Offered a all expense paid trip abroad.... But there is a catch

[Ibizababe]

Met someone through work 9 months ago while they were were the main contractor to carry out refurb at my place of work. Got on great, lots of chemistry, flirting extra!

There contracted finished beginging of this year and he went abroad (Spain) to work on his next contract and he is still there!

We have kept in regular touch through phone text and email and yesterday he has offered me a long weekend (all paid for) to fly out on visit him in 2 weeks time!

Course I would usually jump at the chance, and why not never know what might come of it!

Catch is I found out around the time he was leaving that I was pregnsnt, now I'm 24 weeks, I'm not with father we split just before I found out I was pregnsnt!

I did tell him last night about the baby and he didn't seem to concerned and it looks like offer is still on!

I can't go can I?

So glad you are going op. Have a great time x

Fucksake!

Sometimes I bloody cook the dinner, and still give DH a BJ.

I am clearly selling myself too cheaply. I should hang out for a taco, at the very least.

Have a lovely time, OP.

Wish I'd had a nice Spanish holiday @ 24 weeks' pregnant. Go, enjoy!

As for some of the remarks here, "icky", "not classy",
I can't be the only one who finds the idea of shagging randoms while you're pregnant, distasteful?

Randoms? plural? OP has met him they've spent time in each other's company, she's not turning tricks in a continental layby.

To the poster who mentioned that she wouldn't want her dd acting 'like this' ;
1 - how can you stop her?
2 - what will you do if she does act 'like this'? Suggest an abortion? (problem solved! ?)
3 - maybe hide her away until after the birth, then have the baby adopted out?

OR - support the mother on whatever she wants to do with her body?

I know what I'd do, as a mother of that daughter.

A lot of the judgements on this mad thread come from the old-fashioned 'women should be married before getting pregnant', 'women are the property of the impregnating man', 'pregnant women are somehow icky' and 'women should not be accepting gifts from men at any stage of their lives, because the man will want repaying somehow'

captain that was me.

1. I can't stop her - just ask her to think how her actions might impact her and her unborn child.

2. I wouldn't suggest an abortion, but I'm pro choice so would ask her to consider it.

3. No, that would be ridiculous.

I wouldn't support her with WHATEVER she wanted to do with her body. I'd point out that as an expectant mother, she's no longer the most important person in her own life, and that frankly she needed to come to terms with that pretty quickly. It's not to say that she couldn't have a life, but that she ought to get used to not ALWAYS thinkiing of herself.

For what it's worth, I beleive women should be married before they're pregnant. I believe that a marriage is the best environment in which to raise children. That's not to say that I don't accept that families come in all shapes and sizes (I was raised in a step family) I just think that being married is best. Some people won't have that view - and are perfectly entitled to it, but to dismiss my (and others) opinions as 'old fashioned' is frankly ridiculous.

I'm not sure I've seen anywhere on this thread from those posters that are holding reservations, that 'women are the property of impregnating men' I could be wrong though.

The OPs position has moved markedly since the initial post. If the situation is as the OP now describes it, there would be no need for the question in the first place. The question arises becasue the OP herself had reservations.

Why is no 3 ridiculous? I flat-shared with a pregnant girl who had come over to England to have her baby, which was then adopted. I don't think the family even knew she was pregnant. She certainly lived for 9 months with the weight of old fashioned views.

And that's not ridiculous?

Absolutely, it is ridiculous. She should have been able to tell her parents, have the baby in her own country and either keep it or give it up for adoption, whatever she decided. Unfortuantley she felt she had to hide away like a 19th century harlot and have the baby without any support.

It still happens, even today. (some) People on this bonkers thread seem to have the same sort of ideas! To suggest that she should be some sort of shameful figure, kind of disgusting for being pregnant without being married (which is a totally made-up societal situation) is also ridiculous.

Women should be able to choose what to do with their own bodies, at every stage of their lives. And to say that they need to think of someone other than themselves, is all well and good, but until that baby is born, it is her decision and no-one elses. Not her exP, not her mum, not some people on Internet.

Oh dear looks like I have committed a huge social faux pas
On monday my neighbour took in a parcel for me, should I have offered him a quick 5 knuckle shuffle as thanks?
Why just yesterday my mum did some shopping for me. Would a quick tickle of the tits be considered an acceptable level of payment? I,m so confused. Does anyone have the price list available as a PDF?

Meddie I need brain bleach after your post! ! Titty tickle your DM!!! My eyes!!!

If he takes the dc to see Frozen, do you let him take you Up The North Mountain?

Malice your logic is flawed! You say in 1. That she needs to consider the impact of her actiobs on her unborn child and in a subsequent post about her being secondary to said child. Yet you state that you would ask your dd to consider aborting her child (your grandchild).

Your attitude is far more "icky" than that of the op going for a weekend away with someone who doest happen to be the father of her child. She hasn't even said she was going to shag him. Clearly her pregnancy is going to iimpact on any future RELATIONSHIP with this man which is why she started the thread. He clearly is thinking of a long term thing with the op. But what impact going to Spain is going to have on the child is beyond me

I hope you have a lovely time OP. FWIW, I know of two couples who met when the women were pregnant, both happily married for several years, with further children, and both men are Dads to the children their DWs were carrying when they met.

The logic isn't flawed LEM it just isn't. Scenario 1 assumes that the OP has decided to see the pregnancy through to conclusion. My later comments (in relation to the hypothetical question in respect of my own daughter) derive from what , for me, is broadly a 'pro-choice' stance.

Deciding to continue an unplanned pregnancy still doesn't put the woman in a secondary position. She's still an autonymous human being who can have all the sex she wants and decide for herself how much alcohol, shelfish and pate she will ingest.

Legally, yes.........

Leaving aside the shell fish and pate (I wasn't even aware that those things were off the menu - or the sex frankly) I think it should be classed as abuse to knowingly drink/smoke/use drugs during a pregnancy. In those circumstances, the woman is secondary. For most right thinking people, this isn't really an issue as they only seek to do what's best for their unborn children anyway.

I say that coming from a broadly pro-choice stance. I also don't claim to be an expert on the impact of smoking/drug use/alcohol during pregnancy - and just choose to believe what I'm told.

Pregnant women have the right to make their own assessment of risk. Nearly all the 'advice' given about what to avoid while PG is a lot less about public health and a lot more about reinforcing the idea that women are not, actually, autonymous and their behaviour needs to be controlled by men because they are the vessels for babies rather than people in their own right. The idea that a woman is 'secondary' to a foetus is not a pro-choice position, it's a misogynist one.

My position (not that it matters) is that a woman has the right to choose, but that once she's made that decision, she needs to do all that she can so as to give the best possible start to that child. Legally, this is not the case; however, it is what most people do.

My view - although construed as misogynistic - isn't. It isn't about the subjugation of women, but rather about recognising that children need to be given the best start in life and that some people are incapable of putting their own wants and needs ahead of their unborn children. The same goes for blokes to - though biology dictates that the two (while not usually mutually exclusive for man or woman) are not so closely intertwined.

I agree women shouldn't smoke during pregnancy and probably shouldn't drink either (not sure if one or two is ok) that is not about the woman being secondary. Its about caring enough for the baby to not expose it to harm. Most women happily do this. Everyone has a different perception of risk Regarding those things for me its dont smoke at all. The odd glass of wine ok. For others the line is ina different place. Remember those things potentially harm the mother too. But having sex categorically does not harm the baby so its still a flawed argument.

Oh god is this thread still limping on............Hasn't up the duff girl gone abroad to shag 'no such thing as a free lunch' man yet...............

Only on mumsnet can a thread about a free holiday turn into a debate about diet in pregnancy.