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

BIL demanding I attend wedding without baby

325 replies

MadAngryGnome · 10/07/2015 13:02

So BIL is getting married soon and he and SIL-to-be (nice but bit of a bridezilla, very anxious about her big day) have just announced that they do not want any children at the wedding, babes in arms or not. Up until now, DH and I had been expecting we'd be bringing our DS, who is 9 weeks now but will be six months old at the wedding.

When BIL sat us down and said they didn't want DS there, we said fair enough, we totally understood them wanting an adults only wedding. However, we said this might mean I would only able to come along for the ceremony part as DS is BF and I wasn't sure if I'd feel comfortable leaving him for the whole day.

This has unleashed a bit of a torrent from BIL. He says it is obviously the most important day of their lives and it is very important to them both that I am there for the full day (don't know why, we're not especially close). He doesn't understand why I don't want to leave DS for ages having apparently already checked with FIL that breastfeeding mothers are technically able to leave their children. He's refusing to accept that I'm not up for coming for the whole thing and keeps saying that I'll change my mind nearer the time. I do totally get that some parents would be fine with leaving their 6mo for a day but I just don't think it'll work for us.

AIBU to think that they get to choose not to have children or babies at their wedding but then don't get to also make the choice that the mothers should be attending without their babies?

OP posts:
FraggleHair · 10/07/2015 14:02

No need to stress, just say 'I'm sure you understand where I'm coming from. I can't bring my baby to the wedding but it's very likely I'll be unable to actually leave her behind'.

Then smile sweetly and change the topic.

HeyDuggee · 10/07/2015 14:02

You need to explain to him that it is a wedding invitation, not a summons. You have given him your answer. He needs to respect it, even if he doesn't understand it, and drop it. He's getting insulting now and planning a wedding is absolutely no excuse for his behavior.

LibrariesGaveUsPower · 10/07/2015 14:02

Ha ha.

That is exactly what I was going to say.

Not my monkeys, not my circus is my new mantra.

diddl · 10/07/2015 14:02

"but i'd have been pretty pissed off if my brother's wife didn't come to my wedding, tbh."

But the nephew isn't invited.

Who do they think is going to look after him?

Bfeeding aside, not everyone has babysitters conveniently placed, even if they do want to use them.

Not only is the baby not invited, B&G are demanding that he is left with a babysitter!

Butteredparsnips · 10/07/2015 14:03

Looking forward to your update OP when this couple have their own Baybee.They don't seem to have realised that they need to consider their guests on THE MOST IMPORTANT DAY IN THEIR LIVES EVER

soapboxqueen · 10/07/2015 14:04

Honestly, I wouldn't be going. I don't agree with child free weddings, particularly for family, but each to their own. I've attended weddings where my children weren't invited and it was fine but they were older.

However, the attitude of your bil is choice. I'd tell him to fuck off and then fuck off some more.

saturnvista · 10/07/2015 14:05

I resent the idea that you are 'allowed' to refuse to leave your baby for a day if you are breastfeeding. If you don't consider it in your child's best interests to leave them, you don't have to. Simple as.

Original poster
MadAngryGnome · 10/07/2015 14:06

I like the monkeys and the circus one too.

Apparently MIL suggested to BIL that he was being a bit unreasonable and maybe my parents could hang around at the venue out of sight and I could nip out to them when DS needed a feed. BIL wasn't having any of that.

OP posts:
TeaPleaseBob · 10/07/2015 14:06

I'd just smile and nod then do whatever suits you. Don't get into an argument as its really not worth it ( easier to say than do I know) and nobody will feel better for it.
You're an adult and he can't demand anything of you. If you fancy time away from the little one then great, if not I think attending service is lovely idea as this is surely what the wedding is all about.
Personally I wouldn't have gone to full wedding and reception without lo at that age. I went to a wedding without lo when she was 10 months and to be honest found it stressful as did grandparents looking after an upset baby.

Lottapianos · 10/07/2015 14:08

Exactly diddl. I can totally understand why people don't want children of any age at their wedding. Not every parent is considerate enough to remove them if they start crying or running around.

And please, enough of the smug 'they'll look back and cringe at all this one day'. Not everyone goes on to have children, and entitlement and parenthood are not mutually exclusive!

Pootles2010 · 10/07/2015 14:08

Well sounds like they know that her parents can babysit? I just don't think it's that big a deal. I guess it depends on your personal circumstances, but I can't imagine many babies get to 6 months without ever being left with a babysitter.

Twistedheartache · 10/07/2015 14:08

I still feel guilty & embarrassed about putting a friend of mine in this exact position. I genuinely had no ideaat the time having had no contact with babies ever & am eternally grateful that she went out of her way to bring her parents half way across the country.
They will realise the error of their way I'm sure in the future but for now do whatever suits your baby. If it's feasible to make the ceremony great (if it's in a church take baby anyway - public place) & if not c'est la view. If they keep on about it don't go at all!

SunnyBaudelaire · 10/07/2015 14:08

Just don't go, why should you leave your baby on demand?
'A wedding not a summons' as heyduggee said.

FraggleHair · 10/07/2015 14:09

maybe my parents could hang around at the venue out of sight and I could nip out to them when DS needed a feed. BIL wasn't having any of that.

Christ almighty, who exactly IS BIL? Kim Jong-un?

SunnyBaudelaire · 10/07/2015 14:10

lol yes why should your parents be 'out of sight'?
Are they not invited?

leedy · 10/07/2015 14:10

I'm not seeing what's so PFB about not wanting to leave a six month old all day at great inconvenience to several people (OP, her parents, possibly the baby) so as not to spoil Groomzilla's SPESHULEST DAY.

I too am amazed that the BIL seems to have coopted the OP's parents in all this.

ThumbWitchesAbroad · 10/07/2015 14:11

Cakelady - in my case, babes in arms weren't classified as bums on seats, or if they were, no one said anything. The room was at capacity plus 2 babes in arms, but all was fine.

Pootles2010 · 10/07/2015 14:12

Its not a 'great inconvenience' to spend the day away from your baby.

SunnyBaudelaire · 10/07/2015 14:13

well it is if you have to find and pay for a babysitter and then get back to a pissed off baby.....
all weddings are 'babes in arms' wtf is wrong with your BIL?

ThumbWitchesAbroad · 10/07/2015 14:13

It might not be for you, Pootles, but it clearly is for many others. Hmm

Original poster
MadAngryGnome · 10/07/2015 14:14

I don't think it has to do with capacity, more that SIL doesn't want a baby crying on her big day. BIL said that we should understand that, as he'd been out with us when DS had cried in a coffee shop recently.

And no, my parents aren't invited.

OP posts:
Gemauve · 10/07/2015 14:14

BIL wasn't having any of that.

So he can fuck off, then. And that's how I'd present it over dinner on Sunday: they raise it, you give a reasoned response and say you don't intend to spend more time discussing it, they raise it again, you tell them to fuck off and neither of you goes. You're spared a few hundred quid in costs, you're spared a day in the company of people who are unhinged and, if you're lucky, you get enough of a family rift to mean you don't need to talk to them for a while until the next time they fancy the drama.

Mintyy · 10/07/2015 14:14

Well it clearly IS for some people Pootles. So that's that then.

FraggleHair · 10/07/2015 14:14
Hmm

But it may well be an inconvenience for the OP so therefore the BIL should accept that (like any normal person) and say 'yes of course that's fine'!

leedy · 10/07/2015 14:15

"Christ almighty, who exactly IS BIL? Kim Jong-un?"

Tea has now come out of my nose. Now envisaging the OP's parents as sort of Shakespearian rude mechanicals, skulking around the hotel in their lowly garments, periodically darting behind a bush/into a bin in case they pollute the eyeline of his lordship...

"Well sounds like they know that her parents can babysit? I just don't think it's that big a deal. I guess it depends on your personal circumstances, but I can't imagine many babies get to 6 months without ever being left with a babysitter."

There's a difference between leaving a small baby for a couple of hours and leaving them all day, though - I know neither of mine spent all day away from me until they were a good bit older, and I don't think I'm particular unusual. Also, as mentioned above, if the OP is still breastfeeding a full day away would involve a lot of pumping, etc., it's pretty inconvenient.

Swipe left for the next trending thread