Sister's wedding and no children invited

[BigSister1991]

My younger sister is getting married next year and no children (including family children) are invited to any of the wedding celebrations. We will have two children by then (aged 2.5 and 6 months). They are the only children in the family.

The wedding is 2 hours drive from our home and over 3 days - starting on Friday and ending on Sunday.

Our blood family only consists of my Mum and Sister and so I'm disappointed that my Sister would not want her nephew/niece there or want to include them in the day (and that there won't be any photos of them there). I work full time and weekends with my children are important to me and so I'm sad to have to spend 2 days away from them.

The expectation from my Mum and Sister is that me and my husband attend the wedding without our children without complaint and sort and pay for any childcare arrangements that are required.

this 👆

First response on this pretty much nails it.

Not unreasonable to not want children at your wedding.

Not unreasonable to say you can’t make the wedding due to childcare.

Wow. My brother and his wife are what I’d call child avoidant but even they tolerated my then 18 month old at their wedding 5 hours from my home. The more I read about modern weddings and the expectations upon guests the happier I am that I seem to be past the attending weddings stage of my life.

My sister pulled this (which is her choice to make) when I had a fully nursing baby, three hours minimum from home. I just didn't go and put it in the too hard basket. It's her choice to have no children. We respected that so stayed away as we had no childcare available who weren't also at the wedding.

In your place, OP, I'd book alternative accommodation that is child friendly and attend the wedding and reception only, with DH minding the children elsewhere. Or, just not go. Due to the costs involved at the time of doing that, I'd probably have not gone and stepped down as MOH.

Wow, it bewilders me how selfish some people are on these posts. It’s her sisters wedding, it’s her day! Unfortunately weddings are expensive so if you are tight and prefer to enjoy your cats then you do you!

Of course you don’t have to sign up to 3 days, this can be skimmed back.

Lots of selfish posts on here saying “don’t go to the wedding!”.

The OP has failed to provide additional information like perhaps her sister could have gone through some fertility struggles which is often the reason for these wedding requests. Or perhaps her sister has a budget to stick to and this is a way to keep it down, children cost per head too!

People need to get off their high horses! The OP can just have someone help her look after the kids at the venue accommodation or nearby, it’s not that complicated.

Babies don’t cost anything to host. If the sister cared about OP she wouldn’t make it impossible for her to attend. It’s not at all selfish not to go to the wedding. The selfish one is the sister.

The only way you could be there for the 3 days is if you aren't planning to be bfing the 6 month old and if either DH or in-laws will take care of the children either at home or local to the wedding.

If this isn't an option then you will have to talk to your DSIS and explain that much as you want to be her MoH, it won't be possible for you to be there for the full 3 days without your DC. And explain what you would be able to do (eg you drive up alone the Saturday morning and return the Saturday evening leaving DH with the DC). If she's not happy with that then you would have to offer to stand down from being MoH.

It sounds as though she can't make an exception without changing the venue. The consequence of the venue choice is that her nieces/nephews and potentially sister can't be at her wedding.

Maybe she hasn't thought that through. Or maybe she has. Sorry OP, it is hurtful.

This is ridiculous. Bride is OP’s sister but OP is bride’s sister - where’s the consideration for her??

I’d be regretfully (genuinely regretful) declining this invitation

I agree: its too long to leave a (probably still breastfed) baby.

Get a babysitter for the ceremony and drive 2 hours there, two hours back. The other days I'd skip.

Weddings that drag out forever are a total bore anyway.

The children aren't going to cost. Breastmilk and a babyfood pouch for the baby, pasta for the other child. It's nothing in the scheme of a wedding.

I agree - there should be more accepting in both sides.

I think the issue is that it often isn't that parents of young children can't come, it's the flouncing about it that's the aggravating part

Dont be silly- the OPs kids are not the only kids not invited. The sister clearly had a blanket rule for everyone.
Kids absolutely cost money per head (as they did at my wedding), in some venues they are the same cost as an adult per head.

If this were my sister this would be my response:
Hi Sis
Thanks for wedding invite which I am sorry to be declining.
Unfortunately it is not possible to find childcare for the period of your wedding. AND if I’m honest I really do not wish to leave my little ones for this period of time.
I hope you’ll understand and I wish you a very happy wedding day.
x x x x

OP said her children are the only ones in the family. There may be other reasons in the sister's mind but the cost of a 6 month baby and one young child cannot possibly be it. No venue is going to charge for a 6 month old.

OP didn’t say that. She said her children “are the only children in the family” so she would miss the photos etc without them. She didn’t say anything about the other people invited (who does/ doesn’t have kids) to the weddings at all.

Same situation here a few years back, but my brothers wedding, which was also spread over 3 days. I went for the main day only and DH stayed home with the kids. Worked out fine.

This. I feel it's unreasonable they expect both of you to go, although the 2.5 should be old enough to be looked after, and even the 6 month old as that is an easier age. So if you wanted to make it happen you could.

It's not cost, it's having the wedding disrupted by children which is perfectly reasonable to want. No one wants to listen to a crying baby or a whinging kid. Speaking as a parent myself, I'm all for child-free weddings.

OP's sister has booked OP into a child-free hotel. No kids allowed on the premises at all. OP has said:

'The expectation from my Mum and Sister is that me and my husband attend the wedding without our children without complaint and sort and pay for any childcare arrangements that are required.'

Honestly, OP's mum and sister sound like the child hating King and Queen in Chitty Chitty Bang Bang. Maybe they should book the child catcher just in case.

That is odd and strange OPs mum feels like that about her own grandchildren, makes me wonder if there's more to this

Why would anyone pay your child care for you they are your children, if you dont want to go then don't but they have the right to have the wedding they want

I do think it’s really shit of your sister to not invite your family. She’s put you in a really difficult position. You almost can’t win. I couldn’t be away from a young baby for that long. It’s their day, but a wedding is a family event. It’s weird to exclude close family members on the basis of their age. Bridezilla behaviour.

I think a very polite decline, with the explanation of why may force a rethink on her part (if she’s reasonable)

That doesn’t mean they’re the only guests who have children. Friends, her partner’s family.

But are the other guests having a gun held to their head for both parents to attend, for the full three days, and pay for a babysitter?

Non family guests also have potentially two sides of their own families which might be able to look after their children for a weekend.

I agree with her though. Going by MN anyway weddings are just insane nowadays. I'm glad im old and I've never had to put up with all that shit. I just wouldn't go.