This is entirely up to the individual. I was the only member of my family in the Church for 30 years, until a cousin joined. We had great family relationships and were very close.
Uh huh, and what is your point?
Were you married in the temple when your parents could not attend?
Were you told by the person baptizing you that they would be able to attend another civil wedding alongside the temple ceremony, only to find out 15 years later that all of that wasn't really true at all?
Were you then told by the Stake President, Bishop and every other eccleciastical leader in the city that if you decided to take this tiny step to accomodate the wishes of your family, that there would be serious repercussions and you would have your temple recommend taken away?
Did you experience all of that?
No, you didn't. So no, it isn't simply "entirely up to the individual." I tried to remain close to my family but my loyalties to the Church burned too many bridges to make that possible, and when all of this was explained to the Church, it told me that is just the way it is and to deal with it. It is up to the Church, not the individual, and the "families are important" concept is just a sales pitch with no follow through logic explained to prospective converts; it doesn't mean anything to the Church unless it is an LDS family. I mean really, do Mormons realy believe my family will be "together forever"? Of course not. Only if you go through a Mormon temple, wearing funny garmnets, goofy hat tied down to your side by a string, allowing some creepy old man to rub oil in your bare groin area, sit through a boring B-movie about the creation of the world, and learn some "tokens" (secret handshakes) that allegedly give you the means to cross over to the other side of teh veil and be with the rest of yoru loved ones, only then can families be "together forever."
But of course, you don't get straight answers from the Church. Just spin and excuses.