Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

Original poster

Babies at weddings AITA?

172 replies

HM2018 · 15/02/2021 18:20

I am the maid of honour for my younger sister’s wedding this summer. Her and her fiancé are both pre-kids and I have a 3 yr old and am expecting a second child in 3 weeks.
I have been to a lot of weddings and in my experience, it’s totally fine to say ‘no kids’ for a wedding, but everyone allows you to bring ‘babes in arms’ i.e. little babies who don’t cost anything as they’re still on milk and don’t require a seat.
However my sister and her fiancé are planning on allowing me to bring my 2 kids, but saying to others that no kids (including babies) can come. Obviously a lot of people are very happy to leave their babies or kids with grandparents, so for many it won’t be an issue. But I just feel that obligating parents to choose between having to leave their baby or being part of a social event, is really unfair and quite an outdated stance to have on it. In this day & age I think Mums should be supported and accommodated in taking their babies with them. To be clear, I’m talking about babies who are still being milk fed and who don’t take up a seat at a table etc.
What do people think?

OP posts:
Letsallscreamatthesistene · 16/02/2021 05:53

@lounatics I think nowadays in the UK its very much not the done thing

BeautySleep · 16/02/2021 06:07

I'm currently organising my wedding and during the day we only have 40 guests, over 10 of them are children which will range from 1 to 10. At the reception there will be even more, I couldn't imagine not having children there but I understand that some people wouldn't.

It won't be put out like a warning though like others have said, I think that's weird.

Letsallscreamatthesistene · 16/02/2021 06:15

Oh yeah I wouldnt warn people that kids are going to be there. Thats a bit weird. Every wedding ive been to has specifically said 'no children' or something to that effect, the ones that dont mention it I assume children will be there.

Interested in this thread?

Then you might like threads about these subjects:

3 year olds Families Weddings
SnuggyBuggy · 16/02/2021 06:24

Just don't tell me it's because you want me to be able to "let my hair down" and I'll respect your decision.

Lockdownbear · 16/02/2021 06:32

To be clear, I’m talking about babies who are still being milk fed and who don’t take up a seat at a table etc.

They still count as far as the venue capacity is concerned. The capacity is usually dictated by fire regulations and insurance which doesn't make any allowance for age. The venue can cancel the event or ask people to leave if numbers exceed capacity as they are then in breach of the law.

Op I doubt you are going to return but it's their, wedding their choice.
Sometimes its easier to have a blanket ban than exceptions no matter where you draw the line you'll upset someone.
If we'd invited all friends kids we'd have ended up with 36 'kids' between babies to 18 year olds. That's a lot of seats in a 100 capacity venue.

Iggly · 16/02/2021 06:32

I find weddings excluding kids to be a bit off as, in my view they’re friend and family occasions.
But I understand that that is what other people prefer. So I won’t be going to any of their weddings (and have declined invitations for this very reason, including the nanny of our children!!)

Lockdownbear · 16/02/2021 06:44

Aren’t most weddings public ceremonies? Like baptisms and funerals?

No fewer weddings are being held in public churches most are held in the venue which is in effect a private event.

Scotland is different to England in that you can get married anywhere a celebrant is willing to do it. But its years since I last attended a wedding in a church building.

Shoxfordian · 16/02/2021 07:00

We didn’t have any children or babies at our wedding, not about the cost but about the noise! I didn’t want to be saying my vows over a screaming child. Also I don’t like children

RoseAndRose · 16/02/2021 07:09

Weddings have to be public to the extent that anyone who wishes to make a just objection can do so, right up until part way through the ceremony.

Admission to the ceremony itself, especially if in a CofE church, cannot be denied as objections have to be heard. Unless you are very grand of course (you can't just rock up to things like royal weddings). The venue would have to support all those who wished to make an objection, whether they had children with them or not, and I suspect the fact of a plausible objection, which would of course halt the ceremony and probably put a bit of a damper of all the partying afterwards, is likely to be rather more memorable than whether the objector was accompanied by children.

Attending as a guest, at private invitation, is not the same thing

kowari · 16/02/2021 07:16

Weddings without children feel like something is missing to me, it's lovely to see all the children in a family at a wedding.

RoseAndRose · 16/02/2021 07:17

@kowari

Weddings without children feel like something is missing to me, it's lovely to see all the children in a family at a wedding.
But you wouldn't impose your idea of loveliness on everyone else, would you?
kowari · 16/02/2021 07:20

But you wouldn't impose your idea of loveliness on everyone else, would you?
My wedding, absolutely. Someone else's, I would just be disappointed, and I think excluding babies in arms is just selfish.

RoseAndRose · 16/02/2021 07:26

@kowari I took for granted that posters that would have their weddings in the ways that made them happy. And also assumed that people will enjoy some weddings they attend more than others.

But on the thread where the opening post is about it being wrong to exclude babies because people should be more supportive, I took it to be quite a criticism of all the 'unsupportive' couples who want child free

Sorry if that was an interpretation too far.

Lockdownbear · 16/02/2021 07:28

I think excluding babies in arms is just selfish.

How is it selfish? Babies might not cost anything but they still count towards venue numbers and capacity.

Where do you draw the line and how do you avoid upsetting the friends with children on the other side of the line?

supersonicginandtonic · 16/02/2021 07:31

My brother gets married next year, he's only inviting family children.
I wish he wasn't, I'd love a day to enjoy the wedding, not have to try and entertain my kids who will be bored.

supersonicginandtonic · 16/02/2021 07:34

@SnuggyBuggy but that's why I love child free wedddings. I get an excuse to dress up, enjoy myself and let my hair down.

DiabeticFirstBaby · 16/02/2021 07:37

We had a fully child free wedding, been to a few where babies have cried or babbled all the way through, parents didn't take them out/to the back and you couldn't hear anything. Personally ruined it for me. So for ours we were selfish and said no kids at all, had an amazing day!

JorisBonson · 16/02/2021 07:38

@kowari how is it selfish that a couple, potentially spending thousands of pounds on their one wedding day, have it just the way they want?

I bet you're one of those people who goes to weddings and wears a mardy face all day, and you slag the food and the dress afterwards.

stillonthattightrope · 16/02/2021 07:39

The tradition in my family is for large weddings with all kids invited but these were mostly big churches and church hall/social club receptions that could accommodate those numbers. I remember them as being fun but also fairly dominated by the large number of kids there.

I absolutely didn't want that for my wedding and wasn't willing to do it so I had a much smaller wedding but still invited children.
Out of the 14 children there (20% of my guest list) I had never met 5 of them before the day and never have since.
Another 5 were relatives and the remaining 4 were friend's children.

There were other people I could have invited that I'd like to have been there but didn't because it was expected that children were there.
I even had one guest call and ask to bring their stepson as it was their partners weekend with him and he'd feel left out. What, left out of the wedding of two people he'd never met? Fuck off.

I wouldn't make that decision again, I'd have had the wedding I wanted and that would have been either no children or children of close friends and family only (which always feels a bit shitty in reality).

doubleleopardy · 16/02/2021 07:41

@SnuggyBuggy

Just don't tell me it's because you want me to be able to "let my hair down" and I'll respect your decision.
At mine, I wanted to let my hair down and didn't really want small kids there when I did.
Whyistheteacold · 16/02/2021 07:41

If I had paid thousands of pounds for my wedding day, I wouldn't risk having a baby screaming through the whole thing. Personally I would be more inclined to allow older children than babies because at least children can be kept under control.

2pinkginsplease · 16/02/2021 07:47

Their wedding theirs choice!

However, I have read on here of people not inviting their own nieces and nephews to their wedding! That shocked me. They are close family.

Lockdownbear · 16/02/2021 07:56

@supersonicginandtonic

My brother gets married next year, he's only inviting family children. I wish he wasn't, I'd love a day to enjoy the wedding, not have to try and entertain my kids who will be bored.
Do you mean you'd rather leave your kids with the other Granny, or you'd rather have more kids there to entertain yours?

If its the former could Granny pick the kids up early evening to let you enjoy the dancing?

Lockdownbear · 16/02/2021 07:57

I say Granny but I really mean babysitter.

Lanzo · 16/02/2021 07:58

@Shoxfordian

We didn’t have any children or babies at our wedding, not about the cost but about the noise! I didn’t want to be saying my vows over a screaming child. Also I don’t like children
Saying ‘I don’t like children’ is a bit like saying ‘I don’t like old people’ or ‘I don’t like women’. I would probably keep that thought to myself, if I had it.