Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

WIBU to not go to this wedding?

104 replies

RubyWho · 03/04/2012 11:31

DH's childhood friend is getting married in the summer. Couple have been engaged for about three years, and have been planning the wedding for ages, and have spoken to us about it in detail, including mentioning our DC.
Invitation arrives, turns out it's a child-free day. The elder of our DC is fine to be looked after by GP for the weekend of the wedding, but youngest DC is a baby and breastfed. We emailed the couple explaining this (although they obviously know about the whole baby/bf thing) and they fwd the email onto friend's FMIL. She, in turn, emails me and explains its strictly no children for the ceremony, and everyone they have invited with babies is either not attending or has arranged childcare. She says I am welcome to come to the reception with Baby, but not the ceremony.
Meanwhile, DH is asked to be an usher. He will be in the ceremony, and on the top table. I won't be on TT, because "of the baby".
So, i won't see Dh at all on the day, am being made to feel awkward because of the baby, and won't know anyone else there.
DH really wants me to go.
AIBU to just not go?

OP posts:
sherbetpips · 03/04/2012 12:35

Also you are not on the top table because you are not part of the bridal party, nothing at all to do with the baby, I have never known anyones partners to be at the bridal table - has anyone else?

MorrisZapp · 03/04/2012 12:36

marshmallow - I have attended weddings where screaming babies were not taken out of the ceremony.

It's not the childfree nature of the wedding here that's the issue - it's the DH that's creating the problem for OP.

Kayzr · 03/04/2012 12:54

Sherbet, have you read the posts by the OP? She has said that all the ushers and their partners are at the top table. So she is being left out just because she has a baby.

haddock1976 · 03/04/2012 13:03

YANBU but don't bother going or getting your knickers in a twist. Weddings with a baby in tow are hardly fun.

Great friends of ours are getting married in December and babies are not welcome so I'm not going and DH is. No point in getting upset about it, DD will be a year old and the wedding is 300 miles from our home so a babysitter is not an option and we don't have any family closer than 650 miles to look after her for us.

The only thing that has slightly pissed me off is that other friends of ours coming over from SA for Christmas with their family are coming to the wedding and are allowed to bring their twins who are about 2 weeks younger than DD. The bride's thoughts were that it wasn't fair to say no to their babies as they don't have family close by who can look after them. I have resisted pointing out that they are in precisely the same situation as us, travelling 300 miles from the grandparents home to be at the wedding and that one rule for one and a second rule for the rest of us is hardly fair. It's her day and it's not worth falling out over. I'm more upset that this no baby rule means that I won't get to see the friends from SA or to meet the twins :(

BellaOfTheBalls · 03/04/2012 13:04

YADNBU.

I would also detail exactly why you aren't going. They are BVU. Its not like they are paying for a meal for your DC!

Friends of ours had a child-free wedding. DP was master of ceremonies so very involved in the day. They were very adamant there would be no children, no babes in arms until it was pointed out that I would not be able to attend (EBF baby 2.5 hours away, no phone signal) & the grooms cousin would also not be able attend (their then 10 month old DD has SN). The bride realised it would BU to police it completely and those attending who had left older children at home completely understood.

OutragedAtThePriceOfFreddos · 03/04/2012 13:06

'it will look odd if dh goes without you'

Shock

But it won't look wierd if you are the only person not seated with their partner Hmm

That says to me that they clearly care more about appearances than the comfort and convenience of their guests, so you have definatly done the right thing by declining your invitation. Is your dh going to be pissed off that you said you werent going without telling him first though?

ChaoticAngel · 03/04/2012 13:06

Why should the OP travel 350 miles and pay out to stay in a child unfriendly hotel just to attend a reception? Confused

Her DH needs to grow up and realise that it is possible for him to attend his childhood friend's wedding on his own.

Original poster
RubyWho · 03/04/2012 13:07

Sherbert, Baby is only being tolerated. The tone of the email from FMIL was "oh allright then, I SUPPOSE the baby can come if she HAS to..."
I don't think that they ever expected I'd go...so I'm not. Win/win, I suppose.

OP posts:
porcamiseria · 03/04/2012 13:07

BIG sigh. what a fucking pain. can you negotiate a halfway deal with DH somehow???? ugh

marshmallowpies · 03/04/2012 13:08

Morris yes I know some people don't take babies out which is why I qualified it with 'sane', perhaps 'reasonable' is a more appropriate term on 2nd thoughts.

In any case I agree the DH siding with the wedding party against the OP is the real issue here, he should see this is unfair and take a stand & back her up here!

Original poster
RubyWho · 03/04/2012 13:10

DH will definitely be pissed off, not my problem. Well, slightly my problem, but he will either come round to my way of thinking or be angry forever and ever, either way he will just have to deal with it. I will suggest he takes our toddler as his "date" if he doesn't want to be alone ;)

OP posts:
CountryMouse27 · 03/04/2012 13:12

YANBU RubyWho. I find it a bit of double standard at childfree weddings when the favours are all "Health, Wealth, Happiness, Fertility, and Long Life". Fertility? So where are all the children? Hardly a celebration of family is it?

I wish people could be honest about their feelings about their friends and relations when it comes to weddings. They clearly tried to make you attending the most difficult that they could knowing that you'd be unable to attend.

Friends of ours with 2 children explained it nicely "We're a family now, and we dont do things that we can't all do together".

Lambzig · 03/04/2012 13:14

Oh no FMIL doesnt get to do that! Every communication from them has been to make you feel unwelcome. You cant go to the wedding ceremony, you are told to stay elsewhere from the hotel (unless it bans children, how 'not child friendly' can it be), you cant sit where everyone else's partner sits, your baby is merely tolerated. You have quite rightly taken the hint.

Their choice of a childfree wedding - fine, but then they dont get to be upset if you dont attend or put pressure on you.

SuiGeneris · 03/04/2012 13:15

Let DH go on his own and explain you just cannot leave the baby because of the EBF, so, although you would have loved to go, sadly cannot.
I had the same thing last year, DS was 9 months but weaning took a long time and going to the wedding would have required various expression sessions during the reception. Friends understood when I explained that even with childcare it would have been tricky because of the need to express. None of their friends bf'd,so they had no idea of the discomfort to the mother from skipping feeds.

choceyes · 03/04/2012 13:15

RubyWho - that's what my DH did for one of friends weddings last year. He took our then nearly 3yr old with him. It was a wedding in Scotland, we live in Manchester and it involved a lot of travelling, so I opted to stay at home with our baby DD. I had a friend stay over with her little DD, so everybody had a good time and my 3yr old had an amazing time with my DH for the weekend.

pictish · 03/04/2012 13:17

Friends of ours with 2 children explained it nicely "We're a family now, and we dont do things that we can't all do together".

Hmm that does conjour up images of matching leisure suits in pastel colours.

WipsGlitter · 03/04/2012 13:18

YABU. You are not being "segregated" you will be on another table where gasp you might actually be able to talk to other people at the table. And have a nice time!

Go, miss the ceremony, go to the reception, have everyone admire your baby, eat a meal, go to bed.

My BF got married, it was a four hour drive away, two nights. I never even dreamed of asking could I bring my 3 month old, luckily my sister was able to look after him and DS1, but really where there's a will there's a way. It just sounds as if you don't want to go, baby or no
Baby.

CountryMouse27 · 03/04/2012 13:22

no pictish Grin lol : Defo not. Just a well thought out reason by people who planned for their children and how they would like to spend their family life. Kids are teenagers now so obviously want to do their own thing which is fine, but no one has to feel excluded.

Original poster
RubyWho · 03/04/2012 13:23

Wips, at the risk of this being deleted, I am assuming you didn't ebf?

DD will not accept a bottle. I cannot express. I do not want to leave her, as gag-worthy as it is, I want to be with her. Both her and I have been made to feel awkward and excluded. Well, fuck that. I'd rather stay at home with her and my toddler.

OP posts:
OutragedAtThePriceOfFreddos · 03/04/2012 13:24

Wips, you obviously don't bf your baby. I wouldn't have left a baby at three months old for two nights bf or not. Each to their own. But don't presume that just because you did it everyone's circumstances are the same, they aren't.

NoOnesGoingToEatYourEyes · 03/04/2012 13:28

OP don't go. It sounds like it will be a miserable occasion for you either way.

Tell your DH to do as he likes but that the whole day for you will be more like hard work than a fun occasion whether you take your baby or not.

And keep in mind the fact that in a few years the happy couple at this wedding will have children of their own and perhaps be faced with the same dilemma at a wedding they are invited to and hopefully they will realise no matter how entitled they are to have the child free wedding MIL wants they want, some of their guests had to work very hard to be there because of their decision and others like you were damned no matter what.

And forget Bridezilla, the FMIL sounds like a bit of a Milzilla to me. I thought she told you that other people were not attending because of childcare etc so she shouldn't be doing the "it will look odd..." nonsense at you now.

If your DH goes I guarantee you will still have a better time at home with your children than he will celebrating this wedding. Sounds like a very joyless occasion being orchestrated by a very joyless Milzilla (I like it, I'm using it while I have the chance).

Ephiny · 03/04/2012 13:41

I agree it's mostly the DH who is being unreasonable here. If the couple want a child-free wedding, or no babies at the ceremony, that's up to them. If OP doesn't want to leave her kids or travel that distance with a baby and have the hassle of finding other accommodation etc, then that's perfectly reasonable (I wouldn't go either in her position).

The DH needs to accept that these things are as they are. And he has the choice to either go alone, or if he doesn't want to do that, or is offended by the seating plan or the exclusion of OP/baby from the ceremony, he has the choice of declining the invitation too. Yes a bit awkward if he'd already RSVP'd, but he shouldn't have done that without discussing it with his wife surely! All the 'big sighs' etc sounds very annoying...

WipsGlitter · 03/04/2012 13:49

No, I didn't BF or EBF. But the OP is now saying she doesn't actually want to go, which is a bit different than saying the wedding party are putting obstacles in her way. It's ok to not to want to go.

I'm also Shock that you've emailed them without agreeing with you DH.

Original poster
RubyWho · 03/04/2012 13:58

What do I need to agree with him?! He wants to go; fine. He wants
me to go, I can't. Why does he need to be informed that I withdraw my rsvp (not his).

OP posts:
NoOnesGoingToEatYourEyes · 03/04/2012 14:26

I think the OP is only saying that she doesn't want to go because she has already been made to feel like she is not wanted and because the logistics of not taking her daughter are so vast when it includes expressing milk every two hours for days before and during the wedding weekend.

If she doesn't go, she has to express enough milk to feed the baby while she is gone, with is a pretty daunting task in my eyes (I had a horrendous experience trying to breast feed and express) and then express throughout the weekend every two hours.

If she does go, she and her daughter are not welcome at the church service and will be sitting apart from her DP during the meal, will need accommodation away from the main venue and will have to organise transport for themselves because he DH will be leaving earlier than them to join the wedding party at the church she is not allowed to go to. She's been made to feel like her daughters presence will be under sufferance of the couple and the MIL and I'd bet the MIL will not be happy if the baby makes any noise or needs a feed or a nappy change or in fact anything during the day itself.

If I was choosing between those two options I wouldn't want to go either.

And the biggest concern the MIL has about making a guest feel so unwelcome is how it will appear to the other guests if the OP's husband is there without her. Presumably because they might ask him where she is and he will say she couldn't come because she couldn't leave or bring the baby.