Author Topic: Rude to not postpone wedding?  (Read 12196 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Venus193

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 15620
  • Backstage passes are wonderful things!
Re: Rude to not postpone wedding?
« Reply #90 on: April 05, 2013, 11:37:10 PM »
I almost feel like I've arrived late to the party here.

K and C's parents are being entitled brats about this.  If C is OK with the possibility that she will miss her sister's wedding then nothing else should be said here.  The parents don't get a vote about the wedding date or the type of ceremony.  Considering that the Forbidden Wedding Date Window could theoretically force a six-month postponement, the parents need to be told to mind their own beeswax.

It does sound as though K has always taken a back seat to C with their parents if the parents are going so far as to
  • ignore talk of K's wedding plans and
  • ignore the fact that C is OK with the wedding situation as is.

It's not rude to not move a wedding date for this.  The date should be meaningful for the couple if that is possible and that should not have to take a back seat to the parents' wishes.

sammycat

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 5596
Re: Rude to not postpone wedding?
« Reply #91 on: April 05, 2013, 11:49:19 PM »
I agree with Venus.

Possum

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 203
Re: Rude to not postpone wedding?
« Reply #92 on: April 06, 2013, 12:11:23 PM »
I guess I'm going to be odd in this, but while C and K aren't being rude, and her parents are--the parents also have a valid dilemma.  The wedding *is* all about the bride and groom.  Having a baby *is* all about mom, dad, and baby.  But seeing your daughter get married is a big deal.  With luck, it only happens once per kid. :D  Not to mention, what if K wants her father to give her away?

And not only is a first grandchild being born a huge deal, but it's also a medical one.  If something went terribly wrong, the about-to-be-grandparents would want to be there--and if it all goes well, they won't want to wait to meet their new grandchild.

In short, both are major milestones and life changing events for them, as well, and now they have to choose.

The rudeness comes in them so readily chosing one over the other, and declaring that K's wedding isn't that important.

If I were K, I would get past the sentimentality of the date and delay the wedding by a couple of months.  Why?  Because I would want my parents *and* my sister there.  It's not a manners thing--it's an "I want everyone there on my big day, and I want to be nearby and available when my niece or nephew is born."  Believe me, that birth, having people together on both occasions, is going to be a lot more sentimental than choosing the day you first said "I love you" (though that is a sweet reason to pick a date).

If it's just not possible, and the parents still have to chose, I hope one would attend each.  Perhaps the father could go to the wedding, especially if the bride wants to be given away, and the mother can attend the birth (or be ready to leave at the drop of a hat if C goes into labor).

camlan

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 8341
Re: Rude to not postpone wedding?
« Reply #93 on: April 06, 2013, 12:27:29 PM »
What if K has decided enough with trying to please her family of origin? Now, she's going to please her new family--herself and her future husband. Isn't that what we advise here frequently?

What if it's K's future husband who wants this particular combination of date and venue?

What if K sees changing her wedding date to be just one more instance where her family places her sister above her and K has just Had It, and doesn't want to change one single thing more in her life to accommodate her sister?

And I don't think the real test of C's affection for K is C not being upset at missing K's wedding. I think the *real* test is: Will C be upset if one or both of her parents isn't present when she has the baby? In other words, C may be perfectly okay with missing the wedding only if she gets the undivided attention of her parents during that time. She may, in fact, be expecting that her parents will skip the wedding if she hasn't given birth yet, or even if she has.
Nothing is impossible, the word itself says, “I’m possible!” –Audrey Hepburn

Sharnita

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 21246
Re: Rude to not postpone wedding?
« Reply #94 on: April 06, 2013, 12:37:40 PM »
Possum, I think that these parents have made it clear that seeing this daughter get married is not a big deal to them and that, in their opinion, it shouldn't even be a big deal to the bride herself.

snowdragon

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2200
Re: Rude to not postpone wedding?
« Reply #95 on: April 06, 2013, 12:50:37 PM »
Possum, If K gives in on this - she will end up being bullied into changing things for C's "convenience for the rest of her life.   It seems to me that K has had a lifetime with of being second fiddle to C and has had enough of it.

 

RingTailedLemur

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2807
  • Rudeness is a small person's imitation of power.
Re: Rude to not postpone wedding?
« Reply #96 on: April 06, 2013, 01:05:48 PM »
I'm surprised that K's parents even want to attend, given how little they think of the event.

Do we know if they are upset that a clash of dates might mean they can't attend, or if they fear the clash of dates will steal the thunder from their favourite daughter?

Sharnita

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 21246
Re: Rude to not postpone wedding?
« Reply #97 on: April 06, 2013, 01:11:31 PM »
I'm surprised that K's parents even want to attend, given how little they think of the event.

Do we know if they are upset that a clash of dates might mean they can't attend, or if they fear the clash of dates will steal the thunder from their favourite daughter?

I think maybe they are thinking this will be what it takes to convince her to just have the courthouse wedding they expected her to have in the first place? 

gramma dishes

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 7616
Re: Rude to not postpone wedding?
« Reply #98 on: April 06, 2013, 01:18:46 PM »
I think K should keep her wedding date. 

Next time her parents bring it up, I'd say "Oh, wouldn't that be just the most fantastic thing if C actually did have her baby on our wedding day?  New Husband and I would have two things to celebrate on that day for the rest of our lives!  Our anniversary and Little Niece's or Nephew's birthday!  That would just be so awesome!  Of course we'd miss you at our wedding, but it would be for such a happy reason that it wouldn't upset us at all."

gellchom

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1936
Re: Rude to not postpone wedding?
« Reply #99 on: April 06, 2013, 01:23:06 PM »
We cannot really be so quick to say that if K chooses to move her date, it is just knuckling under to bullying or another page in the history of the parents' preferring C over K.   K herself might want to try to keep the events separate in time.  If so, it isn't because K must always come second to C. It is that she can move the wedding date; C can't move the due date. 

It's still not rude for her not to move her date, and no one here has said so. 

I think some of us are just saying that IF K herself would be inclined to do so, it would be a mistake to refuse even to consider changing the date JUST BECAUSE her parents were rude or unfair.
« Last Edit: April 06, 2013, 06:08:35 PM by gellchom »

AngelicGamer

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3853
Re: Rude to not postpone wedding?
« Reply #100 on: April 06, 2013, 03:20:01 PM »
I think K should keep her wedding date. 

Next time her parents bring it up, I'd say "Oh, wouldn't that be just the most fantastic thing if C actually did have her baby on our wedding day?  New Husband and I would have two things to celebrate on that day for the rest of our lives!  Our anniversary and Little Niece's or Nephew's birthday!  That would just be so awesome!  Of course we'd miss you at our wedding, but it would be for such a happy reason that it wouldn't upset us at all."

I was going to post, but gramma dishes said what I was going to say.  :)




"Life's tough, huh?  And then you die." ~ Buck, the Magnificent Seven.

Minmom3

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2353
Re: Rude to not postpone wedding?
« Reply #101 on: April 06, 2013, 09:02:52 PM »
You know, that's just mean to her parents (extreme sarcasm intended here...) to be happy about the cause for them missing K's wedding.  And I'm good with that.  K and C are OK with the situation, no hard feelings there.  It's just the parents being uncaring about K's priorities, and putting C first, again.  So, if K could pull off being really happy about it all, that might spike the parents guns.  Which would not be a Bad Thing in my book!   >:D  Maybe let the parents feel the sting (large or small) of not being first on K's list of people to be deferred to.
Mother to children and fuzz butts....

TootsNYC

  • A Pillar of the Forum
  • *****
  • Posts: 28711
Re: Rude to not postpone wedding?
« Reply #102 on: April 06, 2013, 09:08:39 PM »
I was baffled by posts that said  . . . that a mother of the bride's time commitment is only 12 hours max. 


It is for THIS M.O.B.

Quote

Some weddings are small, and everyone lives in or near the same city, and there aren't many out of town guests, so the wedding is a few-hours event, and the parents are coming in from out of town, and the bride and groom are doing all the planning, and it's a family and community in which weddings are not so family-focused as in others, and the bride and her parents don't have the best relationship.  So, yeah, then, maybe, 12 hours.

I don't think we know how far away everything is, but the mother of the bride is doing SO LITTLE planning that she thinks the bride is getting married at the courthouse, when she has actually signed a contract with a venue already.

That's a huge part of my reaction, and a huge part (I'm guessing) of the reasoning of the people who say, "heck, the wedding will be MAXIMUM 12 hours."

Quote

When my children were born, my mother came for a few days before the due date to grocery shop, cook, and learn how our house runs so she could run things and take care of the other visitors and let us rest and focus on the baby.  And I was so glad she was there for the births, too -- even in the room the second time.  She was such a huge help.  The second time, I had preeclampsia, and had to lie down for a week before the birth; I don't know how we would have managed without her, especially with a preschooler to care for.  She sure couldn't have left to go help someone with a wedding.



But I bet she could have left to ATTEND a wedding.

*This particular bride* is not asking her mother to do anything--at least that we've heard so far. She picked a specific in-demand venue, completely without her mother's help (without her mother's *knowledge,* even) and she may have access to professionals there. And now that she knows her mom will be unavailable, she can hire professionals if she even needs them.



I personally don't get the idea that everyone in the family has to drop everything and sit at the hospital while they wait for someone ELSE to give birth. I just don't get it. You can wait at home as easily as you can wait there; even if medical complications arose, you wouldn't be allowed in the room anyway--might as well wait at home. And the dad can call you very nearly as soon as you'd hear if you were waiting in the hallway.

And you may not get to meet the new grandchild for several hours anyway! Are there hospitals where they take the kid out to hand him around 20 minutes after the birth?

Help after the delivery, yes, sure! But even then, the helper surely doesn't need to be there 24/7. And parents who were helping one child could surely be substituted for by someone else (oh, say, the dad's parents? as someone upstream suggested--or heck, a paid nurse's aide!).

UNLESS there is a lot of travel involved, this is just not a clash.

OP, I wish we knew how far away the baby's hospital/home will be from the wedding, and how far those are from the grandparents/m.o.b.'s home.

sammycat

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 5596
Re: Rude to not postpone wedding?
« Reply #103 on: April 06, 2013, 09:20:16 PM »
I personally don't get the idea that everyone in the family has to drop everything and sit at the hospital while they wait for someone ELSE to give birth. I just don't get it. You can wait at home as easily as you can wait there; even if medical complications arose, you wouldn't be allowed in the room anyway--might as well wait at home. And the dad can call you very nearly as soon as you'd hear if you were waiting in the hallway.

I completely agree!  I'm always amazed when I watch TV shows and as soon as the mother goes into labour every person she's ever met in her life suddenly rushes off to the hospital. How boring to sit in a waiting room for 12-24 hours (although on TV, labour usually end up only being 1 contraction long; however, I must confess my babies were both within an hour of arriving the hospital). My mother was present for my first son's birth but not the second; it has made no difference to the 'bonding' or the experience at all.

If I went into labour on my sister's wedding day, I would expect/insist on my parents going to the wedding. And what a great story to tell - new in-law and new grandchild, or new spouse and new niece or nephew, on the same day!

Sharnita

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 21246
Re: Rude to not postpone wedding?
« Reply #104 on: April 06, 2013, 09:32:31 PM »
FWIW, I have had a few different experiences with that, though I've never given birth myself.  In one case I was there for a friend whose husband was there but nobody else.  SHe was in labor but it did not progress.  She actually got bored soit helped for me to be there to hang out, keep her company, etc.  It was at least 36 hours between the time she arrived at the hospital and the time they did the c-section.  Immediately afterwards they wouldn't let her out of recovery for quite a while so I and another friend who had arrived shortly before the c-section were asked to call family and frineds.

My SIL had an epidural so she was also feeling pretty good and had time to kill before the delivery. 

In a few other cases people were told they needed an emergency c-section now so there was no long wait.