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

Child-free wedding

296 replies

GingerbreadGingerbread · 29/08/2016 09:17

Posting on behalf of my best friend as she doesn't have an account I hope that's OK.

My best friend is getting married in March and she and her fiancé want a child free wedding. They don't have children themselves and not loads of close family with young children. The wedding is in the city where they live but they have some family travelling from further afield (Manchester, wedding in South East.) After this decision was made the bride's cousin announced his wife is pregnant and due to give birth in December so baby will be very young at the time of the wedding.

The couple plus brides aunt (cousin's mother) are putting pressure on bride and groom to allow the couple to bring their young baby. Other family members are getting i olives saying cousin and wine won't be able to attend without the baby. My friend and her fiancé are very stressed about this as they want the cousin and his wife to be present but they have already told others it's a child free wedding and it's going to be quite a formal affair and they personally want it to be just adults.

Who is being unreasonable?

OP posts:
DelicatePreciousThing1 · 29/08/2016 09:57

What a shame that the couple's wedding preparations are being hijacked.Sad

44PumpLane · 29/08/2016 09:58

I don't think either party are being unreasonable. It's not unreasonable to have a child free wedding- but you have to accept graciously that you will lose some guests.

It's also not unreasonable to decline an invite (remember it's an invite not a summons) on the basis that your children aren't invited.

B&G would be very unreasonable to get narked that they can't have it both ways with the cousin coming and not their baby!

We had a mostly child free wedding- it was extremely local to where we live but some of my family had to travel- we assumed we would lose some of my cousins as childcare wouldn't be possible and it was a shame but something we decided in advance. We had a big wedding and there would have been over 30 extra places needed if we'd invited children which would have meant changing venue.

In the end we lost 2 of my cousins and their partners- no animosity just understanding on all sides.

Brand new baby was invited meaning DH's cousin was able to attend. Also my cousins kids were Invited- they had travelled from abroad for the wedding and it would have been entirely unreasonable of me to say "no your kids can't come- hire a stranger to look after them".

So "child free" can involve compromises that include children :)

Fluffsnuts · 29/08/2016 09:58

We had a child free wedding but made exceptions for babes in arms (and my niece, but she's the only child in the family, the rest were friends older children who we knew to have good access to family child care).

It's unreasonable to expect someone to leave their 3 month old child, and it may be impossible if she's breastfeeding as baby may not take a bottle (mine didn't, only now at 8 months could I contemplate going to a wedding and even then I'd have to leave before the night do).

NavyandWhite · 29/08/2016 09:58

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

kurlique · 29/08/2016 09:59

Jeepers friend of OP... Let the newborn come to the wedding... And have the backbone to stand up to those with children - your cousin's tiny baby being there is NOT the same as having toddlers etc there. My cousin did exactly this... Our quite distant cousin brought her tiny baby and my older kids who knew my cousin quite well didn't, I wasn't offended.

LiviaDrusillaAugusta · 29/08/2016 10:00

And why is everyone else getting involved?

Invitation arrives - child free wedding

Guests: oh we have a child so we can't go, never mind. Guests send RSVP declining invitation.

Why the fuck do these type of weddings cause so much angst?

LiviaDrusillaAugusta · 29/08/2016 10:01

Or is not being able to attend due to have children different from having another appointment that day or something?

DelicatePreciousThing1 · 29/08/2016 10:01

Child free should be just that. Exceptions should not be made otherwise people - who respected the requirement - might be pretty annoyed later if they discover via pics etc that there were, in fact, children in attendance.

Lovefromhull · 29/08/2016 10:02

Their wedding.
However I find it really sad worrying about a baby crying in the ceremony- that's life. Weddings are to create families and join groups of people together. Maybe I am strange in really liking the children in my family and considering them as important as the adults.
I can understand financial reasons to not invite children, and its their day to do as they please. If I were the cousin I would decline the invitation not push for an " allowance".

PurpleDaisies · 29/08/2016 10:02

To be fair livia it's easier to move an appointment than not have a 2-3 month old baby to deal with.

NavyandWhite · 29/08/2016 10:02

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Fluffsnuts · 29/08/2016 10:03

I wonder what these child free wedding couple do when they have kids are are invited to a child free wedding? Wonder if they see it differently?

I don't. We've been invited to 2 child free weddings since the birth of DS, DH went to both, I declined both as DS is a bottle refuser. One bride asked me to come and bring DS once I explained why I couldn't so I did and the other accepted I couldn't go and I've seen her since and all is fine.

The couple have to accept that a blanket policy will exclude some people, and that's fine.

GummyGoddess · 29/08/2016 10:03

Your friend is paying for the wedding, therefore she gets to choose what event she has. She is not BU by wanting to have an adult event, she would only BU if she was insisting that the parents come and leave their baby with someone else.

Is there no compromise that the baby could come to the reception? We banned small children at our ceremony as we were nervous and wanted to concentrate without being distracted by screeching, but as soon as it was over they were welcome to run amok.

I would not bring my baby to a wedding ceremony even if invited as I wouldn't want to ruin one of the most important moments of the B&G's lives.

DelicatePreciousThing1 · 29/08/2016 10:03

@NavyandWhite

They should decline the invitation graciously, of course. It is not their day or about them or about their children.

ParanoidGynodroid · 29/08/2016 10:05

Why is the UK such an increasingly child intolerant place? So different in other cultures. I don't remember child-free weddings as a child... children were part of the family or friendship group, too.
I couldn't go to my former best friend's wedding 20 odd years ago because I had a newborn. Our friendship cooled.... unsurprisingly.

But yes, their "Special Day" blah blah blah.

LiviaDrusillaAugusta · 29/08/2016 10:05

They should decline the invitation graciously, of course. It is not their day or about them or about their children.

THIS ^^

NavyandWhite · 29/08/2016 10:08

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

HyacinthFuckit · 29/08/2016 10:08

Cousin and wife probably won't be able to attend without the baby, so nobody is BU to point that out. Particularly if she's EBF (though I don't understand why people were assuming that, since the majority of babies in the UK are not EBF at 3 months). It is BU to pressure the couple to invite the baby, since there are two choices here. They could invite the baby or they could accept the cousins won't be coming. Should be up to them which.

Childfree does often make an exception for babes in arms, but it's not compulsory. They can restrict their wedding invitations solely to those born in 1929, 1954 or 1990 if they want, that's their business. The only problem comes if they then get miffed about the consequences of their choices ie non-attendance.

Rosae · 29/08/2016 10:08

I would say this is a babe in arms. Won't be eating so no extra expense and I'm sure mum will take baby out if noisy at inappropriate times. So I would allow. But then I wouldn't have a child free wedding. Maybe a conversation with the parents so they know they have to take baby out if noisy? If they really want them there then that may be the only way especially if she is breastfeeding. X

NavyandWhite · 29/08/2016 10:09

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

GoldQuintessenceAndMyrrh · 29/08/2016 10:10

Option one: New baby attends on the "No children except babes in arms" policy and older child stays with family/friends/babysitter
Option two: NO children are upheld and The couple declines gracefully

MoreCoffeeNow · 29/08/2016 10:10

Tell them to stick to their guns. They want child free and that's how it's going to be. If the cousins don't come it's no big deal - they are cousins not siblings. If they say yes to the baby the pressure will be on to let the 4 year old come.

I've been at weddings ruined by a baby crying at just the wrong time. I want to hear the B & G say their vows and not be drowned out.

All very well when people say they will take the baby out but sadly a) they often don't and b) the moment is ruined.

yorkshapudding · 29/08/2016 10:11

Lots of posts saying it depends if baby is EBF. I wasn't breastfeeding when DD was 3 months old but I still wouldn't have wanted to leave her for a full day to attend a wedding, especially not one that required an overnight stay. I wouldn't assume that just because a baby isn't EBF that means the parents are happy to be separated from them for long periods just because it is logistically possible.

If the B&G don't want to make an exception for young babies then thats their decision and I don't think they should be pressured to change it but they need to understand that this will most likely mean the parents of those babies don't attend.

LittleBearPad · 29/08/2016 10:18

Until recent years mat leave was six weeks/12 weeks max.

Babies were put in childcare etc. It's only recently that there's a sense babies shouldn't leave their mothers, (note not fathers) until much older.

A bottle fed four month old could be left with loving grandparents (with the four year old) if the parents chose to.

If they don't want to leave the baby then they don't go to the wedding and decline with good grace. That's up to them and no pressure should be put on the bride and groom. Who have to accept a child free wedding may mean some guests don't attend with equally good grace.

BlueberrySky · 29/08/2016 10:19

We had a child free wedding. I worked out that if everyone had brought their kids we would have had 40 under 10's there, that would have changed the day. Especially as we had the reception at my parents house.

A couple of cousins on each side said they would not come if they could not bring their kids, so they did not come. I had the bridesmaids and two other close family kids, and one very lovely 10 week old baby. The baby's parents were work colleagues of my DH, but of course they could bring the baby, it was so small and being ebf, at that age she was no trouble and everyone loves babies, I do not remember hearing her cry once.

I do think that there needs to be a bit of flexibility, everyone gets so het up about rules and what they want on their day. On the actual day it all blends into a lovely day and the B & G have a wonderful time.