Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 3 4

Original poster

Or is DP? (Wedding related, sorry!)

100 replies

HoneyBadgers · 04/07/2016 20:25

Both DP and I have fairly large families, with quite a lot of young children. Because of this, we decided that other than immediate family, no children were invited to the wedding. So far this has been fine and people have understood, but we've now disagreed on this issue.

I have a friend, who I've known for about five years and we're close. She's expecting a little one about a month before the wedding. She plans to exclusively breast feed, and has said she's happy to take the baby to her room to calm if they get upset during the day. I don't think this is a problem, and think allowing an exclusively breastfeeding newborn is very different to allowing children to the wedding.

DP thinks it means we can't say no if other friends offer to bring their children (all 2+). Mumsnet jury, please tell me who's in the wrong here!

OP posts:

SamWheat · 05/07/2016 17:09

I'm not looking for an argument, I'm just putting my opinion across, and it's rather presumptious to say that "it's everybody but you that thinks that way."
Maybe on this thread, but in RL others will have the same viewpoint.
They won't all think the same way as you.
Fair enough if the invites are drawn up by the bride and groom and they don't mind children there, that's up to them.
I find it seriously rude though when people decide the rules don't apply to them though and want to make exceptions for their child/baby.
Which is basically what you're saying. "It's different for little babies, so I should be allowed."
No, not if they're not invited, they're not! If they are, then all is good. If they're not, you suck it up.

pearlylum · 05/07/2016 17:29

OP you have an absolute right to ban children from your wedding.
But expect some people to refuse to come and think badly of you because of it.

SamWheat · 05/07/2016 17:49

But expect some people to refuse to come and think badly of you because of it.

See, I just don't get this at all! WHY think badly of the OP for it?! It would be her choice!! I just don't get the mindset of people who would actually think badly of someone else just because they aren't getting their own way.
You either get babysitters and go, or you don't go at all!
I say this as a parent too, and have equally enjoyed attending both child friendly weddings and adult only ones.
At the child free ones, I see it as an opportunity to have some me time.
At the child friendly ones, they're great family occasions and enjoyed as well.
I certainly wouldn't think badly of the OP for saying no kids, as I appreciate the whole world doesn't revolve around me!

pearlylum · 05/07/2016 17:55

But a diva bride is not attractive, despite the bling.

I hate the "her day, her way" attitude.
A couple surely want people to come and share their special day, making them feel comfortable and welcome is at least as important as a bridezilla stamping her foot and putting her needs above everyone else's.

lisaboo83 · 05/07/2016 18:09

We had a child free wedding but had one friend who brought her 8 week old baby as she was breastfeeding and he was too young to leave. I just asked her to take him out of the ceremony/speeches if he cried but actually he was no bother and just slept all day really.
I think someone else has already made the point that a newborn doesn't take up a seat and doesn't need a meal whereas an older child would.
I dont personally think that it opens up any flood gates for more of your friends expecting to be allowed to bring their children - they will understand the difference.
We didn't have anyone who had a problem with it (and we had lots of friends there who have children and had left them at home).

UptownFunk00 · 05/07/2016 18:17

YANBU - babies under a year but especially under 6 months shouldn't be separated from parents (well asked to, obviously fine if parents want to).

Jojofjo44 · 05/07/2016 20:23

I think that babies under 6 months are the exception to the rule. I would also say that I would politely request that if the infant was upset/grizzly/crying etc that one of the parents take them to a different room /outside whilst the ceremony is on.

36mum · 05/07/2016 20:32

Does Dp not entirely agree with the no child rule? Does he feel strongly about this?

Personally I wouldn't put a newborn in the same class as a child, their needs and behaviour are so far apart. I doubt your friend will feel like staying the whole day and it will be such an effort for her to come, I'd be flattered she is willing to put herself through the trauma.

Either way I wish you a lovely day

NeverNic · 05/07/2016 20:44

We put due to numbers blah, blah unfortunately we are only able to have immediate family's children and newborns. (Which we basically meant up to 1yr). We did have one last minute child addition who was 2. The couple lived 2 hrs from us, and 3/4hrs from relatives in the opposite direction. They happily found a friend to have her, only 2 days before called us, asking if it was possible to bring her as the friend's children had chicken pox. No one was put out that she came. In fact only one person was upset about the no children, so was a no show on the day. Funnily enough we don't speak that much these days.

AgentPineapple · 06/07/2016 13:13

I'm sure if you explain to your DH that no one considers a NB as a child in the same sense as a toddler etc I don't think any of your other friends or family would see it the same way either. 4 weeks (if she goes on time) is very soon for a baby to be away from his/her mum

altiara · 06/07/2016 13:39

But it's not a child free wedding if family children are there!
I did exactly the same- all children from family were invited (on the invitation), friends children not invited due to numbers. Except for a 4 week old newborn who did not take up a seat and slept through the whole thing.
If anyone wants to complain, pretend they are a member of the other side of the family

mrsseed · 06/07/2016 14:04

I had child free except for a 3 month old who belonged to my chief and only bridesmaid and a 6 month old. Coincidentally they turned up in matching outfits (mums know each other except through me!) They looked really cute and I gave no memory of them crying etc.

backinthebox · 06/07/2016 18:15

Not everyone follows the 'newborns excepted' at child-free wedding rule.

DH and I were invited to a child-free wedding when DS was 6 weeks old. We'd have been happy to leave our older DC with a babysitter but not a newborn baby. We were told there were no exceptions - the bride told me to get a babysitter! DH (my hero) said that if I couldn't be there because I was breastfeeding a baby every 2-3 hrs then he didn't want to go without me. Bride and groom muttered about it being no bother getting a babysitter for other friends who had kids. Clearly they thought we were being unreasonable.

OP, it is up to you whether you have kids at your wedding or not. But you can tell your DP that any friend who has a newborn who is breastfeeding will be basically excluded if their baby is excluded too, and years later people will still be saying 'I can't believe they wouldn't let XYZ have their newborn there!' I know I still can't think about DH's friends without thinking 'ah yes, they were there ones with the wedding I couldn't go to...'

Craigie · 06/07/2016 18:52

I hate wedding where kids are banned. Might as well be at a conference.

WeeM · 06/07/2016 19:21

Babies (especially that young) are def different as they don't cost a seat and you can't expect a new mum to come without a baby so young. I don't think any other guests would think badly of you for letting a newborn come. I was invited to a wedding of a good friend when my lo was 13 weeks and lo wasn't on the invite. I was a wee bit disappointed but I didn't think badly of my friend and I did enjoy my day/night out! The expressing in the ladies toilet was an experience however!

MalcolmTuckersEyebrows · 06/07/2016 19:24

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

CasanovaFrankenstein · 06/07/2016 19:44

I think most people would understand a tiny baby is different to a child. Yes I know someone has said a baby is a child, that is a technicality really though!

I hope it all goes well and admire your friend for even considering attending with such a little one!

Lovingit81 · 06/07/2016 19:48

Babies shouldn't be separated from their parents/guardians at that tender age. This is why child free weddings never work. There will ineveitably be someone there who has gone to a lot of trouble to get child care and then your friend turns up with her baby. It rubs people up the wrong way. I've seen it happen so many times.

Writerwannabe83 · 06/07/2016 20:57

A very good friend of my DH's got married a few years ago, it was child free and our baby was EBF.

My DH spoke to his friend as obviously I wouldn't be able to come unless the baby would come too and his friend completely understood and said it was no problem. Unfortunately though his fiancé was not in agreement and said I could not bring my baby.

I obviously couldn't go to their wedding and DH chose not to go either.

My DH's friendship with the groom has never been the same and neither the bride or the groom look me in the eye anymore if we are ever together in a social circle.

It was all very awkward.

I am biased but I do think that babies should not be included in the "no children rule" especially breast fed ones!

pearlylum · 06/07/2016 21:18

Craigie I completely agree.

Grapejuiceforgrownups · 06/07/2016 21:53

Absolutely she should be allowed to bring her newborn. I wasn't precious at all in the early days but DD was 11 weeks before we left her with a babysitter (my mum for 2 hours while we were in a restaurant 5 mins away). Regardless of BF or FF there's no way I would leave my 4 week old to go to a wedding no matter how close the friend.

Postchildrenpregranny · 06/07/2016 23:01

I attended weddings when each of my DC s was 6 weeks old and ,as it happens ,exclusively bf.It would never have occured to me to check if the baby was invited (but I don't think people had child free weddings,which I find really odd, in those days .I did from choice leave the four year old at home with her GPs as it was a long journey and overnight stay.And one thing less to think about ).DH was primed to remove said baby from church if need be (he spent the whole of the first one with DD1 sucking on his little finger).Each wedding was 120 miles from where we live and I could not have left a tiny baby for a whole day at that stage.Nor do I think anyone would have wanted to look after one for such a stretch .

Rainbow · 07/07/2016 07:28

I have been to child free wedding (before mine were born as now if no kids no me due to no babysitter 😊) and babes in arms were there they are no hassle. You OH is BU xx

MustStopAndThinkBeforePosting · 07/07/2016 08:13

Babes-in-arms are a perfectly normal exception to a child-free wedding rule. If they are too little to sit in a chair or eat or drink any of the refreshments provided then they don't count.

MLGs · 07/07/2016 08:40

Babes in arms different category to older babies, toddlers and children imo. Agree that the fact others are over 2 males it clear cut.

My friend got married when Ds was 10 months. She allowed babes in arms but no other children except nephews and nieces. To me that was totally fine, and I didn't eveconsoconsider that Ds should be included in that. He was on formula and solids by then.

Flip

1 2 3 4

Swipe left for the next trending thread