Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to want to cancel going to this wedding

325 replies

nennypops · 15/01/2013 21:16

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come, that was fine, and since she knew I couldn't leave him behind we would have to take it that my invitation is withdrawn and he would have to consider his own position.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?

OP posts:
ubik · 16/01/2013 13:45

Oh God

'it's their day'

obviously licence to behave like twats then

I have no idea why anyone would object to babies/children attending a wedding to which their parents are invited. I think your husband should still be best man, go through the motions and leave early.

diddl · 16/01/2013 13:46

I don´t think it would be awful of him to not be BM anymore.

Surely he accepted on the grounds that OP & baby were also going?

That isn´t the case now, so why shouldn´t he say no thanks?

The problem is that they were OK about baby & now aren´t-that´s so bloody unreasonable that if it leaves them without a best man-fucking tough.

ubik · 16/01/2013 13:47

Can anyone explain why a baby wouldn't be wanted at a wedding? I cannot think of a single reason Confused

FryOneFatManic · 16/01/2013 13:50

NewAndSparklyMe
It's ONE day. ONE ceremony. Not a week of having to leave your little bundle at home.

It's 2 days so far as I can see, because of distance, and don't forget to add in the older child with SN as well as the newborn. Not quite so straightforward, then.

So what if they're breastfed? Express for one day. It won't kill them to be away for a few hours.

At just a few weeks old, I couldn't have expressed enough to fill a teaspoon. Fed the baby fine, could never get the pumps to work properly.

OP YANBU, but perhaps your DH could go alone, if feasible. And I'd ensure he called his mate and explained about the call. Maybe he should also remind said mate that ceremonies in public places (ie churches) are just that, public.

NewAndSparklyMe · 16/01/2013 13:51

Oh God

'it's their day'

obviously licence to behave like twats then

Why? Why is it SO hard to understand that some people just don't want children at their wedding?! Why is it behaving like a twat because your children aren't invited?
I love my kids dearly, and love going to both types of weddings - those with kids and those without. If they didn't get invited though, I wouldn't be outraged and refuse to go.
I'd take the opportunity of a day/night out and make the most of it getting pissed on all the wine Grin

ubik · 16/01/2013 13:52

I agree - but it's a babe in arms not a sulky ten year old.

Alliwantisaroomsomewhere · 16/01/2013 13:53

I agree, Ubik. This crap about it being "their day" is a load of bollocks. It is a day supposedly for everyone invited to celebrate the couple's wedding.

I would not be able to remain friends with such twits.

choceyes · 16/01/2013 13:53

BUt maybe they just assumed that the baby would be looked after by the same people looking after the DS? Maybe they genuinely didn't think a lot about it, just assumed and when OP and her DH said about the baby going to the wedding, they thought...hang on a minute....??? Easily done I think if you don't have children and don't know what it's like.
Although if it were me, I'd have definitely accomodated the baby of my DH's bestman, it's the nice thing to do. but then I hated being the centre of attention at my wedding, so I wouldn't have worried about a baby getting in the way of things anyway!

NewAndSparklyMe · 16/01/2013 13:54

*Surely he accepted on the grounds that OP & baby were also going?

That isn´t the case now, so why shouldn´t he say no thanks?

The problem is that they were OK about baby & now aren´t-that´s so bloody unreasonable that if it leaves them without a best man-fucking tough.*

No, sounds like the OP and her dh just assumed that children were allowed, and the friends just assumed that baby would be left at home - a bit of communication with both parties was needed here, by the sounds of it as they just all assumed!
Sounds like the friends should have spelled it out on the invite properly.

ubik · 16/01/2013 13:55

and my BF babies never took a bottle. never.

FryOneFatManic · 16/01/2013 13:56

Unless the invite had explicitely said no children, then perhaps the mate was being foolish to assume that with DS1 being looked after, then DS2 would be left with someone too. He could have checked earlier.

NewAndSparklyMe · 16/01/2013 13:58

It is a day supposedly for everyone invited to celebrate the couple's wedding.

No, that's your interpretation of a wedding. Not a blanket one to suit all. Are all those people who just want to get married by themselves with two witnesses and nobody else doing it all wrong, then?
Or should they have to invite everyone as wedding's are an open to everyone event and stuff what they want?

EverybodysSnowyEyed · 16/01/2013 13:58

They are one guest out of many - I don't think the bride and groom should be blamed for assuming the baby wasn't coming.

If the invite just had the adults names then the kids aren't invited. Weddings that I have been to that had children specified the kids names.

NewAndSparklyMe · 16/01/2013 14:00

Unless the invite had explicitely said no children, then perhaps the mate was being foolish to assume that with DS1 being looked after, then DS2 would be left with someone too. He could have checked earlier.

If he doesn't have kids, and knew the existing child was being looked after and had a babysitter arranged, it's not unreasonable to think that the new baby would be looked after as well.
He would have quite rightly thought that a babysitter had been arranged (as it had!) and then when the subject was brought up at dinner or wherever about baby going he'll have thought Confused "hang on a minute..."

PartTimeModel · 16/01/2013 14:01

YANBU & they are being dorks.

ubik · 16/01/2013 14:02

I just don't understand the mentality of not allowing a baby at a wedding. Children - well ok, they can be noisy and smelly and ungrateful (lots of fun though) - but a tiny baby?

Why not?

TheCraicDealer · 16/01/2013 14:02

Everyone is overstating the "public" element of weddings though. Very few people would go to a ceremony uninvited, unless they had a love child or there was a wife in the attic no-one knows about.

FryOneFatManic · 16/01/2013 14:09

Ha! Round our way there's a lot of old folk who love sitting in on a wedding. I know a couple of people personally who've had the uninvited guests at church, and have heard about it happening to quite a few others....Grin

On a more sober note, I've been given to understand that in some cases, these are people who find somewhere public and especially warm to sit cos they are struggling to heat homes.

NewAndSparklyMe · 16/01/2013 14:09

Children - well ok, they can be noisy and smelly and ungrateful (lots of fun though) - but a tiny baby?

Why not?

Because if they invite the baby, and say no to all other children, you'll get all other mothers up in arms and outraged as they've had to leave their children at home?
That they'll see it as "Well, THEY'RE allowed their baby, why can't I bring my kids?" and cause a fuss?
Lot easier to say no children than "no children with the exception of some children" as that will cause even more people to get upset (as this thread clearly shows, some people do get unreasonable if the children don't get invited everywhere!)
Far easier to just say "no children"

HoratiaWinwood · 16/01/2013 14:11

If he doesn't have kids, and knew the existing child was being looked after and had a babysitter arranged, it's not unreasonable to think that the new baby would be looked after as well. He would have quite rightly thought that a babysitter had been arranged (as it had!) and then when the subject was brought up at dinner or wherever about baby going he'll have thought "hang on a minute..."

This was my assumption.

And all the dancing about with "oh well but wouldn't you rather" is all code for "WE DON'T WANT YOUR BABY THERE". And it would be the height of rudeness to go uninvited, whatever the law allows.

TheCraicDealer · 16/01/2013 14:11

Yes, but they're unlikely to be breastfeeding, cry, or "thunder steal" so presumably MIL-in-question would let them stay.

Andro · 16/01/2013 14:16

OP, YANBU - but with your DH as best man I would encourage him to go.

WRT child free weddings, DH and I had a no under 10's policy...at his insistence. His Dsis's wedding turned into a disaster zone because of a few parents who apparently took some time off from 'parenting', their children were uncontrolled (to say the least) and the bride spent most of the day in tears (not the happy kind). DH made it very clear when we were planning our wedding that he didn't want young children there, many of the irresponsible parents who attended his Dsis's wedding were also being invited to attend ours!

dreamingbohemian · 16/01/2013 14:18

The only reason I wanted a child-free ceremony was that I wanted DH and I to be able to say our vows to each other without being distracted or drowned out by crying babies.

It wasn't about needing all the attention or 'it's my day' or anything like that, it was just being sentimental about the importance of those vows and how much they meant to me.

It ended up not being an issue as we had a registry wedding and none of the guests had kids. And yes, the moment we said our vows is one of the best memories of my life.

It's all well and good to say 'I'll take the baby out if she cries' but that misses the point, there has already been crying and maybe not at the best time.

I find it strange that so many people accept that it's not the best idea to take a baby to a posh restaurant or a play, but it's okay to demand to bring your baby to a formal wedding ceremony.

I agree the couple here have not handled things very well, but I think for all of you to pull out of going is really overreacting.

Hobbitation · 16/01/2013 14:21

I think DH should go on his own if the distance doesn't involve leaving you for days with a new baby. That's what we would have done first off TBH, I wouldn't have even have thought of going with a very new baby if it was DH's friend and I didn't know them personally.

SunnyL · 16/01/2013 14:24

I've been invited to a friends wedding in July which is 'no children' but my baby will be 3-5 weeks old by then. I don't mind the no children rule since they are trying to keep costs down and if everyone brought their children along it would cost them for 34 dinners. However trying to explain to them that my baby cannot be left at home but also won't cost them anything is taking a bit of explaining. My friend is not trying to be rude or cruel - he just doesn't have kids yet so doesn't understand the mechanics of small babies and boobs.

If it comes down to it I'll send my husband and stay at home. It will make me sad since we've been friends since we were 3 months old but I accept its his choice.