I can't take my baby to a wedding but someone else can...

[Writerwannabe83]

One of my DH's good friends is getting married in 2 months time. When they handed out their invites they said children are welcome to be at the church ceremony but are unable to attend the meal and the evening reception.

That's fine, I have absolutely no problem with child-free weddings.

I have a baby that I EBF so I text the bride and declined the invite and said it because I couldn't leave DS. DS will have just turned 5 months at the time of the wedding. I didn't get a reply from her.

My DH is felt quite aggrieved as he wasn't comfortable with the fact that me and DS couldn't go seeing as DS will not need a seat or food so won't be affecting their guest numbers or cost. But anyway, like I said, I have no problem if the B&G choose child free weddings.

However, it has now transpired another couple who have a baby are being allowed to take theirs because "he will only be 3 months old".

Since learning this my DH has spoken to the Groom who has said he will speak to the bride. The Groom said of course he wanted me to be at the wedding but apparently the bride had said she didn't want babies/children present as she didn't want food being thrown around the room?!

Do 5 month old babies do that?
(DS is my first so I have no experience of a baby's fine dining etiquette).

He also said she probably wasn't aware I'd still be BF.

It's been five days now since my DH spoke to his friend and we still haven't heard anything back do I'm guessing the bride said no and we are still not welcome.

I don't know how I feel about it all now - surely if she is banning babies it should apply to all babies? I think it's a bit unfair that I'm being turned away but another mother and her baby aren't.

(Incidentally the other baby is being formula fed so can technically be away from her parents.)

I'm happy to be told I'm BU - I just think it's a bit harsh that my baby isn't welcome but someone else's is....

To all those going on about The rights of the bride to a child free wedding, yes okay fair point her wedding her choice, but this isn't a child free wedding another child Iw allowed to go. That's why o.p is understandably peeved.It,s her baby. F.G.S. x

I was at a wedding last year where there were lots of very young children and babies.

Ceremony and speeches were drowned out by crying and shouting. Some of the parents were clearly quite frazzled trying to keep the children entertained whilst also enjoying adult time- couples snapping at eachother etc.

For all those talking about selfish B&G, remember all the money they have spent trying to make the day enjoyable for their guests. If you don't like their offer, don't go.

I'm not quite in the pod. I had a technically child-free wedding but it was restricted to mobile children - babes in arms were welcome, and there were 3 of them. I had a strict person limit of 50 at the registry office, and they didn't count babies but did count mobile children - it was hard enough paring down the list as it was, without including the children! There would have been around 20 of them if they'd all come - too many other friends and family would not have been able to come if they had. I have no regrets about it.

Cheers littlepea - I shall definitely take a look. I've been worried that he was ill so it will be good to read something that says otherwise

Ooh accidently posted twice. X

Writer anytime. It's a good book. I had similar concerns when she was about your DS age. What I didn't realise was that babies have mental development leaps as well as physical development leaps. When one of these mental development leaps happens they can become cranky (teir little verion of stresssed out), sleepy, extra hungry etc. you can also get an IPhone/IPad app which shows highlights but the book is definetly better and much more informed.

Ooh accidently posted twice. X

Haven't RTFT, but why are they getting married in church (so, I assume, a Christian ceremony of whatever denomination? Unless church is deconsecrated?) and banning children? Does their celebrant know this?

I simply do not get 'child-free weddings'. They bamboozle me.

Children aren't banned from the ceremony.

I think they only reason they are tolerating children at the Ceremony is because they know they can't ban them. I'm pretty sure they would if they could

I don't know if I could still say, "Tough, baby can't come" to a mother over the phone.

That's because it sounds like a really shitty thing to say to a friend.

I couldn't say it either, but then I'd actually want to see my friend's baby so I don't know why I'd tell her to leave it at home in the first place :)

writer so why get married in church if they are so anti children? Civil ceremony, surely.
Your wedding, your choice, of course, but the opening words of the ceremony are (IIRC) 'marriage was ordained for the procreation of children'. I understood this to be one of the central tenets of a Christian marriage? No? Have a civil marriage if you aren't planning to have kids. No bother at all. Otherwise it rather makes a mockery of doing it in church.

And I'm not even hugely religious, I just think respect for religious faiths and beliefs is pretty much central to being a decent person. Since there's a viable alternative, why be so disrespectful is it because the church is pretty? when you don't need to be?

She comes from a strong Catholic background so wanted the appropriate ceremony.

But not the appropriate actual beliefs that go with it!
Hum ho, nowt so odd as folk.

I find it a bit odd that you have posted on this thread that you don't understand the faff of expressing, sterilising etc when only last week you posted this:

Add message | Report | Message poster Writerwannabe83 Wed 11-Jun-14 20:47:43
boudica - my hand held pump was about £15 and is brilliant I average about an ounce a minute. I also can't believe the cost of some of the electric ones though I can totally understand why long- term expressers invest in them.

As someone else posted up thread, your life does seem to be one long drama, but do try to remember what 'facts' you post on each thread!

You are right - some people's life are real drama's brought on by themselves!

My SIL is exactly like this, droans on and on about this sort of thing (she doesn't work but that is another issue!)

I express for 10 minutes every now and then and stick it in the freezer. That isn't a faff.

Frequent expressing and having to introduce bottles and all the sterilising that goes with it, is a faff.

I stand by what I said.

Well I say I express every now and then but I actually only have 17oz in my freezer - that's all I've bothered to do in the 12 weeks since he was born.

Why are you sticking it in the freezer if you aren't going to use it? Surely just pour it away if you are only pumping to relieve full breasts?

Thefairy

you need to use that milk if you're going to use it. Breastmilk changes over time to suit a growing baby.. milk for a newborn wouldn't really do it for say a 3/4 months old say.

I keep it in the freezer for such emergencies where there is no option but to give it, like if I was admitted to hospital or something.

I doubt very much that 17oz would go far though

That's a very good pint gamer - I genuinely hadn't even thought about that! I think I first expressed when he was about 10 days old and last did it about a month ago. I suppose I may as well throw it away then

TheFairy
17oz would buy you a fair few hours tbh OP.

I wonder if the wedding has been mentioned tonight by your Dh friend....