Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Wedding and childcare

150 replies

Freeble · 13/08/2015 23:28

Sorry I want to put this as objectively as I can as can't see wood for the trees and need impartial honestly.

Couple have been invited to wedding of old mutual friend. One of the couple has been asked to have a part in the ceremony which will involve them being present on the stage of the ceremony for about 2 hours. Its a child friendly / alternative event and it has been made clear by those marrying that should this person need to hold their baby while up there it is not a problem.

The other member of the couple (who are not getting married!) has suggested the person does not take on this honoured role as they will be unable to help with their other child, who is 6, and will not be able to do very much with the baby as probably won't be able to hold them up there for the whole thing. The other member of this couple is upset that the person taking on this role, which of course is an honour, has not thought to refuse on these grounds.

Views appreciated!

OP posts:
Original poster
Freeble · 14/08/2015 01:23

Scallops that sounds like the kind of conversation I expect to have, go about my life as though I'm going to have a conversation just like that but I end up totally flummoxed and confused as to why it didn't go like thatConfused

OP posts:
Original poster
Freeble · 14/08/2015 01:24

Anyway phone needs to go off now! Night!

OP posts:
whois · 14/08/2015 08:10

Non-stage person is being mean spirited.

But 2h on stage? Fuck me no one wants to sit thru 2h of shit wedding and associated stage events. Ugh ugh ugh.

whois · 14/08/2015 08:13

Although as the non-stage person I'd probably my take the kids outside for a good run around at some point during the 2h mission.

Seriously, I can't think nice thoughts towards anyone who can't cope with their own NT children (which they chose to have!) on their own. It's pathetic and lame.

zazzie · 14/08/2015 08:28

I would let stage person go to the wedding by themselves. My child is not NT though and we frequently don't both go to weddings.

StillStayingClassySanDiego · 14/08/2015 08:43

It's early, I've read through God thread and I still have no fucking idea what is going on with this wedding.

Stage
Non stage
2 hours
Wandering off

Confused.

I need coffee.

StillStayingClassySanDiego · 14/08/2015 08:44

*the

ShowMeTheWonder · 14/08/2015 08:58

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Osmiornica · 14/08/2015 09:12

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

rookiemere · 14/08/2015 09:13

Sorry but I've got sidelined at the 2 hr service bit.

Honestly it sounds ridiculously self involved to have a service that long, no matter how woosy or alternative it might be. Half an hour tops is the usual and it's that for a reason. Reception is the place for long winded twaddle as you can get a drink there or escape to the loos.

Generally I'd always be of the opinion that partners should suck it up for special occasions. But 2 hrs - if I wanted to see a circus I'd have bought a ticket. If I was the non involved partner I might be looking for ways to escape the prolonged hell.

zazzie · 14/08/2015 09:18

I think with some children it is very difficult (to the point of not going in ds's case) but that is different from not wanting to because it will be slightly hard work.

SolidGoldBrass · 14/08/2015 09:24

For all the OP's fudging, I am pretty sure that it's the man who's the non-stage partner, and what has happened is what commonly happens in a supposedly equal relationship when the woman is doing something that takes her focus away from the man and in fact puts her needs first. He can't cope with the idea of her being temporarily more important than him in public so he's got a cob on and is going to be as difficult as possible.

BTW I am getting the impression that the wedding event is not 2 hours of sitting watching but more like a mini-festival with various things to do, and the 'stage' role is something like lighting or sound or greeting every guest, so not as boring as it might have sounded.

chairmeoh · 14/08/2015 09:31

Objectively, non stage person equally 'star'.... Has had big roles at other weddings and so on.

Are the stage/non stage couple Kate and Wills (and the kids)? He often has starring roles at weddings and Mabe the 'stage' and '2hour' elements point towards a fancy-pants royal wedding overseas or something?

If it is Kate and Wills then yes, he should suck it up. Or pass the children to their Nanny.

spanieleyes · 14/08/2015 09:31

I once went to a lovely Indian wedding where the bride and groom were on a stage for a good couple of hours, with various comings and goings in the meantime! The congregation however had a blast, chatting and meeting up with others in the hall, there were children running around everywhere-including on the stage-and it was all very jolly and relaxed. Every now and again something important obviously happened on the stage as everyone went quiet for a few minutes ( couldn't understand a word myself but it looked good!) and then everyone carried on as before, we even went off to get some food for a while and they were still on the stage when we got back!! Childcare was a breeze, loads of older children happy to entertain little ones, various motherly types clucking over babies, children being passed around the hall from one row to the next! 2 Hours flew past!!

Hellionandfriends · 14/08/2015 09:32

If the stage person usually pulls their weight childcare wise, I can't see the problem with non stage person looking after the children for two hours.

Is it that non stage person usually isn't responsible for the kids and worries about coping? If that's the case, they had better learn fast!

Writerwannabe83 · 14/08/2015 09:38

I keep seeing comments about how the poor off stage parent shouldn't have to cope with the 6 year old and the baby for two while hours.

Really???

What do they think single parents do??

I know it may be a bit difficult if the baby gets restless or the 6 year old gets bored but the OP has already said that people can wander off if desired so I'm sure the children could be entertained in some way or another.

It's for two hours! Not all day! Is it really beyond the realms of reality
for a parent to look after their own children for two hours?

If I had been asked to play a part in my friend's wedding and my DH told me I wasn't allowed to because he couldn't cope with the children for two hours I would be furious!!!

BikeRunSki · 14/08/2015 09:47

Stage person does it and other parent stats at home if they are not man enough to look after a 6 year old and a baby for 2 hours.

And for goodness sake, what on earth takes 2 hours? I like a quick registary office in and out; did us well enough. Smile

MammaTJ · 14/08/2015 10:12

I think any parent who cannot or is not willing to cope with two DC on their own in whatever circumstance has not business having two DC!

Suck it up, buttercup! (To the non stage person)

I have two youngish DC, am not three days post surgery and DP is at work. Ok, not a baby or toddler but even so.....

I did take them to a wedding when DS was a baby and DD was a toddler and DP had a role to fulfill. I let him get on with it!

Minicaters · 14/08/2015 10:18

Not necessarily easy or fun for the off stage parent but not something I'd expect my partner turn down on that basis.

I hope PPs are right and it's a indian wedding as described. Keeping a 6 year old and baby silent for 2 hours would be impossible, but presumably the event only calls for realistic levels of quietness.

C'mon Freeble, we've done our bit. Who are you in this?

Uptoyounow · 14/08/2015 10:28

"Well non stage person has suggested not attending with 6 yo and stage person doing it alone with baby"

How will non stage person possibly cope with the six year old if alone at home with them without partner who they need to help them out?

Original poster
Freeble · 14/08/2015 10:33

Really appreciating all views Flowers

Giving me valueable perspective, thank you

OP posts:
MorrisZapp · 14/08/2015 10:38

Let me get this straight. Your husband doesn't want to spend two hours looking after a six year old, at an informal event with a bar, other children and lots to do?

Is he the shittest parent on earth?

CrystalCove · 14/08/2015 10:38

It's really sad if a parent can't face looking after their own 2 children alone, it really is regardless of gender.

Original poster
Freeble · 14/08/2015 10:51

I think a key piece of info I mentioned up thread is that non stage person believes that should they be asked to do similar, that stage parent would initially agree but then create a fuss about it. Stage parent has mentioned a number of examples when they don't think that occurred, but rather child care was carried out with no fuss.
Apologies for the continued use of third person and not saying who I am in the couple but it's helping me to be able to accept the differing views put forwardFlowers

OP posts:
bigbumtheory · 14/08/2015 10:58

Unless the child has sn or behaviour problems which means that both parents are needed for them to help the child then Non stage person is being precious.

Would they normal expect stage person to be doing more of the looking after at weddings? Is stage person the default in these situations so non stage gets to kick back?

Which one are you op? Or just bystander?

I think he or she is being petty about this which is why they are now saying about not going as an option. Id leave both kids with them and go alone if that was me as stage person.