Child-free wedding

[GingerbreadGingerbread]

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?

Can I ask why on these kind of threads people are always so eager to make exceptions for newborns who are BF? What about newborns who are not BF? Are they considered second class babies because they drink formula milk?

If you are going to make exceptions for newborns surely there shouldn't be a further criteria of whether they are BF or not?

When DD was a newborn and formula-fed she still very much wanted to be stuck to me all day long. No way would I have been able to leave her with someone else just because she took her milk from a bottle instead of from my breast.

Nobody is being unreasonable but the bride and groom need to decide whether they want to allow babies or not and stick to it but they also have to accept that a blanket ban on children will result in some family and friends not being able to come as not everyone has childcare.

Special- I don't suppose anyone thinks they are second class babies! I think all newborns should be exempt from a ban on children at weddings but in my case I was just making the point that ebf babies physically can't be away from their mums or they would go hungry so babysitters aren't an option.

I had a child free wedding. Bliss (apart from I married a abusive, drunken arse it turns out!)

People were free to bring children to the evening do where they could run about all they liked. If guests couldn't come to the ceremony due to child care issues, that was ok, I understood, and if people got arsey that was their issue and not mine.

I don't dictate what happens at other peoples weddings. They don't get to dictate what happens at mine.

However I find it really sad worrying about a baby crying in the ceremony- that's life.

For me, a crying baby is torture - that's my life thanks to a hearing disorder.

The B&G need to make the choice which is right for them, if they feel bullied or harangued into changing their plans the chances are they'll regret it.

personally I found the number of visitors in the first few months overwhelming so was just it's possible that guests with newborns will be happy to have a pre-arranged family get-together where lots of people can see the baby. But then I'm not in the "it's all about the bride" camp.

No, you seem to be in the 'who cares about the bride camp'! If new parents want a family party because that makes life more convenient for them they should throw one. They should not expect a formal, adult (description from OP) to be adapted to provide one for them. If a friend told you that your child's second birthday party should be a cocktail party beginning at 9pm because most guests would enjoy that more than a child-centred event in the afternoon would that be fair enough? Or would you think they should organise their own cocktail party? The person who throws (and pays for!) an event gets to choose what sort of event it is.

Margaret- it's not that I don't care about the bride. But I've had plenty of comments when wedding planning along the lines of "you're the main event, it's all about you" and it doesn't sit too comfortably with me I guess. There are quite a few things we are doing at our wedding that are to make other people happy. My dad would be gutted if he didn't walk me down the aisle, for example and I want to do that for him even though it seems odd to me as DP and I live together and have a child! My future PILs are horrible and we don't like seeing them but we will be inviting them and sitting at the top table with them. I can't bear even being in the same room as DPs mum and he isn't far off. But it would hurt them not to be at the top table so we are doing it for the sake of keeping the peace. So whilst it is our day and we are picking the venue, colour schemes etc I think it is also a big family event and we are making compromises to keep family happy.

I don't think anyone is being unreasonable - I think it's just unfortunate timing. The bride and groom have decided that they are not inviting children and the cousin has a child who can not be left so he can't go. It's simple. In my experience it's not usually the B&G or the guest with child who is bothered by this but older relatives, parents and aunts/uncles of the couple marrying. It happened recently to us - cousins marrying in south of England, invited to wedding but no kids, we have two, decided not to go (really no big deal- saved us a load of cash), B&G totally understood, but MIL and her sister were horrified and attempted to make it a big deal!

Been to loads of weddings both children allowed and child free. My rule of thumb is baby under 1 = allowed, over 1 = not (unless the b and g want them there). However there has to be a degree of flexibility not everyone has grandparents/family on tap to babysit and if the b and g really want them there then it's up to them. I personally love going to a wedding without my DC

My point being that whilst it is up to you what you do at your wedding, I think it's possibly a good idea to consider how your plans affect friends and family. I wouldn't pick an inconvenient location or something that requires guests spending a lot of money, for example. Some people might consider not letting a newborn baby attend a wedding a bit thoughtless and I can understand why the extended family would rather this was relaxed.

I'm actually surprised cousin wants to bother coming if a baby who is a few weeks old isn't welcome. If it was a child free wedding and I was in the cousin's position, I'd just decline.

I was invited to one where my 2 week old was not welcome. Politely declined, sent £50 voucher as present with well-wishing letter. No contact ever again. Twats, so far up their own bums.

We've lost friends by politely declining wedding invitations. Some people take offence that we don't have childcare for whole weekends away.

(We've never mentioned that dh wouldn't want to go anyway unless local or kids invited, as weekends are when he spends time with the children.)

I went to a wedding on Saturday . There were 3 pageboys and a flower girl and 2 other toddlers. The children talked and screamed and played up all through the wedding service , no one took them out or even tried to quieten them. They again played up the whole of the wedding breakfast and during the speeches . So I think after my experience that weddings should be whatever the bride and groom want and if they don't want children there then I can fully understand why

A 2 to 3 month old breastfed baby cannot always be left for 24 hours.
It is the bride and grooms call but they have to expect people to decline.
All and unable to quote but the post saying it is highly unlike a baby will be exclusively breastfed at 3 months is so depressing. 3 months is still tiny

I think if someone wants a child free wedding, they should be allowed to have one. I know of friends who have attended such weddings and taken along a parent to look after the kid in the hotel room or whatever and the mother nips back to breastfeed etc. I don't think anyone has a right to demand that their child comes, even if a newborn. But equally, I don't think the bride and groom would be reasonable to get offended if the new parents therefore didn't attend the wedding.
All of that said, most people I know will make an exception for a newborn, especially if it's the newborn of a close family member.
Personally I think child free weddings are great. An excuse to go on the lash and not have to get up at 7am. Bliss.

I know of friends who have attended such weddings and taken along a parent to look after the kid in the hotel room or whatever and the mother nips back to breastfeed etc

Asking a grandparent (presumably one who isn't already attending the wedding) to travel halfway across the country to spend the day sat in a hotel room with a very small baby all day is a bloody big ask. And one that would cost someone the price of an additional hotel room (unless the grandparent is bunking in overnight with the parents). I don't know many people who would be prepared to do it.

Besides if the couple have an older child then the grandparents may be needed to be back home babysitting the older sibling (sitting in a hotel room all day with a baby AND a toddler really would be hell)

Thanks for everyone's comments there is some great advice here.

The bride and groom (I would like to emphasise the groom is more set on a child free wedding than the bride so not relevant to call bridezilla here!) still want the child free wedding and my friend said she would make an exception for the babe in arms but the family won't accept that as the mother of the baby would want her other child to come and then the cousins sister is insisting her 3 year old son attend also. The babe in arms suggestion sounds like a good compromise (although groom still dead against it after recently having two wedding ceremonies ruined by screaming babies) but the family of said child will not take the baby and leave the older child behind.

I think in this case my friend is going to stick to her guns but sadly it seems the family fallout is going to be the cousin and his wife, other cousin and two aunts who all think my friend (like some on this thread they don't give her fiancé a second thought) is being a completely unreasonable bitch!

For starters it's absolutely none of the aunts business so she should butt out.

We had a children wedding just because there are so very many kids in our wider families and friendship circles that we would have been overrun and it would have totally changed the feel of the day and that wasn't what we wanted.
However, we did invite 6 children who we know in their own right (as in they come to us for the weekend now and then without parents and we know and like them as people in their own right not just as the children of our friends / family). We also made an exception for a friends 3 month old baby.
We had a couple of people who couldn't possibly leave their precious kids (primary school aged) for the day and tried desperately to get them invited.
The more they tried the determined we were to stick to our guns. In the end they didn't come themselves.

It's your friends day and people should respect that!

*childfree wedding.

Bloody autocorrect

Bride and groom are unreasonable. Babes in arms don't usually count and if the baby is exclusively breastfed the idea that they should leave them for a whole day is quite frankly ridiculous!

In general I don't have a problem with child free weddings, but in this situation I think it's fine to make an exception for the grooms cousin. It's going to be a new baby. They probably can't leave the baby with anyone and be comfortable for the day and the baby may well also be breastfeeding too.

The general exclusion of children at a wedding doesn't have to apply to family members either. The only thing I'd think about is whether other family members also have babies (young ones), who may feel pissed off that they had to leave their baby behind and the groom's cousin brings her baby.

Hmm. Well in that case I would recommend that the B&G leave it as it is - they've agreed to make the exception for the baby, now it's down to the cousin whether or not she agrees to that. I don't think I would bow to their demands to bring the older one, especially as that will then entail another cousin insisting on bringing her 3yo, which will then cause knock-on effects among other guests - so tell your friend to be firm - babe in arms only, that's it, if she chooses not to come, so be it, but that's the way it is.

B&g have compromised and agreed to babe in arms

Yet this still isn't good enough 🙄🙄

Sorry op but the cousin /new mum is being unreasonable by now insisting her 3yr comes

OP - in that case the bride and groom have presented a reasonable offer. If relatives don't like it then I'm afraid that's tough luck - you can't please all the people all of the time. They aren't obliged to attend.

However if the groom is the one who feels strongly about it, then really he should be the one to communicate it. I think what he is communicating is perfectly reasonable, but what isn't reasonable is putting the bride in the position where she will be the one to get the blame for it, if it's really what he wants