Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

It's a children at weddings AIBU...

253 replies

Thisisntmyrealnamexy · 23/07/2014 10:14

I did search threads before posting this, but there was nothing recent and nothing that matched my situation exactly. I know this is a recurring topic, so sorry. Blush

I'm getting married, still a while away, we haven't sent out invitations. But DP and I have both agreed that we don't want to have children at the ceremony. We're happy to have them at the reception.
I know that people will always take their child outside if they start crying/talking/generally making noise during the ceremony, but it isn't a risk either of us want to take, as once the ceremony has been interrupted, you can't really get that back. Especially if it's when you're saying your vows.

We plan to make this clear on invitations, and guests will be notified well in advance. I'm worried as a couple of guests have already expressed how much their children will enjoy the ceremony, and of course we're going to have to tell them, if they ask, that we're not inviting children.

I don't want to cause upset, but this is something DP and I have agreed on and won't be changing. So my question is, would this bother you? Would you challenge it? I'm wondering what to expect. Sorry for being vague as well (I post a lot - name-changed), but I don't want to out myself with specifics.

OP posts:
ChickenFajitaAndNachos · 23/07/2014 19:10

I thought it was only church weddings that are open to the public, not small private ceremonies.

VestaCurry · 23/07/2014 19:12

As others have said, telling guests they can't bring their children to one bit, but another bit is ok just doesn't work logistically for those guests. It would be a thoughtless move. Unless... you provide a crèche for younger children but then you can't stick 9 year olds in a crèche, in which case they would be at the ceremony but are unlikely to start screaming.

I do not take the view, 'it's my wedding, I'll do it my way'. If one chooses to have guests, then their needs are as important as yours. Put yourself in their shoes and imagine what the day will feel like for them. That is what good hosts do. I've been to many weddings now and it's plain as day who has properly taken their guests into account and who has not.

FatalCabbage · 23/07/2014 19:13

AS pp have pointed out, it's easier for parents to have a completely childfree wedding, or a completely child-invited wedding. Half and half causes logistical problems.

I enjoy weddings more without my DC, although when the youngest is under about a year or two that means I don't go at all. I had a childfree wedding myself. I would have been very upset if a child had made noise during the solemn parts of our ceremony.

I think it's better to say no children at all than only to part.

LittleBearPad · 23/07/2014 19:22

Have the wedding you want. There clearly aren't scads of children to consider and frankly a wedding is a heap more fun minus kids than with them waiting for squeaks during the ceremony and being ready to leg it at any moment.

And don't assume parents do take their children out. I was thumped with an order of service during the noisy 'sword' fight 4 and 5 year olds had behind me at one wedding. At another three siblings decided to roll up and down the aisle throughout. Suffice it to say the only child at my wedding was my 3 month old niece.

CrimeaRiver · 23/07/2014 19:37

In my opinion the problem arises when the B&G try to do what you are trying to do: keep everyone happy, try not to offend anyone, still have an enjoyable day yourselves.

The fact is, a wedding is an occasion where many different people, of many different ages, from many different places, with many different financial means, who don't know each other, converge. It's just asking for trouble!

There is no way you won't be able to offend somebody or other. Accept this and move on.

Personally, I think inviting children to the party but nothing else is sending out a clear message that you only want children around when it won't matter if they behave...like children. It's totally false and unrealistic, and does risk offending. Either have children at everything or nothing. Either you want them there or you don't. Parents understand these things, and will either make arrangements or won't. Don't take offence, and don't cause offence.

Doilooklikeatourist · 23/07/2014 20:13

It's your wedding , do as you please
We went to a child free wedding in East Anglai when we lived in the midlands .
We had a 4 year old and a cosleeping breastfeeding 2 year old

Had a wonderful time . DSIL baby sat for the weekend ,

Go for it , have a wonderful wedding

Picturesinthefirelight · 23/07/2014 20:15

Legally weddings can't be private. They have to be held in a publicly accessible place

(2)Without prejudice to the width of section 46A(2)(e) of this Act, the Secretary of State shall exercise his power to provide for the imposition of conditions as there mentioned so as to secure that members of the public are permitted to attend any marriage solemnized on approved premises in pursuance of section 26(1)(bb) of this Act.

Picturesinthefirelight · 23/07/2014 20:18

Or put in plain ish English on a council website

Marriages and civil partnership formations must be solemnised in premises with open doors, which the Registrar General interprets to mean that the public must have unfettered access to witness the proceedings and make objections prior to or during the ceremony.

rumbleinthrjungle · 23/07/2014 20:23

However in the context of the thread, surely anyone who brings their child to a child free wedding on the grounds that they have legal unfettered access ... isn't planning on their friendship or relationship with the B&G to survive the ceremony?

Picturesinthefirelight · 23/07/2014 20:24

My in laws thought nothing of it. It wouldn't have occurred to them that a child free wedding included the ceremony.

TheLovelyBoots · 23/07/2014 20:31

Hang on. So your in-laws were familiar with section 42A, so assumed that the invitation was wrong and took your niece anyway?

How strange.

Picturesinthefirelight · 23/07/2014 20:37

No, don't be daft. They are just from a time when it was common knowledge that weddings are open to the public & it was common for members of the community to turn up & watch xs daughter who used to live next door to y get married.

Picturesinthefirelight · 23/07/2014 20:38

I've always known that weddings have to be open to the public by law too.

Picturesinthefirelight · 23/07/2014 20:40

They declined the invitation to the reception as they couldn't leave dneice behind. (She's 12 so not a tiny baby)

TheLovelyBoots · 23/07/2014 20:51

Their legal rights to bring a child to the wedding are irrelevant. And, this law is archaic and unenforceable.

Herecomesthesciencebint · 23/07/2014 21:03

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Original poster
Thisisntmyrealnamexy · 23/07/2014 21:07

The people concerned won't find childcare an issue. The couples would both be able to attend, the only reason they wouldn't is if they were annoyed by the "no children" part and decided not to come, which would be their decision. I don't think that will happen, though.

I've come to accept that I'm going to be called 'precious' over this. But to the people who would silently seethe about their kids not being invited: why not mention it to the bride and/or groom? Honestly, I wouldn't change my mind (unless the baby was a newborn and couldn't be left with a childminder, of course), but I would rather they did so I could explain my reasoning, rather than them being offended behind my back, so to speak.

CrimeaRiver You've hit the nail on the head! We're making sure that everyone will have free transport there and back, accommodating to dietary needs (vegetarians, coeliacs, and so on), that wedding party are happy in their outfits, etc. I don't think we can do much more.

OP posts:
Original poster
Thisisntmyrealnamexy · 23/07/2014 21:10

Picturesinthefirelight I think the only members of the older generation there will be grandparents, and parents (but they're not what I'd call older - 40s/very early 50s).

Thanks for your opinions everyone, I've read them all and it's interesting to see what everyone thinks. :)

OP posts:
Mim78 · 23/07/2014 21:55

Not u to be child free if you want.

Just for info, apparently kids were making noise in ceremony part of my wedding and I heard nothing.

TheDayOfMyDoctor · 23/07/2014 22:08

If it was me, I wouldn't silently seethe over my DS not being invited - I'm always happy to go to a child free wedding (even when the last one was abroad). I would take issue with him being invited to a wedding but basically being told not to bring him to part of it because the bride and groom tell me they don't trust me to ensure he keeps quiet during the ceremony, when actually he's very well behaved. I wouldn't say anything to the bride and groom because ultimately it's up to them what they want to do.

bubalou · 23/07/2014 22:26

Sorry but haven't read all responses so sorry if this repeats.

I felt the same about getting married and although you say you know they would leave I was at a friends wedding 3 years ago and her sister in law let her baby SCREAM all the way through until the wedding planner asked her to step out.

I had a lot of family members who had small kids and so we made the decision to pay for a children's entertainer for during the ceremony. They were AMAZING - the kids all had a fab time and I had all the parents tell me how incredible it was.

I did make it clear that ALL the children had to go in it as I had one person telling me her 8 year old wouldn't go in. My reply is he fucking would (sounds harsh but said 8 year old is devil spawn) haha. He went in!

If the venue permits and you have it in your budget I can't recommend it enough. It made us happy, our family happy and the kids had a great time.

Good luck. Wink

allisgood1 · 23/07/2014 23:11

Just to add a light twist...

I allowed children at my wedding. None of our friends had kids yet so it was just one family who brought their 11 and 9 year old girls. The 11 year old was a child I worked with who has autism.

During the ceremony, at our vows, you could hear her start "biscuit...biscuit...biscuit". It then went quiet (her dad said to her "if you keep saying biscuit I'll take your toys away")....shortly after we heard "juice....juice....juice" quite loudly Smile It's most people's worst nightmare but it added something really lighthearted and special to our day....we still laugh about it 10 years later!!! Wink

erin99 · 23/07/2014 23:48

I wouldn't silently seethe, I'd just choose not to go, or not, depending on circs. Why on earth would I ask you to justify yourself? There is no need for you to do so.

Just please don't tell people it's for their own benefit so they can "really let their hair down". It's patronising. Guests are perfectly able to decline on their DC's behalf if they would really rather not bring them. It's not for their benefit, it's for you.

EATmum · 24/07/2014 00:15

We went to a dear friend's wedding a few years ago, where she didn't want children at the ceremony. They wanted to focus on the vows they were making without distraction.
So they found a couple of child carers who organised an Easter egg hunt for all the children in the grounds during the ceremony - taking newborns in prams through to much older children - and it went beautifully. The B&G had a child-free ceremony but a very family oriented day. So a lone voice here saying that the mix and match approach can work esp with the power of chocolate!

Suttonmum1 · 24/07/2014 00:18

Would just like to point out that if this ends up with just one 6 yo at the evening party then they are going to be seriously bored.

Swipe left for the next trending thread