Husband's brother not invited his step-child

[JaynesSmalls]

I got married 4 years ago and my husband became my child's stepfather. My child is 13, and doesn't see their father. My husband has nieces and nephews either side of this age.

My child is sadly my husband's only chance of parenting.

His brother is getting married in a late afternoon early evening wedding in a world famous hotel. They are having 60 people there. Apparently this has been planned for the last two years but we only found out about this a month ago just days before the invitations went out. He told my husband after a night out (he had told their sister that afternoon).

The invitation stated just our names with no mention of my child.

I got it, it's a world class venue and a reasonably small wedding. I totally get child free weddings especially given the time of it. I found out yesterday that husband's sister's kids are invited. Mine clearly hasn't because they are a step-child. I feel quite heartbroken.

My husband asked yesterday if my child could be extended an invitation but was refused. A kicker came a minute later when brother was asked if there was a drop out could they come and brother said if there were drop outs relatively new work colleagues would be invited.

No idea if this is relevant but I want to put my cards on the table so any advice I get will be informed by the facts. My first wedding was massive and as my dad later told my cousin it cost a grand for every month it lasted. My wedding to my husband was in a registry office with just our parents so the sibling who has invited us wasn't invited to ours.

I think it's also possible to agree with both sides up to a point.

I don't think it was unreasonable for the BIL not to invite the DSS to begin with - they are not close, the DSS was 9 at the time of the marriage, not a very young child. I think it's unusual to consider a step child of 9+ your own, I see that as more of a when you have got together with the parent when the child was under 5 sort of thing.

But I think once the DH had made clear he was upset, the BIL should have invited the DSS with good grace for the sake of family harmony.

And then I think it is over the top for the DH to refuse to go to his brother's wedding over it, it doesn't seem such a horrible thing that it merits this drastic a response.

And this may be unfair but the OP's "heartbreak" and leaving work early because of being upset sort of automatically puts me a little on the in laws side.

So on balance, I sort of agree and disagree with everyone!

It’s entirely possible that popular consensus was/is that OP’s DH was unreasonable in declining to go. That that this isn’t what some posters would like to believe doesn’t change that.

Yes, I agree. There was no need to slag him off but I would have thought he was daft not to come.

But you didn’t invite him to yours, what do you expect, you can’t have it both ways or all your way. I understand it is disappointing but maybe he was disappointed to not be invited to his brothers!

A very god friend of my husband (they’d been good friends for well over 10 years) was getting married and it was a child-free wedding.

Our first baby (breast fed)was 2 months old when we got the invite and he would be 4 months old on the day of the wedding. I was told that I could only come if I left my baby at home which obviously just wasn’t feasible.

My husband spoke to his friend about it, who was fine about me still coming as our son was obviously just going to be in my arms, but his fiancée got the final say and I wasn’t allowed to attend.

My husband then declined the invite and said he wouldn’t be going either.

It massively soured their friendship. It’s never recovered and that was over 9 years ago.

This behaviour is awful OP and your DH should stand united with you.

Your DH sounds like mine, the only decent one out of a bad lot.

I am amazed that the subject of OP and dh's wedding has come up yet again. It's been clarified a couple of times that BIL and SIL have no ill feelings about that. And if that were some dark, hidden, unspoken grudge harbored by BIL, then tit-for-tat would have been to not invite his own brother and SIL, not take it out on a child.

I'm in the minority on this thread Op, but I think your BIL was right to do what he did, given how he felt, so I wouldn't doubt that people who attended were supportive of him.

I genuinely don't understand why couples cannot do things solo. If his fiancé did not want children there - respect it!! Its her bloody wedding. Let your husband go alone and stay at home with the baby, no need for drama and offence at every turn.

Sounds like BIL is making his feelings known and frankly they are unkind. He could have extended one seat to keep family unity strong and chose not to. Has your dh explained that whilst his brother has no relationship to your child, that he in fact does and that step parenting is as close as parenting will get for him? What if he adopted him, would he still feel the same ! Sad fact is it is BIL loss.

I do find it funny it all the other wedding invite situations on Mumsnet women are told their husband should attend a siblings wedding no matter what and alone if they have too. Here mention a step child and the grooms the big bad wolf.

If someone invited all the children except their sibling’s adopted child, not one would tell them to go anyway. (And that’s what happened here as far as her DH was concerned.

If someone invited all the partners but not their own partner no one would tell them to go, either.

Really? You think leaving out your brother's child (and to the OPs husband this is his only child) is OK because you need the space for some new colleague you hardly know. I guess it takes all sorts.

That would be OK if it was a wedding with no children but it wasn't. The OP and her husband weren't upset until they knew other kids were going.

Let her husband go? Seriously he must be an adult if he's married with a child so I think it was up to him.

Firstly it wasn’t her wedding, it was their wedding.

My husband was upset that his best friend of over 10 years wouldn’t stand up to his fiancée and say he wanted me at the wedding and instead let me be excluded.

And I certainly didn’t stop my DH from going as not one part of him wanted to go.

+1.

Yes but we only have OPs word on that, it may not be the case!

All the op keeps going on about is the ‘world class venue’ she comes across as entitled and grabby and prob not wanted at the wedding anyway!

Well, I'll be darned. If you already considered that "it may not be the case" like saying OP has fibbed, then why are you even following in the first place. Although I, myself, question whether there's something OPs not telling us, either about the child or more likely, about his biological family, we still have only what she says to go on. But, would you agree that even if BIL harbored a secret grudge about not being at his brother's wedding, retaliating against the child rather than his brother and SIL is pretty low. I doubt that's the case, but insisting that OP and dh's wedding may be the reason, implies that. And what a hateful, vindictive schmuck he would be. Maybe he is, but he did say that the DC was a nice kid. Anyway, the mere fact that he announced a private family issue to all present makes him a world-class ass to go along with his world-class wedding.

You made the choice to stand firm that your baby must attend a child free wedding. You were the cause of the souring of the friendship. Just because you manipulated your Dh doesn’t mean that you were correct. The baby was 4 months - you could have easily missed it and if you had said to husband just to go and enjoy the night with friends and I’m sure he would have done. Instead, you wanted to force their hand to do what you wanted and it didn’t work. As a result, you made sure that you got the outcome you wanted. There aren’t that many people who wouldn’t attend the wedding of a good friend if they had their spouses support for them to go. It’s a shame really that people like yourself are so insecure that you need to make someone else’s wedding about yourself.

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

Yeah, that’s exactly it 😂

I agree @Fairydustandsparklylights

I don't think that is true. Making a decision that you can't leave baby so you either go with baby or don't go. That isn't the same as saying baby must go, it is a choice of two things and if baby isn't allowed to go then that takes it down to one.

I still find your BIL' s attitude so weird. That you don't invite your brother's small family over a new colleague and then are so petulant about it that you try and publicly gain support for doing so, as part of a wedding speech. You do this because it has upset 'the family'. The irony is this decision literally divided family and may now cause a rift that cannot be healed.

The fact that the cousin also weighed in on the wedding being a family get together just strengthens my view.

I am getting married myself. I just cannot fathom it. We have a few people coming that are bringing new partners and blended family because we see them as the immediate loved ones of our loved ones. Weddings are about much more than the day, they are also about the marriage. They are also symbolic of your family joining a community and receiving the support of that community.

Tiny weddings not withstanding, as they exclude most equally, but a larger one that even includes new colleagues, no excuse.

If that friendship is soured, it is definitely all on you and not them. I don’t understand people not wanting 4 month old nieces or nephews at a their wedding, but people are entitled to draw a line at friends babies and children, you have a cheek trying to get a four month old baby into a friend’s wedding. You should have declined, he should have gone.