dd is not invited to DH brother's wedding

[argyll]

DH brother is getting married in Dorset in Sept and we live over 500 miles away in Argyll. Although being initially told it would be ok to take dd they have changed their minds and now said it would not be fair on all their friends with children (who all live locally) to make an exception for us. dd with be 18 months at time of wedding and as all dh family will be at wedding and my mother is not physically able to look after her we have no-one to leave her with (not sure i would be happy to leave her that distance away anyway). Our only solution as i can see it is for dh to go himself, as it would cause to many problems if he didn't. Do you think im being unreasonable to be upset over this.

"I think weddings are generally adult events"

And I think weddings are family events (well they are in OH's family and in my family)

"in my experience it is unusual for children to be invited to weddings"

In my experience it is usual for family children to be invited to weddings, and at the last wedding I went to friends' children came too.

It's no wonder that we have a reputation for disliking children in this country when people view having children at weddings as a negative thing.

I agree with Shelby that you cut your coat according to your cloth. You work out how many guests you want, then you price up what you can afford. And family invites come before friends (well it did for us anyway)

This is not about the child, this is about a brother who is being gracious enough to travel 500 miles to a wedding because it is family and that is what's expected whilst his daughter and wife remain behind because the brides and grooms decision is about wants and not family. I have no problem with child free but my family is important and if my DCs did this whilst maintaining the fake smile for their decision my heart would break a bit.

I can honestly never understand why people have child free weddings. Weddings are about family, about humans coming together to celebrate love. Children are also humans! I think it goes without saying that 99.9% of parents are sensible enough to remove a child if they kick off during ceremony/speeches and other than that, its all just walking about chatting anyway so what difference does it make? I know everyone is entitled to their own day but there was NEVER any question about children at my wedding since everyone I am related to under the age of 18 was in the bridal party! YANBU. They shouldn't have moved the goal posts like that.

I absolutely dread the prospect of children making noise or running around during my wedding ceremony. However I understand that for many leaving the children behind is not desirable or not an option. When we sent out the save the dates for our wedding we didn't mention children at that point but some people asked.

Our reply was "Children are very welcome but we'd rather than the ones who are too little to understand about keeping quiet during the ceremony don't join us for that part".

This is slightly different from asking people to take the kids out if they start to play up. Obviously it does mean that one parent may also have to stay outside, but I hoped they'd think that was a reasonable compromise, since the ceremony is only half an hour out of a total day's celebration. We're actually looking at a nanny/creche, but I didn't want to promise that in case it was unworkable.

Interestingly, a significant proportion of our friends (who were not even given the "stay out of the ceremony " request) have voluntarily chosen to come without their children.

Having spent 3 hours yesterday in the present of a loud and grizzly 16 month old who was constantly whining and mostly crying and kicking and screaming, for reasons unknown, I can quite see how people who either dont have children, or whose children have left that state years ago, would insist on a child free wedding.

Let your dh go on his own.

I agree that weddings are family events but so many selfish parents do not take noisy children out of weddings, therefore the special ceremony is ruined as people can't hear/concentrate on what is going on.

How does a child free wedding work? Are there other forms of social vetting as well?

I am imagining a situation where the Bride and Groom have an A list of suitably attractive friends who will dress appropriately for the pictures, show decorum at all times, and buy them expensive tasteful presents from top London stores. Lovely, lovely people. Mwah, mwah.

Then there will be the B list of slightly chubby people from their schooldays who haven't discovered Spanx yet, have cheap highlights, and who are invited along for old times' sake. Luckily they too will buy presents - in fact they will probably spend more than the A-Listers, as they adore the bride and groom and will be there for them through the inevitable divorce when the A-Listers have long gone. However in the photos they will find themselves positioned ever so slightly behind all the other guests, whilst being very sporting about it all.

The C list will involve slightly demented grandparents, lecherous uncles who can't hold their drink, and the odd friend of the happy couple's parents. The bride and groom hope these people will leave after the meal. They sit them all together at a table near the toilets.

Bunbaker - I think back in the day weddings tended to have mainly family as guests and maybe one or two friends. These days it seems to be more friends than family. - this was because back in the day, the brides family (and sometimes the grooms) paid for the wedding. It was a party thrown by the parents of the couple, so the parents of the couple controlled the guest list and were hosting an event within their family/community.

Now, it's expected the couple will pay for the wedding, possibly with some financial help from parents, but I've only been to one wedding that was entirely funded by the parents of the couple, that was the wedding of a Hindu couple who had 500 guests, with one table of 20 of her friends, one table of 20 of his. The rest was extended family and family friends. Whole thing cost in the region of £40k. Now, if I was spending £40k on a party, I'd want it packed with people I care about, not people my parents think are important. If someone else is paying htat sort of money, I'd expect them to invite who they wanted.

Weddings have changed, the expectation is no longer that parents will fund weddings and that they are throwing a family event (just start a thread on here asking if it's "ok to get married with only 10 guests", everyone will say of course, it's more important that you focus on the marriage, not a big wedding). It's rarely a case that a marriage is seen as bringing together two families, it's seen as two people making a commitment to each other and throwing a party to celebrate that - it's much more about the couple and not the wider community. If it wasn't, you'd get more people up in arms at the suggestion of small weddings or just going off to get married without hosting a family/community event.

(And I'm not defending my own position, we had no children at our wedding, but that was because there were no children in the family and the only friends with DCs couldn't make it, but they were invited, mind you in hindsight, it was a very unDC friendly day, timings would have been a nightmare and the venue was really not safe for little ones)

Boffin - DH was best man at one wedding where the bride had apparently gone through the groom's friend list and worked out which of those were least likely to get drunk during the meal and naked on the dancefloor and only allowed those who passed to be groomsmen.

Jessie - hope your ceremony isn't in a church as you can't ask anyone to stay out of a church. I had two pews of random elderly sightseers turn up at my wedding which was quite amusing. They came up & said hello afterwards & said nice things about the service.

saintly we got married in a private chapel and excluded whoever we liked

Ah now we did avoid inviting 2 friends because we thought they'd spend the reception in the toilet taking cocaine. And we avoided another(distant) friend because her boyfriend was so so awful. Had been to one wedding where he'd pissed against the wall of the church, made rude comments about the bride all the way through the ceremony, & left the reception loudly during the speeches.

Rudy - I think you must be misreading bunbaker's post. She's certainly not agreeing with everything ceres said.

Jessie - if you're worried some of the people you've invited won't have the sense to remove a child whose making a noise during your vows, then, as someone said down the thread, get whoever is officiating to remind parents and carers to take children out if they're making a noise before they start the ceremony. It's shouldn't be something to get massively stressed about.

And I've only taken DS to one of the last three weddings I've been to. I'd rather not take him and I'm sure a lot of parents feel like that - it's less relaxing and fun. But if the wedding was a long distance away, I'd have no choice.

And whoever said that's entitled, I don't understand why.

When my eldest was a baby we were invited to two weddings, one involved flying half way across the world and the other an eight hour drive. I missed one completely because he wouldn't stop crying so I had to stand outside and the other he made a few sudden loud noises right in the middle of the very quiet ceremony so I had to leave very quickly.
Churches are very echo'y and he suddenly realised what fun it was to shout. He was about 9months. I was apologetic and I don't think the Bride and groom minded but it was inappropriate.

I'm closer to my friends' children than I am to my nieces and nephews, maybe that's why this rule is sometimes invoked: if there is pressure on places due to affordability then perhaps people say 'no children' rather than have to say exactly which ones can come.

Ceres it's the excuse that children aren't invited because they take up spaces that I was referring to. There would probably be a few if lack of space meant only DH was invited as the groom's sibling but the OP was excluded as not being a blood relative.

And regarding people who cite noise during the ceremony, well presumably by the age of 6 or so children are used to sitting quietly at school so could be trusted not to cause a disruption. Especially if bribed with a packet of sweets! So following Jessie's advice would be the way to go.

Of course, as hosts you can invite who you like, but excluding children on mass because you don't like them as a group is a bit weird. It's like saying no old people can be invited because they might take their teeth out during the meal, get offended at the best man's speech, look wrinkly in the photos & never bother dancing or complain the music is too loud.

On the other hand, we didn't take toddler DD to one local wedding she was invited to because it would have been a nightmare trying to fit her lunch and nap round the wedding timings. Instead we left her at home with a relative and enjoyed a lovely peaceful meal - bliss! Didn't need permission from the B&G to do this either, we were quite capable of making up our own minds what would make our day most enjoyable.

saintlyjimjams no, my wedding is most definitely not in a church as I am a very, very committed and vocal atheist.

As to having the celebrant warn people with kids to take them out if they get noisy I don't want to do that because by the time they've made the first noise the ceremony will already have been spoiled in my opinion. Not to mention the disruption of people walking out and opening/closing the door. And before anyone says that it's very Bridezilla of me and how dare I want everyone's undivided attention, I think that it's a fair enough request that Bride and Groom be centre of attention during their ceremony!

I was upset that people took noisy kids out of my wedding as friends had missed the ceremony.

I wish I'd told people beforehand not to go out if kids were wailing.

Blimey I hope no-one turns up to your wedding with a cough Jessie!

I didn't really see our wedding as about dh & I bring the centre of attention :shudder: but more about sharing our vows with those we loved, whether they were noisy, dribbly, senile or whatever. Would be a bit weird IMO to exclude someone we were close to just because they were too young or learning disabled to understand etiquette or their dementia meant their once impeccable manners were no more.

Of course we didn't invite children if we didn't know them. But I'd hate to exclude someone we loved/who loved us in case they made a little noise during the ceremony.

"Of course, as hosts you can invite who you like, but excluding children on mass because you don't like them as a group is a bit weird. It's like saying no old people can be invited because they might take their teeth out during the meal, get offended at the best man's speech, look wrinkly in the photos & never bother dancing or complain the music is too loud."

what a strange post.

where did I say I didn't like children? I like children. I even choose to work with children.

just because I prefer some occasions to be child free does not mean that I do not like children.

I find it odd in the extreme that people think children should be included in absolutely everything. I always wonder if the parents who think this get all twitchy when they are not invited to every party that their child gets invited to.

as I said this isn't a problem in my life because my friends all tend to have similar views on weddings.

each to their own, life would be dull indeed if we all thought the same and did the same thing.

I would still decline an invitation if I knew a wedding was going to have hordes of children. but then I am also of the view that invitations can be declined - we are invited to one this year and are not going as it doesn't suit us (although it is child free!) because of the travel involved.

"How does a child free wedding work? Are there other forms of social vetting as well?

I am imagining a situation where the Bride and Groom have an A list of suitably attractive friends who will dress appropriately for the pictures, show decorum at all times, and buy them expensive tasteful presents from top London stores. Lovely, lovely people. Mwah, mwah.

Then there will be the B list of slightly chubby people from their schooldays who haven't discovered Spanx yet, have cheap highlights, and who are invited along for old times' sake. Luckily they too will buy presents - in fact they will probably spend more than the A-Listers, as they adore the bride and groom and will be there for them through the inevitable divorce when the A-Listers have long gone. However in the photos they will find themselves positioned ever so slightly behind all the other guests, whilst being very sporting about it all.

The C list will involve slightly demented grandparents, lecherous uncles who can't hold their drink, and the odd friend of the happy couple's parents. The bride and groom hope these people will leave after the meal. They sit them all together at a table near the toilets."

we didn't have an 'a list' or any other type of list. every guest was invited with either their spouse/partner or a plus one. all guests were invited to the entire day, there was no evening reception (although the wedding was still going strong at 4am, started dwindling around 5am).

very few photos (took half an hour I think), no boring speeches, loads of wine and good food, music and dancing.

hardly social vetting.

Back to the OP's conundrum.What does your Mil say?

I would go ballistic if my first and only Dgc was left 500 miles away.The whole family would want to see him badly at this gorgeous stage.
As for leaving you out and groom's brother arriving alone,absolute madness.

Talk about it to them...they are not thinking clearly.Get Grandmother,(who is not' mother of the bride 'and will love it and have nothing to do anyway) to entertain the little prince!