To think it's polite to not do all of this when planning a wedding

[hibbledibble]

When couples plan a wedding, it seems like often there is little thought given to how easy it will be for guests to attend.

There are three things which can make it difficult for guests to attend a wedding:

1. having it in the middle of nowhere (so guests need to travel, and book one or two nights of accomodation as a minimum)
2. having it on a weekday, especially in the middle of the week (so guests need to use annual leave, or take unpaid leave)
3. not inviting children (childcare costs and logistics)

Doing one or two of the above is forgivable, but aibu for thinking it's really inconsiderate to do all three?

But guests don't have to attend, so I can't see that it's rude.

I think it's fine to do all of these as long is the bride and groom accept that only very close family will come.

I should say that when I got married I chose a venue close to the guests we most wanted to come, on a weekend, and invited kids! But that's because as many people attending as possible was a priority for us. If that wasn't a priority we might have made other choices, and that is fine. The couple has to do what works for them.

Nope, they can do what they want.

As can you.

Just don’t go. Everyone is happy.

The wedding is not held for the guests, it's held for the couple. If it's not convenient for you don't go.

In fairness though, I wouldn't invite people outside of immediate family if I thought coming would be a hardship for them.

Their choice as long as they don't cry poor me when numbers are low.

I think it's fine to do all of these as long is the bride and groom accept that only very close family will come.

I think you meant to say "I think it's fine to do all these as long as the bride and groom accept that even very close family may not be able to come".

It's perfectly alright, people don't have to go if it's all to difficult for them. That's life. However, most would make an effort and enjoy being away from home for a night, could be fun!

Nothing at all wrong with midweek weddings. Invitations are usually sent out well in advance so a day or two's leave can be booked in plenty of time. I've never understood the obsession with Saturday weddings.

I think there are compromises to all three which majority of people will realise.

We had a rural wedding with no children allowed but found a place that would allow camping on site (which our friends loved). Those with children we gave them 10 months notice to find babysitters or decline the invite.

As for midweek weddings as long as they provide plenty of notice then it's not an issue. We declined a wedding in November as was given 6 weeks notice, all annual leave was used up and it involved a 800 mile round trip. We worked out the unpaid leave, petrol etc would have cost us £600 to attend and that's before a present.

I think whatever you want to do with your wedding is absolutely fine, as long as you remember that people may not be able to come.

So if you're best friend is related to you and you end up marrying her DH's cousin therefore invite all of her family and all of his PLUS all of your joint friends don't be surprised when they don't have childcare for their baby and toddler because they're all at the wedding! Almost 4 years now since we spoke properly and I still miss her.

Absolutely fine for them to do this. Absolutely fine for you to politely decline.

What is not fine is when they then bitch about people not coming. We had this for a direct family member. Decided to get married on the other side of the world (literally) and no kids invited. Most friends and family for both bride and groom lived in the same city as they did. A few people would have had to fly in from another state and a few people would have had to drive for a couple of hours. But there was a complete meltdown and ‘if we were that important to people they would come’ saga. Not cool.

I have to confess that when I was planning my wedding, I was only thinking of how easy my wedding would be for selected guests - as in the must-have people I couldn’t imagine getting married without, such as very close family and very close friends.

The wider pool of less close guests? Including the political sort of guest, like “we have to invite uncle Bob if we want to invite auntie Sue otherwise there’ll be fallouts”? We didn’t really worry too much about them. If they could make it, great, if they couldn’t, well, the lack of them wouldn’t ruin our day.

So if a child free, midweek wedding in the middle of nowhere was fine with our must-have guests, we’d have happily gone for that. And not made a fuss about the nice-to-have guests who declined because our choices were inconvenient for them.
(We did consult our must-have guests about days / dates / locations they couldn’t easily do before finalising our decisions).

It's entirely up to the couple how they arrange their wedding, same as it's entirely up to you whether to accept their invitation or not.

Maybe they wanted a small wedding or couldn't afford to cater for many guests, and felt that the less hurtful way to reduce numbers was to invite people to a slightly awkward venue rather than not to invite them at all.

Seems fine to me, unless they complain that you didn't come.

We've been invited to a wedding like that, I've just said I'm not going.
DH is pissed off but I'm not ready to leave my DC over night yet, I'm still breastfeeding, the wedding is far away, we have no childcare, it would be ridiculous.
He's welcome to go on his own for what it's worth.

I would assume that they don't want that many guests in there.

We did not have a destination wedding so no one had need to travel.

We got married on a Friday because it was my wedding and I wanted to get married then. Also we and most of our guests were shiftworkers so days mean nothing.

We had a no children rule because parents usually ignore their offspring and then the children ruin the day for others or the parents spend time watching the children and don't have a good time.

So in the end it was my wedding and my choice and if you don't like it dont come.

HAving a wedding like that is not a problem in itself. Guests accept or decline...whatever. But it rarely ends there so I would add a #4 to the OP's list "Do not complain when you get many declines".

My ex friend (note the ex!) organised her DD's wedding in the Domincan Republic. The groom wasnt happy as his family couldnt afford to attend. Ex friend and her DD said that if they cared about him they would find the money and then kicked off when they couldnt. Silly bugger married her anyway with none of his family in attendance.........

I’ve considered doing the above things (and more) in the hope that very few people would attend but I’d get away with inviting the people I’m meant to invite, but hope most don’t attend.
And I’m not even engaged or getting married

Middle of nowhere is a bit relative though isn't it? We can't all be from cities with brilliant rail and road links!

I'd choose to get married from home, in the church where I was christened and confirmed and my parents married. It would be inconvenient for my friends who work in London or where I went to university, but it would be good for schoolfriends and one side of my family in particular.

As for midweek weddings as long as they provide plenty of notice then it's not an issue.

Yes, it often is an issue. Teachers don't generally get to take a day off mid week for a wedding, even with plenty of notice.

Middle of nowhere is a bit relative though isn't it? We can't all be from cities with brilliant rail and road links!

Middle of nowhere is fine if you have family links to the area and a good percentage of your guests live nearby. If you decide you simply must have your wedding on a private island in the middle of the Pacific where you've never even been before, then you can't get upset if people decline.

I think you need to place the most consideration on your must have guests. Basically the people who really aren’t free to just decline. After that, there is o my so much you can do.

So don’t have your wedding at the end of a hiking trail if you want your 98 year old grandmother to attend. If you want a child free wedding and your siblings have young children, make sure you plan it somewhere they have access to a sitter. If they have super young children, make sure you plan it somewhere they can have a sitter onsite.

I thought the point of a destination wedding was to avoid having guests. Bloody awful to drag everyone half way across the world.

Lol. Maybe some people don't want wedding guests!

I have had friends be upset I have declined due to a combination of the above. One won't talk to me anymore as a result. (Difficult to reach abroad location, when I had a newborn)

By 'middle of nowhere' I don't mean somewhere the bride or groom is from, and has local friends and family, but more a random country house miles away from either of their family and friends

I did all three. I had a small wedding in London where we lived at the time. Most of our guests lived outside London. The alternative was a massive Irish wedding for which half the guests would have to travel the length of Ireland (our families live at opposite ends). None of the people we invited had little kids, and everyone that we invited came and had a fab time. Oh and we also had the audacity to get married the Friday before Xmas! So, do what you like, people have the choice whether to go or not.

Personally, I think it all comes down to what the couple wants. If they want accordion playing monkeys then they should have that. The wedding is for them not for you. As long as they are gracious to those who cannot attend, then all should be well. If you are not married, but plan to, maybe you can set aside these rules for yourself?

Simply put, it's their day. If some people do not attend because of these restrictions they should be gracious. Having said that, they should, for the most part, get what they want even if it's an accordion playing monkey in the middle of nowhere. (which I would pay to see, btw!)