WEDDING DILEMA

ejsgal · July 2010

So, we're progressing full steam ahead for our 9.10.11 wedding -- Man I LOVE the date.

Last night we found out we're expecting in March. Would you get married at the JP this September and renew vows with the ceremony we've planned in 2011, or would you proceed with the original wedding plan? I'm up in the air about it. I'd rather ask ya'll because you're a bit more impartial than asking our parents -- his mom is old fashioned (she already told me I can't wear white because I have a 5 year old -- frankly, I'll wear what ever color I darn well please, red even! j/k) and my mom is not the maternal, give my daughter advice type. Help! (Please) Regardless of your position, I respect it. I just wanted to look at the situation from varying positions.

ejsgal · July 2010

P.S. Besides he and I, you all are the only ones that know. We're giddy with excitement, but we're gonna wait until after the first trimester to share the news.

aerinpegadrak · July 2010

Don't lie to your guests. Just proceed with your wedding plans.

cschuma2 · July 2010

Personally, unless things would be waaay easier for you to be married, I would just stick with your original plans. If this will cause a lot of tension with your family or if you need to be on his insurance, you may want to definitely consider JOP.

Edit: If you do decide to go with the vow renewal, just make sure that all of your guests are aware of this. It will be no fun if someone thinks they have been duped.

MissDuke2012 · July 2010

I would go on with the wedding as planned. Unless of course, you have a problem with not being married when the baby comes. Who cares what everyone else says, the baby is coming regaurdless. You weren't married when you got pregnant.
My parents want FI and I to do the JOP thing, and we refused. All because I got pregnant.

ejsgal · July 2010

Thanks for all of your advice. We'll most likely proceed with plans. Baby should be six months by then anyway.

Sing2phins · July 2010

But if the baby is born after the marriage, it's not an illegitimate child, which what I think some people worry about. In most, if not all, states, though, marrying the child's father after the birth of the child legitimizes the child anyway.

quotequeen · July 2010

I think "vow renewals" when you've been married for a year or so are pretty silly, so IF it was important to me to have the big wedding, I would stick with the original plan. I might scrap the whole thing and just do the JOP though.

RecoveringActor · July 2010

This happened to a family member of mine... except she was due in September and her wedding was the next month. We went ahead as scheduled, and she had a 1 mo old at her reception, and he was a lamb. I echo everyone else and say just continue with your plans.

gottahavashorti · July 2010

[QUOTE]I never understood the whole getting married after you get preggo but before the baby is born. Baby was still conceived out of wedlock, which is the supposedly scandalous part anyway. Just go with your wedding plans as scheduled.
Posted by StageManager14[/QUOTE]
This. When couples who aren't engaged or on the verge of engagement rush to have a wedding before she's showing or before the baby is born, I know it's bad but I always wonder whether they're getting married because of the kid or orbecause they want to be married. If the couple has any doubt about whether the marriage is because of the pregnancy or not, I'd rather see them wait until the child is born to make an unclouded decision. Everyone else already knows, and the kid will be able to count backward 9 months sooner or later.

OP, either move the entire thing up to whenever the JOP wedding would be, scaling back if necessary, or continue planning for your September date. Personally, I'd go for the September date.

tidetravel · July 2010

Personally, I would scale the wedding back, and have it sooner. Not because of the whole "child out of wedlock" thing, but because I don't see the point in spending a lot of money on a party, when you have or are about to have a newborn child. If you're not struggling with money, then it's NBD, but I just think that the money could probably be put to better use somewhere else.

megk8oz · July 2010

Just get married the way you originally planned to. Unless there's an insurance issue, don't bother with the JOP at all. And if there is an insurance issue, please don't lie to your guests about being legally married.

Sing2phins · July 2010

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_chit-chat_wedding-dilema?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:14Discussion:88a23b26-f7aa-4dde-a1fd-a799c013918dPost:b7b8029c-9d9b-4af5-bda1-1b46584c8f6a">Re: WEDDING DILEMA</a>:
[QUOTE] Um, children aren't actually considered illegitimate anyway any more. At least not in the legal sense. So, it's of no consequence.
Posted by StageManager14[/QUOTE]
That may be (though I'm not sure that's true), but I suspect it's one of those things where people still believe it's true even if it isn't the law anymore. IMy point was, the reason some people rush to get married before the baby is born is probably due to societal ideas about illegitimacy.

WEDDING DILEMA

Re: WEDDING DILEMA

Choose Another Board

Search Boards