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 ··· 6 7 8 9 10 11

Original poster

To think a 3 & 4 year old should sit quietly through a wedding?

264 replies

appleturnovers · 01/09/2021 22:08

I went to a wedding last week and I was pretty embarrassed as there were two children, 3 and 4 years old, who were just walking around wherever they wanted and speaking quite loudly, at points drowning out the vicar and even the bride and groom saying their vows. They were wandering around the altar, walking up the aisle, coming and standing next to the bride and groom, one of them even walked up behind the vicar as they were exchanging the rings.

In fairness, both sets of parents were part of the wedding party so were unable to do much, and the grandmother who was supposed to be minding them both was clearly trying but struggling to keep them in check.

I normally love seeing children at weddings as in my view weddings are a family event, and there were almost a dozen babies, toddlers and young children at my own wedding, but I don't remember a single one of them behaving anything like that. Then again, I don't have kids of that age myself so maybe I have unrealistic expectations about what sort of behaviour children that age are capable of...

So, AIBU to think that children aged 3 and 4 are old enough to sit reasonably still and quietly, (and I don't mean in complete silence, but perhaps whispering if they absolutely have to say something, and not wandering up to the bloody altar) during a 45 minute wedding ceremony?

OP posts:

TheLovelinessOfDemons · 02/09/2021 17:23

God, YABU. If I had a 3 or 4 year old and they weren't bridesmaids or page boys, I wouldn't take them.

Springstar · 02/09/2021 17:23

Mine would have behaved for most of it. If they'd got fidgety dh or I would have taken them out. Would not have let them wander up to the altar! I had children at my wedding and not one disrupted the service. Don't know if any of them were taken outside though.

Lockdownbear · 02/09/2021 17:50

@Anothermountain

This isn't about having DC at the wedding though is it? I'm sure many of us loved having small DC at our weddings. This is about adults allowing the DC to overshadow an event, walk around the altar and distract people from the ceremony. The bride and groom may not mind, but that's a bit of a risky assumption isn't it? Imagine they do; they are not really in a position to protest without appearing churlish so it puts them in an awkward spot. It also is unfair on the DC concerned when you allow them to grow up believing that they don't have to consider anyone else.

In this case the B&G are most likely the parents of one of the children. Both sets of parents were in the bridal party.

I imagine if they really didn't want their child to wander during the service they'd have paid for a babysitter, to take care of their child, rather than relying on Granny who wouldn't have wanted to miss her child's wedding service.

Lockdownbear · 02/09/2021 18:06

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Anothermountain · 02/09/2021 18:14

Well obviously, if these are the b & g's DC, then it's up to them how their DC behave on the day!

I thought the thread title (and last para of op) was posing a more general question.

Lockdownbear · 02/09/2021 19:04

Ops second paragraph, Both sets of parents where in the bridal party. Which makes me think one must be B&Gs and the other a neice/ nephew.

AlrightThereSkippy · 02/09/2021 19:12

@Lockdownbear

Ops second paragraph, Both sets of parents where in the bridal party. Which makes me think one must be B&Gs and the other a neice/ nephew.

Could op not just have meant bridesmaids and ushers / best man when she said in the wedding party? I know you've been saying for pages now that you think they were the B&G's kids, but I don't see anything the op has said which indicates that. But sorry if I missed it.

AlrightThereSkippy · 02/09/2021 19:13

Actually she said the parents were "part of the wedding" not "in the wedding party". That could mean a few things really.

Lockdownbear · 02/09/2021 19:24

It would be very unusual for 2 couples to be part of the wedding, if one of them wasn't the B&G.

And the kids must have been cousins, as they were left with the same gran.

Bouledeneige · 02/09/2021 23:21

Well there's a difference. I'd have prevented my two DC from wandering around the church at a wedding but couldn't have guaranteed they'd have been that quiet all the way through a service.

MrsTerryPratchett · 03/09/2021 01:12

I think if you are going to have children in church, with the parents in the bridal party then they need to go to church beforehand and be told how to behave.

I've been bridesmaid at a church wedding. I'm also a hardcore atheist so I wouldn't be taking my child to be indoctriated socialised into church services beforehand. It wouldn't have helped anyway since DD's ADHD wasn't diagnosed at that age. She would just have been an ill-mannered child with "no obvious SEN" as people are always saying on here.

PurpleOkapi · 03/09/2021 08:32

Is it really so unusual for all siblings and their spouses to be in the wedding party? Maybe it depends on where OP is. But in the US, it wouldn't be uncommon for both of a bride's two sisters to be bridesmaids and for each of their husbands to be groomsmen or ushers, or vice versa. Any gender combination works here, really.

Maybe the bride and groom truly didn't care so long as the children weren't screaming, and had made that known. But if that was the case, why was Granny even trying to contain them? I think it's at least equally likely that the parents assured the bride and groom that someone would watch them and take them outside if necessary, and didn't mention the fact that "someone" was dear old Gran who really didn't want to miss the ceremony and whom the couple would never knowingly have put in that position.

OhRene · 03/09/2021 09:41

My boy was two and stood next to his dad and the best man whilst we got married. He behaved through the whole ceremony. No one needed to hold him or correct him. His sisters were 5 and 7 and stood as my flower girls beside me. Again, no need to do anything. However, my kids must be the exception because kids these days can't even eat a meal without an iPad so I dunno. I guess YABU?

Could any 3 or 4 year old be expected to sit down and behave? No. That's not how it works anymore.

surreygirl1987 · 03/09/2021 15:23

The thing is, little kids are unpredictable. Good for those who are bragging about how their 2 year old behaves perfectly. Mine might. Or he might not. Sometimes he surprises me. When we had to wait in a hospital for 3 hours he behaved impeccably and just stood, waiting quietly (no seats) the whole time. However, yesterday he couldn't wait 30 seconds for me to butter his bagel. You just don't know how they're going to react in a situation (and it could be different the next time!). They are also changing all the time. My friend who had an amazingly well behaved 2 year old girl (and was very smug about it!) now has a completely wild 4 year old! Yes, of course parenting plays a massive part - setting boundaries etc. But little kids are also constantly testing boundaries as part of their development, and to blame parenting because a 3 year old can't sit still for 45 minutes is ridiculous.

Flip

1 2 ··· 6 7 8 9 10 11