Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

AIBU to think this an acceptable exception to child free rule

38 replies

YetMoreNewBeginnings · 03/01/2023 07:56

Several years ago a couple got married. They now have a tiny baby.

At their wedding her cousin (one of her BM’s, very close almost sibling relationship, went to school together and in same friendship group) met his cousin (not as close but still very close). They are now getting married.

The second couple are having a child free wedding, but have made an exception for the groom’s only nephew and couple 1’s baby.

The reason being that all of the grandparents and aunties/uncles of the baby, plus the Mum’s close friends will all be at the wedding due to the link. The baby will also be a babe in arms.

There are massive hissy fits being thrown by some people at them having to get a babysitter when couple 1 don’t have to.

AIBU to think it’s a perfectly acceptable exception on both of the grounds and the whinging people have lost their minds?

OP posts:
londonrach · 03/01/2023 07:58

Bride and groom can choose who comes to their wedding.

kitcat15 · 03/01/2023 08:02

It’s not about exceptions to the rule…..st about what the bride and groom want…end of

PAFMO · 03/01/2023 08:03

Bride and groom don't have to have exceptions. Their wedding, their rules.

WashAsDelicates · 03/01/2023 08:07

Depends.

I had to find childcare to attend a friend's child-free wedding. When we arrived we discovered that close family children were invited, but not friends' children. Fair enough. Their wedding, their choice.

I've also attended another child-free wedding which felt like a slap in the face. It was dh's sibling's wedding. Dh is their only sibling and has the only children on that side of the family. Our children were not invited. The spouse's nieces and nephews were invited. It was not a misunderstanding. Our invitation did not mention our dc, and dh's parents clarified it with their dc. They were as shocked as us when they arrived at the wedding.

LittleDisaster · 03/01/2023 08:07

I'd expect allowances made for close family and new babies anyway. Otherwise you're inviting those people knowing they can't come.

At my sister's wedding, which she had where she now lives, she had my DC and her SIL's DC, plus the children of a friend from home who'd had to travel overnight. AFAIK it didn't cause any issues.

LittleDisaster · 03/01/2023 08:08

PAFMO · 03/01/2023 08:03

Bride and groom don't have to have exceptions. Their wedding, their rules.

B&G have made the exception, it's the other guests who object.

upfucked · 03/01/2023 08:08

As a general rule it’s fair to make an except for young babies. Are the other children older or babies?

Holly60 · 03/01/2023 08:10

Babes in arms always an exception- infants should be with their mothers. Children that can walk etc are down to the discretion of the bride and groom.

LlynTegid · 03/01/2023 08:11

Bride and groom's choice, seems reasonable to me.

Quartz2208 · 03/01/2023 08:12

Yes makes perfect sense. DH sister had the nieces and nephews (plus the Grooms children) and then a small baby. That sounds about right

VivaVivaa · 03/01/2023 08:14

The bride and groom can invite whoever they want. I’m shocked that other guests are kicking off about it, they should just decline the invite if childcare isn’t possible. Weekend childcare can be tricky so I think those with children are completely reasonable to not attend…but I wouldn’t even think about raising it with the bride and groom!

yikesanotherbooboo · 03/01/2023 08:16

Babes in arms should be expected, other DC are up to the B&G in a similar way to the invites of any guests. Obviously , as per pp, if close family DC are there from one side then it is hurtful and distasteful not to invite from the other side of the new family.

TheMagicSword · 03/01/2023 08:21

I think it’s generally accepted that little babies are an exception at child free weddings. But that’s about difficulties of leaving a baby with someone else, and the fact that a non walking baby shouldn’t interrupt things in the way an older child would. I find it slightly odd that part of the justification is how many close friends/family members the mother will have there. If the people kicking off have older kids, they’re unreasonable. If they’re the same age, I have sympathy for them (though I wouldn’t actually kick off about it myself).

Original poster
YetMoreNewBeginnings · 03/01/2023 08:22

There are no other nieces and nephews on either side - there is just the groom’s who is invited.

Those kicking off are other cousins who feel that as the baby’s parents are cousins of the couple then all children of cousins should be invited or none. None of the other not-invited children are babies.

I’m currently in the bad books for telling them main whinger (high school age child) to wind their neck in trying to cause bother and either go or not.

Mine aren’t invited and I totally get it. If they invited cousin’s children they’d have about 20 on the side I’m on plus however many on the other side! It’s not like just one or two.

And they’ve been very open about the two invited so no-one gets there and is surprised to find two invitees.

OP posts:
WandaWonder · 03/01/2023 08:22

B&G set what they want and guests can choose whether to go or not

They shouldn't which if people don't make it though

The only exception not relevant here though is the have kids for part but not another part of the wedding which is not fair on parents, all or nothing for me

SunshineClouds1 · 03/01/2023 08:26

I totally get why they've done it.

Personally I wouldn't want my child at a wedding, they aren't fun for kids and I'd rather enjoy myself than trying to entertain a 3 year old all day.

mondaytosunday · 03/01/2023 08:26

I had a child free wedding. I als had a friend's two young children (5 & 7) as my attendants. Their grandmother came and the kids did the ceremony and stayed for pictures and the drinks/canapé bit (the wedding and reception at the same venue), then the grandmother took them away. They were at their limit anyway and would have been bored and tired for the sit down dinner.
One woman made a fuss about it being child free. I explained it was either have 30 kids I may never have met and get rid of 30 friends/relatives, or people could have a fun child free afternoon and evening.
She managed to find a sitter. And then announced her third pregnancy at my wedding 😠.
I didn't know anyone with babies under two though, but I think the couple decide and if it's not possible to leave baby/child behind then you refuse the invitation.

MelchiorsMistress · 03/01/2023 08:39

it sounds like the people whinging will also have lots of family at the wedding that could include their normal babysitters.

Its fine to exclude children, it’s fine to make an exception for tiny babies. It is less fine to invite only one older child when there are others who’d like to be there. Obviously it’s entirely the B&Gs choice, but they can’t dictate how others feel about it, especially in circumstances like this. The b&g should own their decision instead of saying it’s about babysitters, because others are likely to have babysitter issues too and it is obviously just an excuse.

Original poster
YetMoreNewBeginnings · 03/01/2023 08:42

It is less fine to invite only one older child when there are others who’d like to be there

The only older child is the groom’s only nephew. The bride has no nieces or nephews.

And no-one with children except couple 1 has both sides of their family and most of their friends at the wedding. Everyone else has a non-invited side and non-invited friends.

OP posts:
BernadetteRostankowskiWolowitz · 03/01/2023 08:43

If I was invited to a wedding child free I'd lap it up, get the kids overnight with grandma and book a hotel. Savour the night off! Couldn't give a hoot if other kids were there.

Sweetmotherofallthatisholyabov · 03/01/2023 08:45

I think your mistake was saying I have decided it's too difficult for this one couple to find a babysitter because I have invited all those I consider an appropriate babysitter. Therefore their baby is invited. I have decided your pool of babysitters extends far beyond whom I'm inviting therefore I don't think your kids should come. What if some cousins are lc with their in laws. Or they live far away? Or they're older? Or they've never had the baby? Or they think car seats are optional. At the end of the day it's your decision but when you give your reason people will poke holes at it, and at the end of the day the reason is you're closer to these two.

Missedvocation · 03/01/2023 08:49

Holly60 · 03/01/2023 08:10

Babes in arms always an exception- infants should be with their mothers. Children that can walk etc are down to the discretion of the bride and groom.

Parents. Infants should be with their parents. Fathers can parent too!

FlipFlopBattle · 03/01/2023 08:57

I've never understood why people feel justified in trying to influence someone's wedding plans and guest list, in a way that doesn't happen for a milestone birthday or Christmas arrangements.

If the bride and groom decide to get married on a random Tuesday in the middle of nowhere, and all guests have to come dressed as dinosaurs, that's up to them. They just have to be aware that the more expensive and logistically complicated a wedding is for guests, the more people may decline.

Sounds like the couple have been super transparent, and also logical and fair, in their plans regarding children. It's up to the guests to accept or gracefully decline, and leave them to get on with enjoying this milestone in their lives.

saleorbouy · 03/01/2023 08:58

Having loads of children at a wedding means that alot of table places are used and the number of adult guests that the couple can invite is reduced if capacity is an issue.
Also the kids parents will head off from the celebrations early once the kids go to bed unless they organise baby sitting or allow grouchy tired kids to ruin the night.
Personally weddings are much more enjoyable without loads of kids about and that's up to the bride and groom to decide. If those invited don't like it then don't accept to invitation.

upfucked · 03/01/2023 08:59

Holly60 · 03/01/2023 08:10

Babes in arms always an exception- infants should be with their mothers. Children that can walk etc are down to the discretion of the bride and groom.

I think there is some cross over here. DD2 could walk at 9 months but as bf baby she still required me for most of her nutrition.