the baby was 3 weeks old iyswim.

I just don't see why you would expect someone to change their holiday plans for a quick visit to the hospital, especially as you will probably want "space" for you and DH and pfb.

Don't have DD but still can't imagine a situation where they would want me rearranging my life for them.

I suppose the fact that NO family visited me after either DS jades this slightly - both families live v. far away so I have never experienced the "grandparents rush down to the hospital" moment.

Hasn't stopped them being involved grandparents though.

MilkMonitor · 28/05/2008 20:37

Doesn't it just depend on what the DD wants from her mother? The two of them need to discuss it, surely is the answer?

A grandmother-to-be can't automatically assume she's even wanted during labour / birth etc and so she'll get back and there'll be a new baby. Hoooray.

usernamechanged345 · 28/05/2008 20:47

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

laura032004 · 28/05/2008 21:06

I don't really know. I don't suppose I would, but I love new babies, and would probably want to see the baby ASAP. However, I've got 2 DS's, so I'll never have this issue. I don't think however close you are to your MIL, that you would want them there in the same way that you would want your own mum.

My mum was there for the birth of both DS's. Outside the theatre for DS1's ec/s, and in the room holding my head for DS2 Her support both times was fantastic, and I am very pleased that she was there.

In the case of DS1, she lived hours away, but I rang her when I knew things were kicking off, and she was there with hours to spare. With DS2 my waters broke on the Sunday, but he wasn't born until the following Saturday (stop start contractions ended up with induced labour). She managed to get there in plenty of time even though she didn't set off until the Thursday and lived in Cyprus at the time!

Pollyanna · 28/05/2008 21:12

I would, first babies are often late anyway.

mothers and mils are in a no win situation - either they hang around and phone every day, turn up the minute the baby is born and piss the daughter off (see threads passim) or bugger off on holiday and piss her off. (and you never know, she might have a life of her own....).

(my dh went on holiday at 37 weeks when my last baby was due but it was all fine anyway as he came more than 2 weeks late in the end).

motherinferior · 28/05/2008 21:13

My parents phoned me from India when I was about 35 weeks pregnant with DD1.

I snarled at them.

Gave birth two days before due date, and let them know afterwards, just as I'd intended.

julen · 28/05/2008 21:18

Yes. Unless she has no support whatsoever straight after the birth. Otherwise, absolutely; she is having the baby, not yourself, after all..

used2bthin · 28/05/2008 21:20

My Dad went away the day before I had DD. He asked what he should do before and I said go because DD was due the following week and I just knew that if he didn't go then I'd still be pg when he got back and if he did, I'd be in labour that night and guess what? I went into labour that night. There were a lot of complications with DD so he has always felt he should have been here and no doubt had a horrible journey back. But I honestly have never felt that he shouldn't have gone. I am glad my mum was there though but I didn't have a stable relationship with DD's dad so perhaps was relying on them more than others would. So I think if your DD says she's ok with it and yo re happy then do it.

Hulababy · 28/05/2008 21:24

Possibly? Would depend on circumstances I guess, or unless she needed me for support at the birth/immediately after - i.e. no partner there for her. I would probably chat beforehand though to make sure.

If my parents had it would have been fine with me. I had DH for the birth and afterwards. Yes, it was lovely for my parents to see DD quickly afterwards - next day. But it would have been fine to be a week after too.

FIl didn't see DD until she was a week old as he was in hospital - didn';t affect the support he offered afterwards nor the love and bond he has with DD.

And where does it stop? From when in your pregnancy can a parent not be away - 36 weeks? 33 weeks? 30 weeks? 28 weeks?

And from when after can they risk booking too - 40 weeks? 42 weeks? 44 weeks? more?

georgiemama · 28/05/2008 21:25

My mum was my birthing partner, so would have been a bit stuck without her.

Swedes
"Women who get all precious about their Mother not being on hand as PFB crowns are the same people who tell their Mother she can't visit for at least 2 weeks as her and Mr Uptight want some space with PFB, alone."

My mum was the best birthing partner anyone could ever have had. I can barely be arsed to respond to this comment because it is so dismissive and arsey, but just give some thought that not everyone on here is coming from the same place, eh?

TheBlonde · 28/05/2008 21:26

yes I would go away

spicemonster · 28/05/2008 21:28

Probably. My mum was my birthing partner though so moved in pretty much from week 38. Having said that, she went on holiday for a week when I was 35 weeks.

I suppose it depends on the pregnancy.

Flip

1 2 3 4

Swipe left for the next trending thread