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.

And the best part about child free weddings - as well as the fact that it's always been the norm for people to have this choice - is that anybody who bitches and complains is waving a huge red flag of total entitlement and you now know they think they're more important than everybody else and should be kowtowed to. Good enough reason to avoid them really :)

This.

Stop being so dramatic. Just go for the wedding and reception. You'll be done in a few hours.

It's the one day specifically about exactly what they want as a couple. Not about your children.

Can you reply to the question about why brides feel they can throw a strop when guests can't go because they can't get childcare.

They are being just as "unreasonable"

You hate children don't you?

Yes but what she wants is a three day affair with her sister and brother in law present the whole time, when that would require her sister and brother in law to find and pay for a trusted babysitter to leave their baby and toddler with for upwards of 48 hours.

What she wants isn't reasonable and the OP has no obligation to facilitate it.

If you’d like family money for the wedding, then you have to invite family

Ooh... love this! 👏👏

When my DH's sister got married, she had a very small and intimate child free wedding. Similarly, the wedding venue was adults only. My children were older and stayed with grandparents at home, but another couple had a small baby. They travelled 6 hours away with a friend accompanying them to care for their children on the wedding day, they came to the wedding day and got a taxi back to their separate accomodation to be with their kids that night.
My wedding had tons of kids and I was more than happy to have a huge child friendly wedding, my SIL was not happy to have a child friendly wedding. My kids were gutted, but it wasn't their's or my choice. Everyone has different ideas for their big day and it is their right to celebrate it how they chose. And me and my DH were over the moon to be able to see my SIL get married.
If the above is not feasible for your family, then explain to your sister. She will understand that her choices mean this is not possible for you. If it means a lot for you to see your sister wed her husband, then there may have to be a solution which means you have to compromise on your ideals.
You're right to dig your heels in if you're really uncomfortable with it, just as much as she is right to dig her heels in for the day she wants. This may be something you both just never see eye to eye on. But at the moment, you're both being rigid with your thinking. Sit down and talk about it- see if there's a solution either of you are comfortable with.

It’s three days that’s she’s expecting her sister/maid of honour to be there for.

I agree she should just go to the ceremony and then however much of the reception is achievable. But from what she’s said about her mother and sister’s expectations, I think that won’t be viewed as good enough.

I was at many weddings in the 80s as a guest and worked as a waitress for wedding caterers in the late 80s. These were wedding receptions from working men’s clubs to stately homes (that were the family homes rather than a venue) all of them had children.

Honestly, some bridezillas seem to think that children are like pets where you can just farm them off to a cattery or kennels.

They can have a child free wedding but they have no right to whine about it

left all the bitching "But this is what I waaaannnntt"
as well as the fact that it's always been the norm for people to have this choice - is that anybody who bitches and complains is waving a huge red flag of total entitlement and you now know they think they're more important than everybody else and should be kowtowed to. Good enough reason to avoid them really :)

Usually by the bride, not the guests.

Not sure why this nonsense keeps coming up on mumsnet

Because usually the bride is being bridezilla about it. The bride throws a strop when people decline because they can't get childcare.

I would not want to be away from my children, especially with one being 6 mths old for 3 days. I would either say we couldnt make it or that you would just go for the ceremony. Not having kids at her wedding is her choice and you have your choice to make.

If your concern is pictures, maybe ask your sis if the kids can be there for a portion of it and I guess you'd have to hire a babysitter for the rest of the time...

I disagree with this. It is not about whether family is important — it is a child-free wedding. If she makes an exception for her niece and nephew, she would need to allow other guests to bring their children too.

They have clearly told everyone that no children are invited, and I doubt her sister is the only one with kids. It has to be the same rule for everyone.

As others have said, it is their wedding and their decision.

The OP is well within her rights to say no, just as other guests with children likely have.

Who do they think is going to look after your children for 3 days whilst you are there?

Spot on, really.

I've been to many child-free weddings and none of them have involved this level of drama. Majority of parents are enjoyed the chance to let their hair down. Brides and grooms have understood if it's not possible for some guests to make it, and usually have found other ways to celebrate with them. A wedding is just a wedding, there's really no need to take offence over how some people choose to do theirs.

Most of my parent friends have told me very firmly that if I marry DP, it had better be child-free, because they expect to party properly.

Anyway, if OP really feels there's no way she could make attending the wedding work, she could do what one of my friend's sisters did in a similar position many years ago - send her apologies with a bottle of fizz and some delicious baked goods, then a few weeks later take the happy couple out for a slap-up lunch (when her kids were in nursery, I think). No offence taken at any point by anyone involved.

If she makes an exception for her niece and nephew, she would need to allow other guests to bring their children too.

No she wouldn't. It is quite normal to have family children only. I don't think I've ever been to a wedding where children other than family were invited. The only way that would be an issue is if her husband to be has a load of nieces and nephews.

Oh that is tricky isnt it.
I do see a lot of no-children weddings.
Could your in-laws watch the children while you go for the ceremony and meal and then come home.

Child free wedding is one thing. Expecting the parents of a young child and a 6 month old to leave them for three days is quite another.

Who will look after your kids if you go? If you have a 6 month old at that time, you could be possibly feeding?

Perhaps it isn't going to be the sort of wedding 'party' that is suitable for children. Weddings take all shapes and fun these days!

Children really do impact on nature of an event so it is reasonable for them to say no children but it is also reasonable for you to decline the 3 days especially when you have a baby in arms! But I guess you dont want to miss your sister wedding so perhaps you could attend the main day ceremony and reception but leave the serious partying to those without children. Maybe you sister would even be up for letting the children come to the ceremony and agreeing a time when it becomes an adult only space.

Good luck. I hope you manage to work it out where everyone feels included in such a special occasion.

I had a wedding when my dc1 was 6 months, he wasn’t really eating food and wouldn’t take a bottle. We flew in to the country and they told us for the first time our baby wasn’t invited. I was so furious. They are separated now.

Did you just not attend the wedding then?

Yes, I agree its unlikely to be the cost.

I suspect its the vibe and the hotel she has chosen etc.

If it was just cost, she could easily make a "costly"(!) exception for her only relative children; two very young children "off-menu" seriously wouldn't cost much, and its perfectly ok to invite children who are immediate family (only two including a very young baby) but not open it up wider.

So I agree, it isn't cost dictating the decision.

Agreed.

Nope i breastfed all my kids till they were 2 from the boob, ide be saying nope. We went to a child free wedding but it was local and only for a few hours when our youngest was a baby. No way would i leave them for a long weekend!

I say child free wedding, but the bride and grooms kids were there and the grooms sisters newborn baby and toddler were there but they were the only children.

Your sister is being ridiculous 🙄.
Just politely decline and if they want you there then they will change their mind, if not then thats that.