Skip to main content
Skip to main navigation
Skip to talk navigation

Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Saved Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Flip

1 2 3 4

AIBU?

to think not having your own child at your wedding is a bit weird?

99 replies

wanderingcloud · 18/08/2014 10:58

Totally prepared to admit to having judgey pants on here but a friend of a friend's hubby got married on Saturday. Whilst having coffee and a chat with friend this morning she was saying, despite her initial reticence leaving her youngest, how much fun her and hubby had child-free at the wedding. Fair enough, child free weddings are not my thing BUT I acknowledge it's the couples right to dictate this if they so choose. But it transpires when this bride and groom said no kids, they really meant it and their own two yr old wasn't there! Not at the ceremony, wedding breakfast or evening do.

I need mumsnet jury to decide if IABU thinking this is really weird behaviour!

OP posts:

Report

SaucyJack · 18/08/2014 11:00

YANBU at all.

Doesn't sit right with me in the slightest.

PenguinsIsSleepDeprived · 18/08/2014 11:02

Gosh yes, very odd not to have your own child there at all. I can understand a baby sitter for the evening do - let your hair down, have a few drinks. But not there at all does seem a strange choice.

dexter73 · 18/08/2014 11:02

It's not what I would do but if they wanted a day off then I don't think it is that weird.

vestandknickers · 18/08/2014 11:02

I quite like their style. Weddings are much more fun without children. Maybe they had a separate celebration with their two year old. Or maybe the two year old didn't know or care that they were getting married - no reason why a two year old would have any interest really.

FruVikingessOla · 18/08/2014 11:04

How odd. What's going to happen when their DC is old enough to realise he/she was 2 years old when mum & dad got married?

HygieneFreak · 18/08/2014 11:05

When i married dh , i had no children of my own but dh has two older children.

I had a child free wedding and my step children didnt attend.

My own mother married my step father when i was 13ish and me and my sister wasnt allowed to attend

WorraLiberty · 18/08/2014 11:05

Christ, I don't blame them.

Anyway, who's to say the 2yr old would enjoy it?

I'm sure they know their toddler better than we do.

HygieneFreak · 18/08/2014 11:05

When i married dh , i had no children of my own but dh has two older children.

I had a child free wedding and my step children didnt attend.

My own mother married my step father when i was 13ish and me and my sister wasnt allowed to attend

DrFunkesFamilyBandSolution · 18/08/2014 11:06

I wouldn't have my children at our wedding if they were that young.
If we were invited to a wedding now (2yr old & 1 yr old) i don't think we'd bring them just because it wouldn't be as fun for us.

But then I prefer childfree weddings!

WorraLiberty · 18/08/2014 11:07

Perhaps they did what was best for the child

RiverTam · 18/08/2014 11:07

obviously it's up to them but one of the things I loved about the fact we got married after DD was born was that she was there. It's now a shared memory for us all, she can see herself in the photos and hear about the day (she was only 16 months so no actual memory of it herself, which I appreciate doesn't quite make sense with my 'shared memory' comment ).

SpaceInvaders · 18/08/2014 11:08

Their wedding. Their day. I don't find it weird, it's up to them.
I find it far weirder to have children in the first place before getting married so there should'n't be your own kid at the wedding in the first place but that's a WHOLE other thread.
So, instead of rambling which I tend to do yes. YABU.

merrymouse · 18/08/2014 11:09

Speaking as somebody who had their almost 2 year old at their wedding, I don't think he would have minded not being there. Even though we had a very child friendly wedding and invited loads of other children, he really had no idea what was going on and has no memory of it now (eight years later).

In retrospect it might have been more fun to have the ceremony plus adult 'do' and then a big informal party for all our friends and their children. The whole day was a bit much for him really.

Anomaly · 18/08/2014 11:10

I know someone who nearly did this but kids a lot older so old enough to know what they were missing. After a chat from someone pointing out how it would seem to the kids - (the brides future step children) they did end up being invited. I think the couple saw it as a romantic occasion just for the two of them.

Nanny0gg · 18/08/2014 11:12

I think I would be surprised too.

If you already have a child, therefore a family, I think that when you make that final commitment to each other, your children should be there; they're part of it - whatever their age.

PrincessOfChina · 18/08/2014 11:16

We went to one last year where the couple's children were brought along to the reception for a couple of hours by the babysitter but they didn't attend the ceremony. They were 18 months old. Seemed perfectly sensible to me.

yesyouare · 18/08/2014 11:18

we went abroad to get married , no parents ,family ,friends or kids , it was great .

MrsDavidBowie · 18/08/2014 11:20

Sounds ideal to me

Topaz25 · 18/08/2014 11:21

Although I can understand them wanting to let their hair down and relax on their wedding day rather than keeping a constant eye on their child I think they could have achieved that by having a babysitter, friend or family member supervise the child at the wedding or having the child attend the ceremony but not the evening do. I think it will be awkward to explain to the child one day, they may not remember but they will work out from the dates that they were two when their parents got married but are not in any of the photos. It would have been nice to include them in some way for at least part of the day, they are part of the family.

Eminybob · 18/08/2014 11:22

Space why is it weird to have kids before getting married? Have I time warped back to the 1950's?

wanderingcloud · 18/08/2014 11:26

Seems IABU after all. It's none of my business and I'm certain they know their own child best etc it was just my gut reaction was that it was really strange!

OP posts:

ShadowStar · 18/08/2014 11:28

I'd think that was weird too.

Don’t want to miss threads like this?

Weekly

Sign up to our weekly round up and get all the best threads sent straight to your inbox!

Email address

Log in to update your newsletter preferences.

You've subscribed!

ElleCloughie · 18/08/2014 11:29

If you don't want your children to be at your wedding, get married before you have kids. Otherwise of course they should be there - how odd will it be when he gets older and realises he isn't in the photographs.

tertle · 18/08/2014 11:31

I don't think it's weird. A 2 year old won't enjoy a wedding and it will create more stress for the parents on their day. And it's obviously completely up to them what they do. Yabu!

WD41 · 18/08/2014 11:36

I guess it depends on what aspect of the wedding people see as most important. If it's the piss-up reception, then I can understand not including a 2yo. I do think it's strange to not even have DCs at the ceremony though.

I love that our (then 18mo) DD was at ours. We wrote a bit into our vows about promising to be the best parents we could and always supporting each other in that, so it would have been a bit weird if she wasn't there! She's unlikely to remember it, but will be nice for her to see herself in the photos when she's older.

Flip

1 2 3 4

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.