Wedding question- who is U- me or the bride?

[angelberry]

A relative of mine is getting married. One of my children is involved in the wedding, the rest are not. All fine.

My problem is this: she has booked a place which is too small for the amount of people she wants to invite. Her solution is to leave the children outside with 'a couple of the dads' to look after them. What this actually means is that I'll be in the wedding watching DD be bridesmaid but my DH and other children will be waiting outside.

I'm not sure how to react. Most of the family seem to think it was a great idea. I thought it was bloody rude, but this particular relative has never been too hot on manners so I'd let it go. But my parents have just found out and are livid, wanting me to pull DD from being bridesmaid if half of our family isn't welcome.

Now, tbh, I don't know whether to keep the peace or not. There's no middle ground here, due to the nature of my family, it's a choice between going along with it or setting off WW3.

So, what would mumsnet do?

I don't think the bride being young and childless is any kind of excuse. I'm childless (though not particularly young and am appalled at this. I'm not sure that not having the children at the ceremony is too big a deal (I can't imagine two little boys would care all that much) but to demote a spouse to look after them outside is seriously weird behaviour. What they should have done is plan some simple activities for the children in a separate room, and hire a childminder for an hour. Problem solved.

Oh and the registry office which held that no of guests wasn't a matter of choice it was that or £800 or more extra that we didn't have. Not everyone can have everything they would like.

HahahAhahahahah at the child minder idea - I'd kick DH out to look after them before I left them with a total stranger. (and he wouldn't mind).

That would be a whole new AIBU thread all of it's own.

child minder is a better idea than a couple of the dads - while that might be ok for the DCs of that bloke, if I was one of the other parents, I wouldn't want to leave my DS with a stranger with no childcare background, but I would be happy leave him with a registered childminder for 30 minutes.

I can see other guests being unhappy on the day. If I was invited to a wedding, with my dh and dc and then found out at the door that I was expected to leave my children with some man I might not even know, I would refuse to do it.

And if my dh was expected to look after random children, I wouldn't let him do it either. There are all sorts of potential problems if one of them needs the loo, or gets upset because they want their mummy (as small kids are inclined to do). No, my dh would not be looking after anyone's dc but our own.

Now the bride has no children, so hasn't considered all this. I think you are right to tell your dh to just bring your sons along afterwards, but I think that someone needs to gently point out to the bride that this is not a cracking idea, generally and could all go pear shaped on the day.

He's also expected to look after another relative's children, too. A relative deemed more worthy of being in the room than he is.

That's the bit that would piss me/DH off! If he doesn't go and chooses to bring your boys later-who will they ask instead and how many kids (will he even know them?!) will he be expected to look after?!

If she does decide to go down the child minder route, then she ought to warn people in advance. My dd would not be happy being left with a cm that she didn't know, so if small children are excluded from the ceremony, their parents might prefer to make their own child care arrangements or decline the invitation, rather than turn up on the day, thinking that their dc are welcome and then have this sprung on them.

I think the bride should tell everyone with kids that unfortunately the venue for the ceremony cannot accomodate children and that said children and their parents should all come along afterwards to the receiption only.

Very odd arrangement though to have a venue not big enough.

At least you are not being asked for a "donation to sub the wedding venue as appeared on another thread recently. :)

Come in late here, and not read every message. But I think you can find some way to get through this without WW3. Am sure there is a middle way. You might have to do a bit of straight-talking though - its feels unfair to let one child in and leave the rest of my family including DH "outside" kind of thing. See what she says. This way you are leaving the ball in her court. But still think her plans sound unspeakably stupid and annoying.

Do the other parents know their children won't be let in? I'd be annoyed if I arrived on the day to find out!

Yanbu to be annoyed that invited guests will be asked to wait outside but yabu to say that you will be inside watching dd being a bm. You should be inside watching the wedding.

This wedding, it is not at the Ritz is it? In July, with relatives flying in from both the middle east and Oz?

(Please tell me it is.....)

Not that I am invited, and not that I am the bridge, but there was a thread about it last week, where some guests had been asked to fund the flights of the "poor oz relatives"....

But this cant be the same wedding, I am sure the grooms mum (who was paying) would be mortified at the idea of some guests hovering outside due to no room.... (like she would be mortified that the bride had suggested f the grooms relatives pay towards her relatives flights, in addition to their own flights....)

Unless you are relatives of the bride, of course.....
Oh, you are, arent you?

Please tell me it is the same wedding, I NEED TO KNOW more!!

It's rude to ask people to stand outside. I hope they are putting on drinks/entertainment or something? Mind you, they've probably lucked out not having to sit through a boring wedding. Can the other part of the family just join you later so they are not waiting outside?

Your DH would be wise to just come later so he doesn't end up minding loads of DCs.

I love that some people think ops DH is selfish for not wanting to stand outside a wedding and babysit 8 children, some of whom he probably doesn't even know I've got this vision of them all huddled together in the rain whinging about needing the loo while the important people sit inside and sip champagne

I don't think it needs to be either go along with bridezilla who sounds like a selfish nightmare the plan or create ww3. Just discuss between you and DH what you'd both be happy with and present your plan very politely to the bride, saying that under the circumstances your sure she'd understand if DH and the boys didn't attend/you all would be unable to attend the ceremony etc, it doesn't need to be a big drama

If it were me though we would all attend the ceremony or none would and we'd attend the reception or not. I would happily attend a wedding without the children if it were child free, but I would not go anywhere where my DH had to hang around outside as he wasnt deemed important enough and he would feel the same and I certainly wouldn't want to be lumbered with a load of kids if I hadn't even been asked if I minded watching them

I'm usually pro what the bride and groom want. If they want a&b to be bridesmaids/best man/ushers instead of x&y fine. If they want roses instead of carnations that's what they should have. If they want a horse and carriage instead of a car, so long as they're paying, it's their choice. If they even want a specific venue that only holds x then, afaic, they can do that but they need to invite x number of people.

In this situation, it's rude of them to say 'we want you to come to the wedding but we want you to miss the ceremony and provide us with free childcare instead.' They either need to have a childfree wedding or, if they want children at the reception, they need to provide childcare for the ceremony, letting the parents know in advance so they can either make use of it or make their own arrangements.