overseas travel - pregnant vs baby
Printed From: OHbaby!
Category: General Chat
Forum Name: General Chat
Forum Description: For mums, dads, parents-to-be, grandparents, friends -- you name it! And you name the topic you want to chat about!
URL: https://www.ohbaby.co.nz/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=13447
Printed Date: 11 October 2025 at 1:43pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.05 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: overseas travel - pregnant vs baby
Posted By: caliandjack
Subject: overseas travel - pregnant vs baby
Date Posted: 08 January 2008 at 11:40am
|
Which is easier travelling pregnant or with a baby.
We are planning on travelling to the UK in 2009 next year as a belated honeymoon. I was planning on being pregnant at the time, but not sure I can wait that long. What is it like travelling long distance with a baby under 2? Has anyone done both, travelled pregnant and/or with baby? ------------- http://lilypie.com" rel="nofollow">   [/url] Angel June 2012 |
Replies:
Posted By: mummy_becks
Date Posted: 08 January 2008 at 11:43am
|
I would rather travel pregnant with with a baby then you only have to worry about yourself. ------------- I was a puree feeder, forward facing, cot sleeping, pram pushing kind of Mum... and my kids survived! |
Posted By: caliandjack
Date Posted: 08 January 2008 at 11:59am
That's what I thought, ho humm TTC has to wait for another year. ------------- http://lilypie.com" rel="nofollow"> [/url] Angel June 2012 |
Posted By: yummymummy
Date Posted: 08 January 2008 at 12:33pm
|
Yeah, I'd rather travel pregnant than with baby.
We've only been to Wellington when Gina was 10 months old or so and it didn't really feel like a holiday. You need to stick to their schedules still and carry nappies; clothes change; toys; food; etc etc everywhere!!! You can't go to dinner and visiting museums can be tricky - it's all baby permitting so to speak. Oh and I was pregnant on the trip too and that was fine 
PS: It depends if you have family in the UK of course as they may be keen to see bubs and then it will be worth it. They may also be keen to babysit while you do other things. If it's a pure overseas trip though, I'd pick pregnant any day ------------- http://lilypie.com">  http://lilypie.com">
|
Posted By: Katherine
Date Posted: 08 January 2008 at 12:37pm
|
I think it depends on HOW pregnant you are -- as with advanced stages of pregnancy there are increased risks of blood clots and other fun things. Also, you never know how you're going to feel when you're pregnant, so you could get terrible motion sickness or morning sickness that is aggravated by plane travel, be bloated and not be able to sit still for very long cramped in a window seat on a longhaul flight, need to go to the bathroom all night long (and disturb all the other passengers)... the list goes on. I flew a few times while pregnant and hated it, but I was a miserable pregnant person anyway. LOL I travelled to the US with Emma Rose by myself when she was 4 months old. It was excellent as having a baby along meant we got bulkhead seating (more leg room -- not guaranteed when you're pregnant and travelling coach), a bassinet for her to sleep in, and extra seats to spread out on, as well as extra attention from flight attendants and priority boarding. It was tiring but I think I would prefer it to travelling pregnant. |
Posted By: Paws
Date Posted: 08 January 2008 at 12:50pm
Well we're doing a cruise with Miss M in 4 weeks so I'll let you know how horrific it is! 
To be honest I think I'd prefer to travel with a child. ------------- http://lilypie.com"> 
|
Posted By: cuppatea
Date Posted: 08 January 2008 at 1:17pm
|
I flew to england 6 weeks pregnant and flew home again at 8 I had terrible morning sickness and it was an ordeal. I have done the flight non pregnant a few times so have that to compare it to. The smell of the plane food made me want to vomit, I very nearly passed out in heathrow cos of the heat and crowds and queues, it was pretty bloody awful. I think if it we had gone when I was second trimester it would have been a whole let better as long as i was only 18 weeks or so cos the seats are uncomfy enough as it is without being the size of an elephant. My BIL and SIL came out here with a 4 year old and 5 month old and the 5 month old and apart from bringing half of England with them they found it quite easy and got preferential treatment on the flights. ------------- 
 
|
Posted By: caliandjack
Date Posted: 08 January 2008 at 1:28pm
|
We will be going to visit family and sight see. I also want to do a couple of cooking classes, and am already dreading the food restrictions of pregnancy.
We're planning on going June/July so depending on how successful we are with TTC i'll either have a 3 month old baby or be 4-5 months pregnant. ------------- http://lilypie.com" rel="nofollow"> [/url] Angel June 2012 |
Posted By: james
Date Posted: 08 January 2008 at 1:41pm
i,m flying with james to perth in september and i would rather not but we will get thur it ------------- <a href="http://lilypie.com"><img src="http://b4.lilypie.com/nLJ5p13.png" alt="Lilypie 4th Birthday Ticker" border="0" /></a> |
Posted By: caliandjack
Date Posted: 08 January 2008 at 1:47pm
|
I suspect there is more likelyhood of being preggers, make it easier on DF if its just the two of us.
Ok so when is the best time to travel when preggers? ------------- http://lilypie.com" rel="nofollow"> [/url] Angel June 2012 |
Posted By: Katherine
Date Posted: 08 January 2008 at 1:49pm
|
Second trimester! Second trimester! Or whenever your morning sickness ends and you're not too huge to feel like a whale and not be able to move in those teeny, tiny little airplane seats... |
fleury wrote:Posted By: cuppatea
Date Posted: 08 January 2008 at 1:53pm
Yeah absolutely, anything past about 24 weeks will probably start to be uncomfy especially on a long haul. Morning sickness normally stops about 14weeks but that isn't true for everyone. -------------
|
Posted By: caraMel
Date Posted: 08 January 2008 at 1:54pm
|
We went to HK for 3 weeks when Ella was 4 months old. The fights were pretty cruisy as she was young enough that she slept a lot and didn't want to run around all the time and was old enough to be alert and fascinated by the other passengers/crew etc.
Like Katherine said, the bulkhead seats were much more comfortable than regular, plus we got all our food served first and extra attention generally from the crew. Ella was very portable at that age too, she happily stayed in the capsule and stroller as we trekked through the sites. The drawbacks we found were: With a baby you are limited with their schedules, unless you have babysitters (and feel comfortable with leaving them) you can't really go out late or to the more upmarket places in case they lose it and start howling the place down. Changing nappies on planes is not an easy task. Site seeing on limited sleep thanks to night feeding etc isn't as fun. You have to take a lot more stuff with a baby and you need to stay in a place with good laundry facilities there or nearby (think puking and poo-splosions) That's all I can think of at the moment, hope it helps with the planning! ------------- Mel, Mummy to E: 6, B: 4 and: 
|
Posted By: MelanieAndBree
Date Posted: 08 January 2008 at 1:55pm
|
Im travelling to the UK in 2009. Briahna will be about 19months. Hope all goes well haha ------------- Melanie. Mum to Briahna Robyn, 3yrs |
Posted By: caliandjack
Date Posted: 08 January 2008 at 2:11pm
|
Thanks ladies, looks like DF gets me to myself for the first year of marriage. Lucky him.
thanks caraMel the puking and poo-splosions was the clincher ------------- http://lilypie.com" rel="nofollow"> [/url] Angel June 2012 |
Posted By: AnnC
Date Posted: 08 January 2008 at 4:14pm
|
I have travelled back from the Uk when i was 5 months pregnant - granted i wasn't too big - but didn't find it too uncomfortable. only thing on the plane they served me samon (smoked) and of cause couldn't have it so was pretty hungry - if i was more assertive then i would of asked for something different but didn't.
I also have traveled to the uk with a few different ages, 4 months (RHyley) 13 months (Brooke) and 20 months (Josh) I would say the hardest was Brooke as she had just started walking and a social butterfly so on the plane all she wanted to do was walk around. During stay in uk didn't find it too bad but wasn't there as a tourist I was visiting family and had a funeral to go to. Rhyley at 4 months was the easiest cause he slept most of the flight and wasn't moving (so to speak) in uk he adjusted to the time frame straight away (think better than me) we did alot of tourist things and took him along to most of them, we saw a couple of west end shows where my aunty looked after him while we went to that otherwise he came with us. Ony thing I guess was that he woke earlier and he was in the same room as us. as for Josh I know the plane ride was ok except when he had to sit on my knee (under two's don't get a seat unless you pay extra for one) ------------- Ann 
Also Mum to Josh (15) and Brooke (10) |
Posted By: AnnC
Date Posted: 08 January 2008 at 4:15pm
|
oh my choice would be to be pregnant rather than with a child as they can restrict what you are doing - unless you have family over there who can baby sit for you. ------------- Ann
Also Mum to Josh (15) and Brooke (10) |
Posted By: jaz
Date Posted: 08 January 2008 at 6:49pm
|
I went to the States when I was five months pregnant and found travelling ok. We walked for miles every day.
The only problem I had was the lack of healthy choices for food. ------------- http://lilypie.com"> 
|