To think you should put "No Children" on the wedding invite if they're not allowed?

[SirBoobAlot]

Yes I'm bitter and I'm upset

But we received a wedding reception (not ceremony) invite a few weeks ago. I treated myself to a new dress for it, spent more than I normally would (not particularly expensive, I just don't generally shop outside of Primark ), and was really looking forward to it.

A week after DP had RSVPed, he's told that its no children.

I don't have a problem with people not having children at a wedding, that's their choice. But it would have been helpful for it to have been obvious from the off. I was really excited about going, and wearing a pretty dress for the night. I can use the dress for another wedding at the end of the year but still feel a bit put out. The reception starts at 7.30, which is DSs bed time, so there's no way I can just pop along for a bit, either.

So AIBU? Or just over sensative? (Highly possible, that...)

If I received an invite to an evening wedding, it would never occur to me for one minute that the DC were invited too (unless it specifically said their names on the invite).

Besides evening weddings are not good places for small kids, they get overtired and its no fun for the parents, eg at my brothers wedding my children were invited but we got a friend to pick them up (and take them home to meet the babysitter who put them to bed) at 7pm as it was just too late for a 1 year old and a 3 year old.

Booboobedo and Sancty I agree with you. IME if it's child-free it's usually organised by Bridezilla.

SIRBOOBIE - you just want to take your baby - not walking/talking children? Then I'll disagree with what I said before and say YANBU, however 1000's on here will disagree with me - distracting from the brides special day, causing worries that baby might make a noise, put pressure on couple as to when they might start family etc etc - you've heard all those arguments before on MN. Its fraught.

All former country bumpkins my lot - we are probably just weird as i said earlier... older generation thing too maybe?

LillianGish

What an unfair statement. It could be because the couple can't afford to invite all of their friends children. What about Mumzillas who want their children to be invited to everything, regardless of the cost for other people?

Exactly, swanandduck!

It's just two different kinds of 'selfishness' - one is 'it's my day' and the other is 'they're my kids'.

I don't see how one gets to be called after a movie monster and the other has right on their side.

Wildly unfair, lilliangish.

LOL MorrsZapp.
I agree with you. Therefore you are correct.

And I agree with you wukter.

I knew it!

Just speaking from experience.

Indeed you made the point yourself swanandduck: "In the days when weddings were family occasions, they were usually simpler affairs".

I always assume that if my dc's names are not on the invite then they are not invited, if they are on the invite then they are. If we have verbal invites to parties ect (had a few last year to dh's family parties) I got him to chec about the children, I never just assume they are invited.

'course baby free, whatever you might still be upstaged if a friend does what mine did and announces a preganancy four eyars after trying at your big day!

Follow that with a MIL who fakes a fainting fit so she can reappear during speeches (failed- we forgot to tell her we did speeches BEFORE meal PMSL), a mad grandad lying on teh floor trying to see up bride's and bridesmaids skirts and then picking a fight (or rather attempting to) with groom at top table....

Good job that Diva is not one of may many failing PMSL

Yes, but I followed that up with the point that the reception was often in a community centre or your parents' house.
You don't have to be having a bridezilla type wedding to not be able to afford to invite 20 or 30 extra children.

Yes YABU. Their names not on the invite they are not invited end of. Every sympathy with the child free wedding crowd - fine in the days weddings were held on the village green and over by 7pm but these days if you invite children the whole day is foccussed on them (bouncy castles entertainers etc). Fair enough if that is not how you envisage your wedding!

I wish we had had a child free wedding. Have a clear memory of my vows being drowned out by a 3 year old running a train up and down a pew and shouting. Grrr. Wedding surely a marvellous reason to have a childfree time.

Fair enough. It's just that the ones I've been to that specify no children have all been carefully orchestrated "It's my perfect day I don't want anything unscheduled" affairs - completely missing the point that the people most likely appreciate the fairytale dress and horse-drawn carriage are in fact the six-year-old girls they've omitted to invite.

Also the whole can't get childcare thing. Have you thought of doing a child swap with friends locally? Round here familes whose children are friends sometimes have all the children for 24 hours at the weekend freeing up one set of parents then the other couple have them all another weekend. Can work - children have the fun of spending the weekend with their friends and you dont feel indebted as you return the favour.

By the way, regarding the point made that weddings used to be family affairs I would also make the point that when I was a child, children were made to behave themselves at social events. Nowadays, an awful lot of parents let their kids do what they like. How often have you witnessed children being allowed shout and scream in restaurants, run around Churches and generally make a nuisance of themselves while their parents look on fondly and say nothing. I suspect this is the reason why some couples don't want children at their wedding. Because their will always be at least on inconsiderate couple who allow their kids to take over and do what they like.

Lillian - completely agree. This is what I am to be subjected to tomorrow.

I agree, by the way, LillianGish that some weddings are huge big over the top productions with nothing natural or spontaneous about them. I just don't think that all 'no children' weddings are like that, although some of course are.

Totally agree swanandduck that is my experience. Just found out my sisters wedding is to be childfree hooray cant wait.

Ime the kids are perfectly well behaved, it's the adults who run riot.

Yes kids used to be amde to behave but some of us still do- I do.

At the two alst weddings we've been to, th Church had a playa rea there, children were welcomed by Vicar and at one the child running about most was the Bride's LOL and she was quite happy.

It all varies. I suspect excepting family we find the friends with views like our own (I am an old fashioned oucntry bumpkin and think for me a wedding is a community celebration and would much prefer basic and scrimped with kids to posh without)

Do brides really worry about being upstaged by children?
That's a very mean spirited interpretation to put on someone choosing to have a childfree wedding. Is it the same when they have a childfree 40th, or a childfree dinner party?

Some do

I doubt most do (which is why I placed so many caveats in my post) but I can certainly recall a 'friend' (you know the type, has been mates with your best friend for ages and although you can't quite like them...) who took over a decade planning her wedding, ordering the dress 8 years ahead of schedule (depsite only meeting groom 2 years ahead LMFAO) who got really, really edgy at the cuter kids but was fine with the less cute ones (mine - perhaps the antagonism was mutual? )

And wrt to MIL, and her cenrtre-stage-hogging fake fainting fit, it's not just DH and I- FIL (now her ex) reliably tells me she just went home to rant about left out she was becuase she didn;t have dd's, and there is a memorable bit in the unofficial videot where my DH's duchess-like aunt is making @oh no not stage hogging again' comments not knwoing about video camera!