is she being unreasonable? Wedding, children

[Bagofholly]

Have just had my very tearful cousin on the phone. She gets married this September, fiancé's step sister is invited to the wedding, with her husband, and they have a little boy. The venue is a lovely but rather formal restaurant and they've said verbally that it's a no-kids do. The invitations haven't gone out yet, just Save The Date cards. My cousin's fiancé told his SS that children weren't allowed and that he hoped she would understand. Well the SS rang the venue who said they didn't have a no children rule, and then rang my cousin and her fiancé and got really upset, saying they shouldn't have lied, they're starting their marriage with a lie, why can't she bring her boy, etc.
I think they could have handled it better but that SS is incredibly rude checking up on them and trying to force their hand. She says they won't go unless she can bring her son.
Unreasonable?

Their wedding, they invite who they like.

I think the Step sister is being unreasonable definitely. I don't like the no children rule at weddings, but you have to accept it as being someone else's decision. You don't then circumvent the bride and groom to ask the venue if you can bring your child. That's just not on.

She sounds peculiar

It's their wedding, not hers. If I were them I'd tell her not to come at all if she's going to behave like that. But then I'm a bit of a stubborn cow when it comes to emotional blackmail.

Yes SS is unreasonable. The invite is for who it states and that is up to the bride and groom so if they want no kids, then no kids it is.

I'd be grateful she couldn't / wouldn't come if she's like that!

Did the say no children because we say so or no children because the venue says so. If its the second they shouldn't have lied, but she should have just accepted it. Its up yo them and if I were them I would have told her straight in the first place. Its possible she rang as she knew they were lying which is as disrespectful as checking up on them.

Checking up is unreasonable, of course.

Not unreasonable to not go if she so decides - people who choose to have a child free wedding must accept that people who have kids might not attend.

I think she's being unreasonable in making a weird fuss about it, but at the same time I admit I'd be a bit if my child wasn't invited to a family wedding.

You cousin should just get her fiance to send an email to step sister and say
"Sorry for the mix up, the venue does not have a no kids rule, but we do. We want a child free wedding, and are letting people know well in advance so they can make child care arrangements. I hope you understand."

And then specify on the invitations that the invitations are for grown ups only.

Their wedding so they should do what they want. If the SS throws a hissy fit that's her problem. The couple shouldn't back down to accommodate a stroppy, hysterical relative.

Yes, SIBU to phone the venue and to have a go at them about it. They were BU if they tried blaming the venue rather than just telling her straight that her child wasn't welcomr though...

Yes they should have told her straight, but apparently she's a little tricky sometimes, you'll be astonished to hear. I think he lied to try to save an argument and then got a bigger one.

SS is being a loon.

I have politely declined no children weddings.
If it's a formal sit down do, with limited seats, it's understandable.

It's no children in the ceremony that annoys me.

I think child-free weddings are weird, but if that is what they want then that's their business. A pretext was probably unnecessary in the first place, but in their shoes as things are now; I would stand my ground and reply very calmly "Perhaps we did misunderstand what they told us, but it makes no difference as we shall not be inviting children".

(From what you've posted, it sounds as if she wouldn't be much of a loss of she decided no to attend, but I hope that would not cause other family problems. Good luck).

I can't work out from the OP whether or not the SS was lied to, or was just told it's a child-free wedding. She should've been told it wasn't a policy, but rather a choice, but that doesn't excuse her checking with the venue unless she got the impression that the B&G really wanted children there and were having problems getting the venue to agree.

Ultimately though, while I hate child-free weddings and believe on the whole they are pretentious, the fact remains that it's a decision for the B&G, not the guests. B&G just need to accept that some people will not be able to go, as their regular babysitters may also be guests at the wedding.

The step sister sounds very odd.

Did they lie and blame the venue (perhaps because they suspected she would cause a fuss about not taking her child) or were they confused themselves about the venue allowing children or did the step sister just assume it was the venue's rule rather than the choice of bride and groom?

Whichever it is though, she was incredibly rude and very odd to check up on them and she sounds a bit unstable to be ranting about them starting their marriage with a lie. It's not as though one of them is already married or hiding a secret family somewhere, all they have done is tell a difficult relative that her child, for whatever reason, cannot attend.

They have a right to state no children at the wedding and the step sister has the right to decline the invitation because of it, with no hard feelings on either side.

Am going to show my cousin this thread. She's v upset.

HereIGo, that is a very extreme way to look at it. Like I said, I don't like child-free weddings either, but I certainly wouldn't be stamping my feet and refusing to go to or celebrate any future occasions the family had, just because they wanted an adults-only occasion.

It's their wedding, they have the right to invite who they want to.

TidyDancer, her fiancé spoke to his SS and (I think) said children weren't allowed by the venue, when really he should have been honest and said that they just wanted an adult only wedding, so the SS phoned the venue to check and discovered they DO allow children, and blew her top about being lied to.

Yes, he should've been honest. I can understand her being upset about being lied to, but it's still the B&G's choice ultimately.

Odder than chucking a tantrum over a perfectly valid choice? Really?

cousin is UR, I have no problem with child free weddings if the couples OWN it! Really irritates me (to the point of declining) if they make out it's not their choice, or because parents "want a night off" or because of the venue when it's not true!

I wouldn't insist DS come, I'ld just not go at all, silly couple!

I don't blame her for being annoyed at being lied to, but it's still not acceptible to check up on people's reasons for not having children at their wedding. It's hard but you have to accept it (unless you're paying for the wedding)

HereIgo, it will all seem odd if you take the view that all weddings should include children. Not everyone thinks that way.
And if you're from a giant family with a gazillion kids you can end up with a day that isn't at all what you'd planned, especially if you don't have children yourself yet and just don't "get" them. Wouldn't be my choice but I understand.
We went to a wedding in the City a while back and it was totally unsuitable for children - more like a swish cocktail party. Again not for everyone but it's up to them, and doesn't make the bride or groom evil kitten killers etc.