Duty to go to a wedding?

sekura · July 2014

One of DH's oldest friends (from high school) is getting married on Saturday. DH is a groomsman. We've known for months that the timing would be terrible, but we've always planned to go if possible. (I'll be 38 weeks 2 days, and DS1 was born at exactly 38 weeks).
The wedding is about 45 minutes away, so not too far; but I'm 4 cm dilated, 50% effaced, -1 station. Midwife thinks I'll have a very fast labor, and is a bit concerned at the distance to the hospital.
I've told DH that so long as I'm not already in labor, we will plan to go. But yesterday evening he says "I have a duty to be at the wedding; so as long as you're not in active labor--if you've already had the baby--I will go".

????He has a DUTY to be at the wedding??? If I'm in the hospital with a newborn, (even fully healthy), where exactly do YOU think his duty lies?

caballablanca · July 2014

Do you have family or friends nearby that could help if you were to go into labor while he was at the wedding? 45 minutes really isn't that far, and if you were to go into labor, I think he would get there in time to not miss anything. If it were me, I would not be going to the wedding myself cause I would be too uncomfortable sitting on those hard chairs, but I would let DH go as long as I wasn't showing signs that labor was in progress. My parents also live down the street from me and could drive if I were to go into labor.

Now if I was showing any signs that labor was happening or in the hospital, then they would just have to be down a groomsman, which I'm sure they have already planned for.

MandMLeona · July 2014

I'm probably going to be unpopular, but I'd agree with your husband for the actual ceremony. If you're in labor...he doesn't go. If you aren't yet, he goes and plans to attend as much as possible of the rest of the formal stuff at the reception. If baby is already here, and he's had a bit of time to bond, then he goes just to the ceremony...now that's assuming no scary complications are happening at the time...but I think that's fairly reasonable.

Raclla · July 2014

I would have told him not to commit to being in the wedding in the first place.
Too late for that, so he needs to go for as little time as possible.
Ceremony only.
Unless you're in active labor or just delivered 10 minutes ago, he should be there.

The problem is going to be if they want him there hours before or after for pictures and shenanigans.

jojosmommmy · July 2014

My husband and I both agreed to be in my sister in laws wedding, which is 2 weeks before my due date. I'll be 38w1d. I figure if we're going to be there and the baby isn't here yet, we should be in the wedding. If the baby comes earlier, my sister in law has said over and over that she doesn't expect either of us to be there.

If it came down to it and baby comes early and I'm in the hospital with the baby or home, I see no reason why he can't go to the ceremony. The only way I plan on missing that wedding is if I'm in active labor or just had the baby!

belle785 · July 2014

He should go if you aren't in labor or just had the baby. He committed to this and could have backed out ages ago.

jenniferurs · July 2014

I agree that he should go if you've already had the baby and aren't experiencing any complications. But then, I'm also the woman who's going to an out-of-state wedding 2 weeks after my due date, so I think I place a little more importance on best friends' weddings than most.

That being said, I would compromise. Ceremony, but no reception.

cashews29 · July 2014

MandMLeona said:

I'm probably going to be unpopular, but I'd agree with your husband for the actual ceremony. If you're in labor...he doesn't go. If you aren't yet, he goes and plans to attend as much as possible of the rest of the formal stuff at the reception. If baby is already here, and he's had a bit of time to bond, then he goes just to the ceremony...now that's assuming no scary complications are happening at the time...but I think that's fairly reasonable.

This is where I am too.

Jenrileysmom · July 2014

cashews29 said:

MandMLeona said:

I'm probably going to be unpopular, but I'd agree with your husband for the actual ceremony. If you're in labor...he doesn't go. If you aren't yet, he goes and plans to attend as much as possible of the rest of the formal stuff at the reception. If baby is already here, and he's had a bit of time to bond, then he goes just to the ceremony...now that's assuming no scary complications are happening at the time...but I think that's fairly reasonable.

This is where I am too.

Same.

dogperson11 · July 2014

MandMLeona said:
I'm probably going to be unpopular, but I'd agree with your husband for the actual ceremony. If you're in labor...he doesn't go. If you aren't yet, he goes and plans to attend as much as possible of the rest of the formal stuff at the reception. If baby is already here, and he's had a bit of time to bond, then he goes just to the ceremony...now that's assuming no scary complications are happening at the time...but I think that's fairly reasonable.

I agree with this as well. If it's only 45 minutes away and he only goes for pictures / ceremony he would probably only be gone 4-5 hours tops. If you're still in the hospital then the staff will help you and you'll get some good bonding time in.

CanadianintheSouth · July 2014

My DH works 45 mins away, so in my opinion it is not that far of a drive. I agree with everyone else, he should go (I would personally skip it) and he can always leave if you go into labor.

Russiandea12 · July 2014

I agree that he should go if you aren't in active labor. I would stay if I were you. If you have had the baby, are you still in the hospital or at home, will you have help? My DH is a groomsman in his roomate from college's wedding 8/16, wedding is 8+ hours away,VA when we are in OH, and he will be attending alone Fri-Sun, as I am having a RCS 8/4. He agreed to be in the wedding prior to finding out we were pregnant and this is one of his best friends. However, I have made plans for my parents to be at our house when he is gone so I have help with my DS and new baby.

sekura · July 2014

We've always planned (and I still plan on) going to the wedding if I'm not in active labor. I was just irritated he would say he has a duty to be there. This guy is an old friend, but not what I would call a "best" friend--they see each other maybe 3 times a year.

I suppose I'm overreacting, and, as MsGrace says, borrowing trouble. Thanks for your thoughts. I'm glad I asked.

shutaff · July 2014

I agree with the others that if you aren't in active labor or if the baby is already born, he should go, but just to the ceremony. Most ceremonies only last like 30 minutes, so he would be gone 2-3 hours tops. I'm assuming your husband still works, so it's really no different than him being gone to work for a few hours. It might be nice to have a little time with your family if they're nearby or to rest and let the nurses take the baby during that time anyway. With that being said, if you are in active labor or the baby is like 2 minutes old, I understand him not going. And obviously, if you go into labor and text him that you are, he needs to hightail it out of there.

shevaCC · July 2014

I'm with the group that says as long as you're not in labor or just pushed out the baby within the last hour or two, I'd have him go. It doesn't seem that much different than having your H have to go back to work fairly soon after the new baby arrives, and probably he'll be gone for less hours.

Jolaine83 · July 2014

Honestly, he does have a duty to be there. He agreed to be a groomsman. That's not just an honor, but in fact a role in the wedding. It will throw off a lot for him to just skip without good reasoning. That being said, he also has a duty to you to be there if you need him to be. It is possible for him to have a duty to both parties here (the groom and you). He just has to make a choice, depending on the circumstances, of which duty is greater - if you are in active labor, you'd be the greater duty. If you are just not up to attending but home relaxing safely, the groom has the greater duty to his presence at that moment. 45 min isn't too long of a drive for him to rush home as long as you aren't already having timeable contractions before he leaves. My hospital is 25 min from my house alone.

Is it maybe the tone in which he used for this statement? Because simply saying he has a duty isn't putting the groom before you. It's just the sign that he is responsible and respectful to all of those in his life and that he doesn't want to flake on this friend without good reason.

Want a personalized experience?

Duty to go to a wedding?

Re: Duty to go to a wedding?

Choose Another Board

Search Boards