To be put out that 1.5 year old excluded from wedding when other children invited?

[MillieH30]

We've been invited to a wedding where the invitations says no children except godchildren and small babies. The couple have at least 6 godchildren of ages 2 to 8 between them and there will be approx 4 small babies there.

It seems really odd to allow some children but not others. We've never left DD overnight before so, if we go, will have to bring a relative away with us and pay for a hotel room so they can look after DD.

The groom is a good friend so we want to attend wedding but his fiance is insisting on this rule. I could understand if there was a blanket ban on children, but it seems really unfair to allow some but not others.

[Ragwort]

As others have said, why can't your DH go on his own? But seriously, I am amazed at the number of people who seem to find it so hard to leave their baby/child over night - don't you ever think about what would happen if you had to go into hospital, some other emergency or worse. There seems to be a bit of an element of the 'martyr' over this subject and no, I didn't have local family that I could easily leave my DS with - but I made arrangements so that it was never such a big deal if I did need to leave him.

[Morgause]

YABU.

I'm guessing cost is a factor. They are paying so much per head and the venue may insist that children are paid for. The costs would soar if they invited all children, so they invite babes in arms (no charge, probably) and children special to them.

YANBU to not want to leave your little one - send your DH on his own.

[saintlyjimjams]

Your OP was unreasonable but in your update the groom is being unreasonable.

I would consider sending dh alone in your circumstances - although a trip involving 2 days away might be pushing it (not because I cannot bear to be apart from him but because family circumstances mean we often need two adults hands on to run the household - so 2 days away takes quite a bit of rearranging).

I would have been quite happy to leave a 1.5 year old overnight - but not for 2 days to trek to a wedding the other side of the country. If dh can't/doesn't want to go alone then just keep being polite in the refusal to the groom but ignore the pressure. The wedding party shouldn't be sulking if you decline - for whatever reason.

[saintlyjimjams]

To be fair china the person grumbling & showing bad grace here is the groom. The OP politely declined & the groom is getting funny about it.

[MissDuke]

I think they are being very fair to be honest. It stands to reason that they will be close with their own godchildren so makes sense to include them. I doubt they know your dd well? My children were not invited to their aunt's wedding, which did annoy me as she saw them every single week and they were involved in the wedding preparations and old enough to be upset at not being invited - but what can you do.

[Southsearocks]

I have some sympathy with the bride and groom. We're getting married this year at a venue that can only take so many people, and there are lots of people we'd love to invite. If you invite a couple who have two or three children you can soon fill the guest list at the expense of other people you'd like to see there.

For us it was a no brainier as we wanted children to come and enjoy the day but I can totally understand how your friends have become selective. No doubt it was a hard decision for them and they are aware they will be upsetting some people but it is their decision and their special, and very, very expensive day, so some compromise your part wouldn't go amiss.

They will be disappointed if you don't go but probably don't want you to go a feel resentful either.

[WhoKnowsWhereTheTimeGoes]

Yes, send DH on his own. It's a perfectly reasonable compromise.

[Southsearocks]

Also agree with saintly

[saintlyjimjams]

No- one is reading your update OP.

SHE POLITELY DECLINED THE GROOM IS PUTTING PRESSURE ON THEM TO ATTEND

Bottom of page 1.

Yes I think the first post was unreasonable but the OP responded appropriately & now it is the groom who is in the wrong.

[saintlyjimjams]

AND IT'S A 2 DAY TRIP NOT OVERNIGHT (due to distance)

Also bottom of first page.

[Lilaclily]

Yes the groom is unreasonable
End of thread

[MissDuke]

I did read the update, but didn't see it as a big issue. Personally I feel the DH should go alone if he wants, he is bound to know other people going. If he doesn't want to, then he will just have to be firm with the groom, I don't really see it as a big problem.

[lanbro]

We're off to a child free wedding in July, we will have a 2yo and 9mo and I can't wait! We are doing the opposite journey to you, away for 2 nights and youngest hasn't stayed away before. She has to at some point and I can't see a better reason than our first weekend away sans kids, and my first wedding in 3 years where I haven't been pregnant or feeding a newborn, it's going to be fab!

[WhereTheWildlingsAre]

The groom is putting pressure on because they, as yet, don't have kids and so they don't understand the dilemma of leaving little ones. However it's their right not to invite. They are NBU.

Your DH should go alone, definately. We have done this before.

[PrincessOfChina]

Absolutely the groom is being unreasonable if he is putting pressure on. I can't imagine he's actually doing anything other than expressing his disappointment, which may be coming across as pressure to the OP who is probably a bit disappointed herself that she can't make it work.

[WhoKnowsWhereTheTimeGoes]

I had read the OP's update. Of course the groom wants his close friends there, that is understandable, so just sending DH is the perfect compromise, if he is a close friend there will be lots of other people he knows there.

[JessieMcJessie]

The date for our wedding RSVP has just passed. Having learned a few things from Mumsnet (though no DC of our own) we decided to invite the children of all our guests, and we are in our late thirties so that's quite a few. Every invitation named every child individually. And what do you know....pretty much every couple apart from DP's sister whose daughter is our flowergirl, one couple that's travelling from New Zealand and combining the wedding with a family visit and one Mum of a baby who will be under 10 weeks has said "great, we'll come but we're not bringing the kids. Not one single invitee has declined due to unwillingness to bring kids and lack of childcare. So from my own experience I can say that the best way to get yourself a child free wedding (we're delighted with the outcome) is to invite everyone's children!

[Gurnie]

I agree with many others. I think your dh should go. I don't think the groom is being unreasonable to be fed up that neither of you are coming if he is a good friend. Reminds me a bit of our wedding where my brother and sil both left just after lunch (missing the evening reception) because they said their dd's bedtime routine involved both of them. They were staying close by and plenty of people could have given lifts to the one who stayed. I was a bit hurt.

[Tvseemstobemyhobby]

To be honest I wouldn't wish my 17 month old on my worst enemy's wedding.

She is of course adorable but her daredevil never sit still character would have the wedding guests alternating between cooing at her, trying to prevent her shinning up some curtains and wanting to gag her to prevent her constant shouting of the same word again and again and again!

[Tvseemstobemyhobby]

I'm amazed that people are amazed that a child has not been left at 18 months. The inference that those of us who haven't done it are some weird crazy attachment parenting freaks makes me chortle lots and lots.

As mentioned in a pp we have a 17 month old, she's still breastfed and still wakes loads in the night. She is our second and I know from my PFB that she will eventually sleep through. Till this point I wouldn't give that stress to someone else.

I know people on here are saying "It's your choice not to leave DC" but just had to add my two penn'orth.

promptly returns to tie dying a sling Joke Joke

[saintlyjimjams]

Of course the groom is being unreasonable. He's invited friends from the opposite side of the country to a wedding but not their child. With or without their child it's up to them to decide whether they can go or not - & not for the groom to get huffy if they can't.

Last child free invitation we received, I went, dh stayed at home - but because it was Fri-Sunday we had to get MIL over (involves crossing a sea) to help out - as I said before family circumstances make our 3 a 2 person job. She was happy to visit, I was happy to go alone but had she not been able to help I probably wouldn't have been able to go - would have been pissed off if having politely declined the apology then wasn't accepted gracefully!

[Raxacoricofallapatorius]

I was similarly incensed when we were invited to a wedding and dd wasn't. Other children were invited, just not my precious offspring. Who happened to be the groom's niece. Yup. My BIL and SIL had their own children, their friends' DC and specifically excluded their niece.

Yanbu in the slightest to not want to leave a 1.5 yo. My ds at the same age would sweat, scream and vomit if he couldn't see me. When we went to a wedding in Ireland which was child free, the ILs came too and babysat.

[WhereTheWildlingsAre]

not for the groom to get huffy if they can't

There's a big difference between getting huffy and expressing disappointment. To be fair, we don't really know where on the spectrum the friend's response was unless op clarifies what happened.

[candycoatedwaterdrops]

I'm confused; have you both declined? I think your DH should go, it's his friend after all.