Another wedding one ...

[what2dooooooo]

My husband's niece is getting married and they've said no children at the wedding. I totally get this and it's their choice.

As the wedding is a number of hours drive from where her family live, and most of those who have been invited (cousins) have young children, they can't attend as they can't get overnight child care. It's also an early start so guests need to be away from home for two nights.

Everyone is sad they can't attend, but the bride is hurt and upset.

Is this to be expected?

For me with enough notice there is not many people who cannot get child care. For example in your case I am sure you can get child care from your side of the family or a friend. If she had only given a few weeks notice than that’s different. It stinks of lack of effort to try and arrange child care for me

@Joelkimmo

"It stinks of lack of effort to try and arrange child care for me".

How can you ask very elderly parents to look after a number of little children from Friday to Sunday? That stinks of inconsideration and selfishness to me!

But maybe the mum and dad in question work full time and don’t want to not see their children on the weekend as it’s their only time together. Maybe their children need time with their parents. Maybe the mum and dad want to put their children first on weekends. Maybe the children are going through a needy spell. Maybe there isn’t suitable childcare. Maybe child doesn’t settle well at night without mum or dad there and the wedding is late and far away. There’s a million reasons why it’s not as Simple as “getting childcare.”

@Joelkimmo is in a very privileged position to have childcare.
Saying that people don't make enough effort to get any is tone deaf and self absorbed.

A number of posters on this thread have explained why they don't have childcare, but according to her they aren't trying hard enough

If they are sufficiently part of the family to be invited, and they want to go, then they will also be at the wedding, and won't be available as childminders.

If they aren't invited, they may still have their own family commitments, which may make them unable to provide childcare.

And many people won't have relatives on the other side of the family, or they may be elderly/ disabled/ estranged/ living in another country, and for any of these reasons not available for childcare.

I think that people have every right to have child-free weddings if that's what they prefer. Their wedding, their choice. And other people should not take offence at this choice.

However, the bride and groom don't have the right to then take offence if relatives or friends with young children cannot come.

In general, one should NOT treat relatives'/ friends' ability to attend their big occasions as a measure of how important they consider one to be. I am not talking about total flakiness or never being in touch at all, but about people, who due to finances, health, childcare, care of elderly relatives, unsocial work hours, or any other real reason, cannot drop everything to travel to one's wedding/ big birthday party/ other big occasion. One should not be attacking them for 'not making the effort', as though one was their boss or harsh teacher. If it's very important to you that they should be there, perhaps you should make the effort to make it possible for them, by keeping the wedding local, allowing children to come, etc. Otherwise, just accept that not everyone will be able to make it, and don't get offended. It's much more a sign of caring to accept people's genuine restrictions and commitments graciously than to attend all their special occasions

If you say no children, then it's to be expected that not many can attend. The wife or husband could stay behind with their children, but who wants to go to a 2 day event alone?! They should look at who can attend, and if they're happy with that number, then press ahead. If they're not happy, then they need to reconsider the no children rule. I went to one wedding, who excluded children. Not many came, it looked very sparse. Quite a few left around 10pm to get back to their partners.

One should not be attacking them for 'not making the effort', as though one was their boss or harsh teacher. If it's very important to you that they should be there, perhaps you should make the effort to make it possible for them, by keeping the wedding local, allowing children to come, etc.

Well said @ToWhitToWhoo

Do non of these cousins with kids have another parent who can look after their own children? Child free weddings if we can’t get childcare then the one closest/related to the couple just goes.

@Dayfurrrrit even if they had childcare the cost of two nights in a hotel and travel expenses might be the deal breaker.

Totally up to the couple if they don’t want dc there. A small child screamed throughout my brother’s wedding speeches, made me realise that I wanted a child free wedding, I was absolutely bewildered as to why the parent didn’t take him/her outside, surely better for the child/definitely better for everyone else.

Obviously some guests won’t attend if they can’t bring their dc/don’t have childcare, dunno what the couple are getting upset about, it’s a straightforward equation.

I think people's expectations of a wedding have changed
When I was young it was very unusual to exclude children they were part of the family and a wedding was seen as bringing two families together. Buffets after the ceremony instead of a sit down meal were common so a few extra children didn't cost anything. Having children there added to the atmosphere.
Weddings were less expensive and less meticulously planned. Now a wedding is more like a 'posh party'.
I wonder if it's because people are marrying later and when they do they want to splash out and have an adult party.
I prefer the chaotic family type weddings but each to their own. And if people want an adult only wedding they have to accept some people won't attend.

I was absolutely bewildered as to why the parent didn’t take him/her outside, surely better for the child/definitely better for everyone else.

Yes. I don't understand why parents don't parent their children during solemn occasions, and during other occasions as well.

If I was a wedding celebrant I would just stop the proceedings and glare at the noisy child's parents until they accepted responsibility for their child, or ask for quiet so that I could continue.

This is the way it works. Bride and groom set the rules and then have to accept that means some guests won’t be able to attend.

If their most loved people are at a stage of life where a childfree wedding would be complicated, then they might be wise to make a different choice if they value attendance. It’s all about tradeoffs and what matters most to the couple.

Yes totally agree, but OP isn’t saying they couldn’t afford it, it’s that they don’t have childcare so can’t go. It’s odd that every cousin with children doesn’t have a second parent who can look after their own child so they can go celebrate their family member getting married.

Maybe they don't want to go without their kids. I am not close to my cousins at all, which may be colouring my view on this. I wouldn't bother going to any of their weddings even if they asked me, which they most likely wouldn't. I certainly wouldn't feel any obligation to go just because they're family.

I know several people tandom feeding. I would have myself if fertility issues had not prevented it. I fed dc1 until 3 1/2. Even without the bf bit though, plenty of people have 2 or 3 small children.

A good friend of mine has 4 under 5, one totally bf, one 18 months still feeding a couple of times daily and one 3 who bf at bed time.

Oh bugger that 😳 i mean, fab for your friend as thats her choice. But thats a full on no from me!

I am bf dc2 at 17 months. I will keep going until she naturally stops. If mine were closer in age, I would feed like she does. Most of my friends do. Although sometimes older ones just seem to stop when their mum's have been pregnant.

But we just go with the children really.

She could ask the hotel to hire a large room, several baby sitters etc and people could drop their kids off there during ceremony and meal.

If she really wanted all the cousins who are parents there this is the best suggestion.

Yep. The bride can control everything at her wedding EXCEPT the guests' right to refuse to attend.

If you want a child free wedding miles from anywhere fine, but don't be surprised in the couples with kids say "Thanks, but no thanks".

It may be your big day, but it's not theirs.

I've never been to a wedding without kids.

Most weddings I’ve been to, the kids have made the wedding by doing or saying something hilarious. If they’re part of the family too, surely they deserve to celebrate ?

But I also have to add that the weddings I’ve been to have made some effort to include or entertain the kids . One had a colouring station, another had a park on the grounds, one had someone making balloon animals. Plus, all the adults attending made an effort with the kids to keep them entertained and involve them. Surely that’s easier than everyone getting babysitters ?

Most of the weddings I have been to have been family weddings, and no-one in either of our families have had child free weddings.

My motto when it comes to wedding rules/decisions:

1. If the rule you set/decision you made was good, then you are ok with the guests that decide they can't keep to it not being there.
2. If 1 is not true, then you need to change the rule or decision.

For example:

1. If you say "no kids" then someone declines the invite because they can't/won't organise childcare, then you are ok with them not being there.

2. If you really aren't ok with them not being there, allow them to bring their kids.

3. If you choose a venue miles away from your family, then some are likely to not be able to travel and your ok with that.

4. if you want everyone to come, especially like elderly grandparents or whatever, choose a venue/destination that is easy/cheap for most of your guests.