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 3 4 5

Original poster

to be annoyed that my close cousin doesnt want my DS (her godson) at her wedding?

113 replies

santapaws · 28/04/2009 11:28

I know the whole "kids at weddings" debate is a funny one, but she says that if she has my DS, she would have to invite the other 19 kids of people that are coming.

She is godmother only to my son though and was chief bridesmaid at my wedding (apprantely, i dont qualify as a bridesmaid at her wedding but thats another AIBU!)

Im not demanding that he play a part in the wedding, but just not to be excluded, especially when the only babysitters i really have will be at the bloody wedding!

My mum has "sided" with her saying, i'll have a much better time without him there! I have yet to convince my (very skeptical) husband of this fact.

He will be 5 when they get married.

OP posts:

wombleprincess · 28/04/2009 14:26

sorry, "her" wedding, or even, their wedding..

FrankMustard · 28/04/2009 14:27

twofallas - you're lucky then.I've been to many a wedding where parents have been upset that they couldn't attend because their children weren't included. Not all parents want to go without their children esp if they're going to be seeing relatives they've not seen for years etc.
I'm not saying all wedding have to have children at them but my point was that if there are a lot of children in the families of those involved and if the bride and groom want to have a big wedding with loads of guests, then I personally feel it's a tad unfriendly to exclude sections of the guest list p0urely because they think they might "ruin" the day. Weddings AREN'T all about the bride and groom - if you're hosting a wedding, you need to be a good host and guests like to feel they're been considered. Just my opinion.

DandyLioness · 28/04/2009 14:28

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

GColdtimer · 28/04/2009 14:34

but the thing is, if all the children had come we would have had to strike 20 people off our guest list (budget and space). Friends and family we wanted to share our day with would have not been able to come otherwise. Which would have been a real shame. 5 years down he line, our friends still talk about what a great wedding ours was so it coldn't have been that sterile and boring .

But, as I said, we didn't exclude, just explained our situation to our very understanding friends who actually welcomed the chance to let their hair down with people they hadn't seen for a long time. I don't think we were bad hosts.

Morloth · 28/04/2009 14:37

Look the people whose names are on the invitation are the people who are invited. If you don't like it then don't go. This really is very simple.

FrankMustard · 28/04/2009 14:38

twofalls - sorry, didn't mean to imply that YOU had been bad host! Was just referring to those brides and grooms who didn't have an particular reason for ewxcluding the kids other than not wanting them ruining their ceremony etc and in situations where there were people who were unhappy about how it had all been done. Mainly having a go about my brother really because his fiancee has categorically stated that she won't stand for any children making noise during the vows..[hmm}

jack99 · 28/04/2009 14:39

Twofalls - the crucial point is you did not issue a ban, left it as a choice. And a lot of the dcs were under 2. 5 year olds would be less work for parents than a small toddler. My own dcs have loved weddings from very early ages and NEVER screamed out in the church (too busy looking at the pretty windows!).

Though appreciate issues over costs. That's why buffets can be a lot better, not so stiff and "sterile" !

jellybeans · 28/04/2009 14:40

DL That was directly in response to you saying that the bride 'does not have to consider guests situations/childcare'. Glad you had a great time at child free weddings. I think having all ages there, little people and big, makes the atmosphere better and more family like. Nothing can be cuter than little bridesmaids etc running around! Anyway, back to OP, I agree with the idea go for the service/photos etc and then go if you have no childcare. There will be other guests with the same issues.

jellybeans · 28/04/2009 14:42

Twofalls, I too think it's great you gave a choice.

DandyLioness · 28/04/2009 14:45

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

pavlovthepregnantcat · 28/04/2009 14:47

Pain as it is, its their wedding, and if this is the case, then that is how it is.

Not fair to put even more pressure on a couple at a time when they will be getting pressure from here, there and everywhere about making this concession, that concession.

yabu.

GColdtimer · 28/04/2009 14:47

Jack99 and FrankMustard . I do see the points you are both making and can see what you mean about people who issue bans because they don't want a bit of noise at the service. That was definitely not our reasoning. And I think if the children had been older we wouldn't have had a problem at all. It was just the thought of hassled parents trying to control all those toddlers and not enjoying themselves. Our prime aim was for everyone to have fun.

I was at a wedding recently when a 3 year old exclaimed loudly "crikey, that is a really funny looking lady" when the long haired, hippy vicar started to speak. It was very funny. I don't suppose your future SIL would have liked that though FrankMustard?

jellybeans · 28/04/2009 14:49

DL..sorry..think have mixed you up with someone else then. Anyway, that quote was in response to them. My DD has been one too. I always wanted to be one as a child but never got asked to! When I did get chance (in my 20s) I was literally about to have twins (and like a house) so couldn't do it! Ah well. Each to their own I say

GColdtimer · 28/04/2009 14:52

jellybeans, it was a choice, but we biased it when we told everyone that FIL had been stockpiling champagne for the previous 2 years

nappyaddict · 28/04/2009 14:57

I can understand why people sometimes say no children at the service but not at the evening reception.

MrsTittleMouse · 28/04/2009 15:15

Weddings aren't necessarily completely happy occasions. I have told this story on MN before, but I'm happy to bore you all with it again.

Not long before we were married, we had a couple of very nasty bereavements. Our wedding was therefore a very emotional event, and I wasn't even sure if I'd be able to make it through the vows. As a result, we wanted a very small, intimate wedding. Unfortunately, the children of one couple that we invited were very lively and noisy. Nothing wrong with that, but not appropriate for our wedding, especially as the parents were of the "aren't our toddler cute" variety that don't take them out if they kick off. We weren't going to do one rule for one, and one for another, so we didn't have any children at the wedding. If they had run around (the tiny venue) and jumped on my dress etc. it wouldn't have been a laugh and a funny story to tell our grandchildren, it would have really upset me.

Before anyone jumps on me as a typical childless nutter who changes their mind as soon as they reproduce themselves, I have a baby and a toddler now, and my feelings are still the same. I have taken my DDs to funerals as babies - but I have sat at the back and whisked them out at the first murmur, and I am quite happy to go to a wedding without them and have a boozy knees-up.

expatinscotland · 28/04/2009 15:23

Kids at weddings suck. Invariably one or more kick off in church and the parents do nothing to discipline their little angels so the other guests don't get to enjoy the ceremony for the disruption.

Then at the reception they're allowed to run amok and usually do because they're bored whitless and usually trip people on the dance floor, knock things over, all whilst the parents chuckle over what a cutey they've brought along.

I never had a wedding because I eloped, but if I had, I wouldn't have wanted kids there.

I wouldn't evne take my own.

It's not 'about family', it's about getting pished and having a knees up with food .

MorrisZapp · 28/04/2009 16:12

What expat said.

I was at a wedding and a couple up the back of the registry office had a newborn in their arms which screamed as if it was being murdered throughout the vows.

Nobody could hear the vows at all and the bride and groom had to shout. People kept whipping their heads round to give 'evils' to the couple, but they just smiled beatifically as if to say 'yes, he's ours! isn't he perfect!'.

Mothers of bride and groom were fuming. It's all very well saying 'people can remove their kids if they misbehave' but the thing is, they generally think their own kids are so lovely that the mayhem is 'cute', and they're busy getting trolleyed anyway.

YABU and obviously you know it now!

cheekster · 28/04/2009 16:20

I hate the whole - exclude children from weddings.

You wouldnt exclude older family members e.g. great grandmas because they moan too much and let their mouths say anything because they know they can get away with it

But for some reason, people think its ok to exclude children. Because they may make noise in church and run around??????

They are part of the family FGS!!!!!

Im totally with you on this santapaws, YANBU. If I were invited to a wedding and DS wasnt I definatly wouldnt be going.

But then I love children and spend my whole life, work etc around them. Some people just arent that child friendly!

MorrisZapp · 28/04/2009 16:24

Enough already comparing children to old people - hardly the same.

pagwatch · 28/04/2009 16:29

I got married nearly 20 years ago so my views are far from relevent.

But if I were getting married the people I would exclude would be those who bitch and whine about how I want to organise my wedding.
God above - people talk about bridezillas but i think the guests are worse.

A couple getting married useally fret and worry about getting it right according to how they think the ideal wedding would be. That is a moveable feast and they will ALWAYS have guests who feel differently ( as evidenced on this thread).

If the requirements of the bride and groom are so offensive to you that you feel the need to complain, moan, be outraged or offended THEN DECLINE THE FARKIN INVITATION as you clearly don't actually like them enough to place their pleasure on the day above your own.

pagwatch · 28/04/2009 16:31

Oh FGS. Ignore me. I am grumpy.

cheekster · 28/04/2009 16:31

I never said they were the same????

At the end of the day it is up to the bride and groom how they want their wedding, but if it was me I would wish them well but refuse the invitation. I wouldnt be at all comfortable at a wedding knowing my child wasnt welcome there.

MrsTittleMouse · 28/04/2009 16:33

Yes, of course. I obviously hate children.

MorrisZapp · 28/04/2009 16:39

cheekster, it isn't just about 'being welcome' - your kid will cost then ca £40 a head, and your friends will all have kids there too.

Obviously is your choice which weddings you go to, but I'm personally baffled as to what right thinking, god fearing, red blooded woman wouldn't thank the good lord above for a reason to buy a new dress, get glammed up, have copious amounts of champagne and dance to Abba till midnight without her kids to worry about!

Is it just me?

Flip

1 2 3 4 5

Swipe left for the next trending thread