Awkward wedding family situation

[Pepper12]

Hello all sorry this may be long!
Backstory I have 2 brothers. Brother 1 is getting married in March. Been together a few years no dcs. Brother 2 married for years has 4 kids from 7 to 2 months.

Brother 1 has asked brother 2 eldest child to be flower girl as she was so excited about wedding. All fine and dandy-dress shoes etc bought last week. Invitations have now arrived and wording as follows ' we respectfully inform that with the exception niece and fiances niece no children will be permitted at the wedding'. Brother 2 wife has gone mad how dare her 3 other kids (who to be fair are 3,2 and a baby) be excluded hence the eldest is now banned from being flower girl. Brother 1 and fiancée have stood firm and explained that niece is old enough and others are too young. Fiancées niece being flower girl is an only child. Cue me getting phone calls from sil and two brothers all wanting an opinion ! Is it awful that I think your circus your monkeys? Grrrrr

Honestly wondering why weddings have become so pretentious! And I've worked in the industry!!

Personally I think people that want child free weddings are up their arse! Weddings are about union of families as much as the couples. I've turned down 2 invitations to them. Before I was a mum too! Both were bride/groomzilla nightmares getting married.

My wedding if I could have had children ONLY I would have. We certainly had a fair number there. They were all miles more fun and better behaved than most of the adults!

Having been in a similar situation to 'brother 2's wife' lately, I'd say that saying 'this is bonkers' to both parties will make the left out kids feel better, the brother 2's wife feel supported, and not risk condoning the bride's decision by saying nothing.

You don't really need to say anything more than that though.

God, I hate all these rules and regulations at weddings.

People are determined to suck the joy out of the day, just because "it's our day and it's what we want". Well fuck off with that if it means you make your guests day a misery.

My hairdresser was telling me her sister is getting married. She's having two hendos. One a spa weekend and another a city break and will cost over 600 pounds. The bridesmaids also have to pay for half of the cost of their dress and shoes and their accommodation cost for the wedding hotel which is in the middle of nowhere. All in all she'll spend nearly £1000 for her sisiter's wedding day.

Guests need to start saying "No, that isn't acceptable, I won't be coming"

I went to a wedding when I was 3, 30+ years later I remember bits of it, and also other events like a ruby wedding anniversary do. It's unfair to say 3 year olds won't care or remember and I've just had this argument with a relative who won't watch what they say in front of my 3yo and basically has left her in tears because she's not invited to something.

It's cruel, probably akin to playground bullies who do this sort of shit to exclude a child from a birthday party or something. I would be livid as hell and no, if I had a 7yo as well No way would they still be going. It's so unfair and sets up sibling jealously/rivalry for the future.

Also, if the bride is phoning you wanting your opinion, you could say something like:

'Of course you have the final decision on what happens at your wedding day, but it might be worth bearing in mind whether this issue is worth a big family fall out in the lead up to the wedding. The last thing you need is extra stress... yada yada yada'

Fairly neutral (if you want to go down the Switzerland route) but also useful advice.

Like I said, we've had a pretty big family fall out over a similar issue recently and it's been stressful and horrible for everyone involved.

Personally I have no time for people who put their big day being 'perfect' over having people who matter to them being there. Arrogant and doesn't foster good family relationships. Rant rant rant!

Child free weddings are fine, as long as people realise that some folks don't have babysitters on tap. I think it's the same as Friday/Monday weddings, do it if you want, but don't get uppity if some people can't make it.

I think talking about a wedding, including someone's child, your brother's child, and then not mentioning until the invitations go out that other children aren't invited is just rude. It smacks of wanting to get the flowergirl for the photos all sorted so that the parents feel obliged to let her be a part of it no matter how annoyed or inconvenienced they are because of the money already spent.

I wouldn't want one of my kids invited and the others not. Also if DH's sibling didn't invite children to their do I'd be unable to go as I don't have non-family members who can babysit. I'd also be livid that they'd not mentioned it before the decision about the flowergirl was made, it's so sneaky.

Aargh, have tried to post this three times, so sorry for abridged version.

Yes db2 was unreasonable not to mention this sooner (very unreasonable).

However db1 and his wife are being v unreasonable now not to think of their DD first. She will be all excited at being a flower girl. She will feel so special and remember it for ever and be so disappointed not to have this opportunity. The little ones will know nothing about it either way.

If they can't get childcare, db should take her on his own. A pain for sil but that's just life. I suspect this is the reason for the toys been thrown out by sil, tbh, that she doesn't want to be left with little ones. Yes, it's a bit annoying but it will mean so much to DD 7.

Fair treatment of kids is not treating them the same especially where there is a gap in age. The older one/ones need to feel that they are treated differently, not coming as a "batch" or "job lot" with little siblings. It's not fair on her otherwise.

I would actually intervene and say this to your brother in your shoes. I couldn't bear the thought of the little girl being so disappointed so her parents can make a (misguided) point.

This is not tonsay what db2 did was OK by any means, but that db1 and sil now need to put their DD first. They can make their displeasure known to db2 in some other way.

Pps i invited all children of invitees to my wedding and was glad I did.

It's not up your own arse to want a child free wedding Not everyone has or wants kids, their presence doesn't define family.

Not everyone has or wants kids, their presence doesn't define family. Fair enough, but the kids in question here are family, and close family at that, and it's reasonable to expect that their existence will at least be considered when planning the wedding. You can't pick and choose who is a member of your family when it suits you.

It's not like it's the kids of some old school friends that they've never met, this is the children's uncle!

I would be gutted if I felt my brother cared so little about his nephews and nieces that he wouldn't want them to be at his wedding, and would decide not to even bother telling me to my face, but to just exclude them on the invitation.

I don't see the problem here, apart from the obviously poor communication.

The 7 year old is a flower girl and crucially, not a toddler. Not everyone loves having kids around at a wedding reception.

"However db1 and his wife are being v unreasonable now not to think of their DD first."

That's what the other brother is relying on though, isn't it?

Guilting them into getting their own way.

How, with any shred of decency would ask a child to be flower girl, let the dress be bought & then lat it be known that the siblings weren't invited?

So if the eldest is now not to be a flower girl presumably she is also no longer invited?

So who if anyone will be going?

Just the brother?

If bride and groom are worried about appearances they should realise they will not look good in this situation

Your extended family will ask where the kids/sil are and when they get the answer 'they weren't invited' it will make the groom look a nob. Especially if the seven year old is there to perform flower girl duties with her dad.

I think this is incredibly mean.

It's not up your own arse to want a child free wedding

It is, actually, if many of the people you love and care about have children.

I don't adore all of the children of my friends and close relatives, but if I like them enough to want them at my wedding, I wouldn't exclude their children. And if I did, I wouldn't get arsey about it if they decided they wouldn't want to come.

My mum is/was a single mother. If we'd not been allowed to go to weddings with her she'd never have gone to any.

diddl you are undoubtedly right that they are relying on this and I did think that while posting.

But I think they should make their displeasure known in a different way after the wedding. Probably by not seeing much of them.

Ha Ha - me the fiance! (Bunbaker) - I am practically pensionable age!

Realise I am in the minority but I think it is important that kids do different things. I went abroad with my dad when I was very small. Neither of my siblings did. I was old enough - they weren't. Years later my younger brother went on a school trip that we couldn't afford when it was my chance to go. Five or six years on and my dad was earning a lot more. Would parents have said NO to him because they said NO to me??

My middle sibling was friends at school with a very rich boy who invited him to go to the USA with them - something we could never have afforded for ourselves. He went. We didn't. That's life.

However most people seem to think that the wedding couple were BU.

I can understand why people say no children at weddings, even if it's purely from a space and numbers POV (which was the reason we asked everyone not to bring kids, they would have taken up a quarter of our possible numbers!). But I had no nieces/nephews and would have made an exception for them only, as my sister did at her wedding a few years later with our DD.

DB1 and fiancee ANBU to have a child free wedding if they wish, but to invite a couple of children and not their brothers and sisters is a bit bonkers. Particularly as they're close family members. Don't really blame your DB2 and SIL for being pissed off, but I think you should just remain neutral for your own sake/sanity!

I know too many people whose families have never been the same because of weddings, in most case it has not been about decisions but about communications. A man I use to work with lost all contact with his family over a wedding that only lasted six months, luckily his family got in touch as soon as they heard about the split.

to say "no children but may I borrow one of yours for ornamental purposes while the others can't attend" is just so not classy.

This. Although I would say it is twatty, no simply "not classy"

I think wedding couple should have told family of the arrangement in advance. That way they could make an informed decision whether to let eldest be flower girl.
But I completely sympathise with wedding couple not wanting 3 very young children at their wedding. Couldn't the kids other GPs babysit?

Bit of a mess but I agree, unless you also have children who are banned from the wedding and are upset about it, step back and let them fight about it. You can't win, it's not your fight even, and you'll be seen to be taking sides (usually the wrong one!) so hold your hands up and say "not my issue".

I have a friend who did pretty much this - the only mobile child allowed at her wedding was her own goddaughter, as flower girl. The child's siblings weren't invited. Another friend was grudgingly allowed to bring her breastfed baby, but that was it (we had to keep him entertained to stop him squawking in the ceremony!) I don't know how the child's parents felt about it, nor the child's siblings.

We had a child-free wedding except for babes in arms, and my nieces came to the evening bit (they were all under 4 at the time) - I was extremely limited for space at the registry office and wasn't going to exclude friends I wanted there for small children I barely knew. I know this isn't a popular view on MN but it was how we wanted it. In the case of the babes in arms, one of them had older siblings who spent the day with their grandparents instead - they were fine about it, but I can see it would be problematic the other way around - the oldest one going on a jolly and the little ones being left out.

It's still a bit strange, I think, when people say "no children apart from our nieces/nephews". I always read it as "we care about our family's children but we don't care about yours". Ironically both my friends that had that at their weddings have turned into very fussy mothers, who would go crazy if someone excluded their little darling nowadays.

It is odd to differentiate, isn't it?

As a PP puts, bad enough to choose between rellies kids & friends kids.

But to choose between part of a family!

I mean brother & SIL might have decided to leave the younger ones given the choice, or they might have thought of it as a chance for rellies they don't see very often to be able to meet/spend time with the kids.