to want to cancel going to this wedding

[nennypops]

DH is supposed to be best man at the wedding of an old friend of his in a few weeks' time. He was asked when I was expecting DS2 and I was invited too. DSs is breastfed and would have to come with us. DS1 has SN and wouldn't cope, so we are making other arrangements for him. A couple of weeks ago we had friend and fiancee round for a meal and, when we were talking about the wedding, I said that I was planning on sitting at the back with the baby so that I can take him out if he starts crying; also we would get a room in the hotel where the reception is happening so that, again, I could disappear and feed him if necessary.

They seemed happy with that, but a few days later DH got an embarrassed call from his friend saying that they weren't sure about having the baby there, couldn't we leave him behind. DH said no, explained why not, and said we realised that they wouldn't want any disturbance which was why we were planning on making arrangements so that wouldn't happen. Shortly afterwards, he had a call from the fiancee's mother of all people, coming up with all sorts of reasons why we shouldn't have the baby there - e.g. it would be cold in church (we'd wrap DS up warm, I'm sure the church won't be that cold), and the same sort of stuff re what if he needs feeding or changing etc. DH again patiently explained that we'd thought of all that. Then she started saying how it would be her daughter's day, she shouldn't have the attention taken off her, etc etc. So DH said that if she was basically saying that DS couldn't come, that was fine, and since she knew I couldn't leave him behind we would have to take it that my invitation is withdrawn and he would have to consider his own position. And we are both now thinking that he should cancel being best man.

It seems to us that they're perfectly entitled to have a no children rule, it's their wedding after all. However, they asked DH to be best man knowing the baby would be born before the wedding and never suggesting that children in general weren't welcome, let alone that our baby wouldn't be. DH doesn't want to spoil the wedding or embarrass his friend, but he feels it would be unfair to leave me behind, and that effectively withdrawing my invitation is a bit of a slap in the face. AWBU?

[NewAndSparklyMe]

Where's the OP gone? If you're reading, did your friends actually SAY all along that children/babies were welcome, and you'd talked about it prior to the dinner where they said no?
Or did you just assume that babies were coming, and the dinner was the first time that you had actually mentioned the fact to them so they were a bit "hang on, who said baby could come?!"
Genuine question by the way, as there seems to be a bit of confusion on the thread as it's not made clear in your original post.

[NewAndSparklyMe]

A lot of bf mums would not want to give a bottle (even expressed) to a new baby or leave baby for a day so I stick by my accurate view that you are talking rubbish.

Well, that's entirely up to the mum, and of course they're NBU to want to stay at home. If you bf and can't go anywhere though, you have to accept that your choice means you sometimes just can't go places then.
Not go in a sulk because the world refuses to revolve around your baby.
The bride and groom are just as entitled to have the kind of day THEY want, without being guilt tripped into a different type of day to accommodate and please everyone else.

[Viviennemary]

I think it's fair enough to impose a no children rule if that's what people want. But then they can't complain if people decide not to go if they can't take their children.

[gimmecakeandcandy]

I don't get the impression the op is sulking. More like the bridezilla is being odd!

[NewAndSparklyMe]

Why are they being odd for not wanting children at their wedding? Not everyone does. Doesn't make them odd.

[NewAndSparklyMe]

Sorry, pressed send too soon. What is it if they're both not sulking then, if she's refusing to go, and so is husband, when he's got a main role in the bridal party?

[dreamingbohemian]

I agree New -- it is absolutely a woman's prerogative not to leave her baby for a day but unfortunately that means sometimes you have to give things a miss. I think ideally everyone would want children at their weddings but people are not monsters if they don't, there are actual reasons for it.

It's not ignorant to wonder if a woman might express. Maybe it's a little ignorant to assume everyone can or wants to express, but it's not the same as suggesting leaving the baby with a Happy Meal. Lots of women do express so people might genuinely think this is an option. If not, fair enough, but again, that doesn't trump the couple's wishes for their own wedding.

[13Iggis]

I don't get all the "world doesn't revolve around your baby" posts. The OP does not want to bring the baby in order to show him off. She needs to bring him as he is dependant upon her. There is a big difference. Thinking the world revolved around your baby would mean expecting the event to change to accommodate you - the OP is expecting nothing to change, and has made contigency plans in case the baby is distracting others from the bridezilla

Invariably some BF mothers are more discrete about BF than others...need I say more? Zavi you are shit-stirring, and the word is discreet fgs.

[NewAndSparklyMe]

Thinking the world revolved around your baby would mean expecting the event to change to accommodate you - the OP is expecting nothing to change, and has made contigency plans in case the baby is distracting others from the bridezilla

She is expecting the event to change though by wanting them to change their plans and have babies/children come along.
What contingency plans? Promising to take the baby out if it threatens to cry all the way through the vows? Because sometimes people promise they'll take the baby out, then when it comes to it actually don't bother and let them scream all the way through the vows.
speaking from personal experience

[dreamingbohemian]

Of course she expects the event to change, from child-free to allowing children.

She may have a very good reason for wanting that change, but you can't say it's not asking the couple to change their preferences for the event.

[Longdistance]

Bridezilla thinks the attention will be diverted to baby during the day.

Don't bother going. I wouldn't.

[expatinscotland]

They are not taking their DS1. The couple were okay with the baby being there. Now they are not. The DH himself said he needed to consider his position, he said this of his own volition in response to the bride's mother's call.

Look, OP, life is way too short for precious bridezillas and people who enable them. Hope you and your DH have decided to cancel on them and use the money to do something as a family. These people aren't friends.

[Binfullofresolutionsfor10thjan]

As a sub topic, why are so many of these child free invites so unclear?

It would be so much easier if instructions were clear in the invitation.

We have just received a save the date card addressed to my dh for a wedding later in the year.

When the prospective groom came to stay, we enthused about the fact that it was half term so we could all fly over. Cue much awkwardness and then the eventual admission that ds wasn't to come, too much money to invite a kid, personal intimate wedding blah. My dh has been asked to be best man, I have been invited. WTAF are we meant to do with our ds during this wedding? I said I wouldn't be able to make it as we can't leave him in another country. Cue me BU!

I believe people should have the wedding that they want. However when you are late 30's and all your friends have kids, you at least need to make sure they all understand your intentions, surely?

This is the third invite we've had in this fashion, one from my best friend. Is it so hard to put an explanatory note in the invite?

[NewAndSparklyMe]

Bridezilla thinks the attention will be diverted to baby during the day.

Nothing to do with attention being diverted to baby, where the F does Bridezilla come into it just because she has different wants to what you do?
It's just the same as saying you're Mumzilla. I'm a mum, therefore my wants and needs trumps yours, stuff what you want for your day.
Both utterly ridiculous statements.
You can't, or won't, be parted from your baby, fine. That's entirely up to you. Just don't make out everyone else is being unreasonable and arsey just because their idea of their wedding day is different to how you'd have it if you ruled what happened.

[NewAndSparklyMe]

Seriously, why do people take the hump if their children don't get invited? We got invited to one last year, an adult only one.
Unfortunately it was on a weekday, school term, and at opposite ends of the country, and no babysitters so was unable to make it.
I didn't take it personally though, and accepted we couldn't go. Because I know it's not always all about me.

[MrsHoarder]

She's bridezilla because she misled them into thinking that babes in arms would be acceptable and has got her mum to ring up (how old are they, 5?) to give excuses as to why the baby couldn't come. The whole thing is then revealed as the bride wanting all the attention on her not their big day.

And if they'd made this clear at the start, there wouldn't be a situation because the DH could have declined to be BM and they wouldn't have made arrangements for DC1 and paid for a hotel.

[NewAndSparklyMe]

It hasn't actually been made clear though has it (unless I've missed a post) if the getting married couple had actually been saying out loud that baby could come all along, or if OP had just assumed that baby was allowed to come.

[ENormaSnob]

I suspect a lot of us on here don't really give a shit about weddings, child free or not. It's just a day with a party.

If they had been transparent about the baby ban from the beginning then I'll bet the op dh would've declined best man position. Therefore no issue now.

Leaving it so late (and getting the mil to ring ) has put them all in a shit position. B and g think their wedding is priority, op and dh think their baby is. No winners here.

If b and g are happy to leave such short notice to enforce the baby ban then they should be happy to have short notice in which to find a new bm.

[gimmecakeandcandy]

It's not the fact she doesn't want children at her wedding that is odd, it is the way both the bride and groom have gone about things. They knew a new baby would be around but they have made a real hash of how they have gone about things and that makes them rude and odd.

[Kafri]

Am I missing something here...

Surely if OP's DH is best man, then they are particularly close to B and G, therefore B and G would surely rather their good friends witness their special day with baby than have them stay away as they can't leave newborn..

I don't see a problem with kids at. Weddings but i could understand non child friendly couples not wanting unruly kids spoiling their day but a newborn?? - really. What exactly do the B and G think a newborn is going to do??

The slightest whimper and OP can slip out the back door!!!

Oh, and technically, their wedding or not, B and G cannot stop any child coming to the church. Like any other service-it's open house!!

[PureQuintessence]

Maybe they think your dh will not take his Best Man duties seriously with you and your newborn there? Maybe they think he will be at your side all the time?

[diddl]

It´s not the ceremony though, is it, it´s the reception!

Why travel for a couple of hrs or whatever just to prove a point by going to the ceremony & then be on your own for the rest of the day/evening??

[parachutesarefab]

OP - it really sounds like a misunderstanding.

You say "they asked DH to be best man knowing the baby would be born before the wedding and never suggesting that children in general weren't welcome" - so was DS1 invited?

In your later post "they invited both of us knowing we'd have a small baby and they knew perfectly well that we were planning to take him with us because we talked about how to deal with him"
Knowing you'd have a small baby isn't the same as inviting your small baby.
When did you "talk about how to deal with him"? If it was months ago, they should have said something then, but if it is when you had your meal in the op they clearly realised there was a misunderstanding, talked it over, wanted to stick to having no children, and made the "embarrassed phonecall".

It would have been nice if they'd made it very clear from the start that they didn't want any children there, but they didn't.

It would have been nice if you'd made it very clear from the start that you were planning to take your baby, but you didn't. (or you'd have mentioned it in the op)

I couldn't go to a wedding in Australia, because I was pregnant and wouldn't have been able to fly. That wasn't my invitation being withdrawn, that was my circumstances making me unable to go.

[Cailinsalach]

In my view a wedding is not a wedding unless you have boys doing kneeling slides on the dancefloor, little girls in pretty party dresses squealing and a fight. If you lack anyone of those items I think you can have the marriage anulled. Legal requirements, you see.