Just wait until they have kids.....

[prufrock]

We have been invited to a wedding soon. It's one of dh's best mates (actually the guy he was with when I first met him, who I thought was really cute) They have specified no kids. Now that's fine, we did the same but he's the last one of our group to get married, so now all of us have kids so it makes it a bit more difficult and the wedding is down near Devon, and they, and all their friends come from London, so it's not like we can just go for the afternoon/evening.
But we'd sorted it out, that dd will go to MIL's and ds (who will only be 4 months and bf) will come with us and we would get a babysitter to look after him. So I called to say that was what we were doing, and would it be OK if ds comes to the church (timing/location will make it difficult for feeds otherwise) AND THEY SAID NO!

Now I can totally understand them not wanting toddlers running about, and I can understand them not wanting to have to pay for meals for children, but saying no to a 4 month old baby being at the bloody church!
Now I don't know what to do. If I leave ds at the hotel for the service it will mean being away for one of his main feeds, and he's not brilliant at taking bottles, and if he doesn't feed well at 11.30 he won't sleep properly at lunch and so will be grumpy baby for the babysitter for the rest of the afternoon. Plus it means an extra 3-4 hours babysitting at £9 an hour, which when we are already paying £210 for the hotel, and petrol to get there, and outfits and presents and £81 babysitting for the afternoon/evening..... you get the picture.

"But Mr Justice Lindsay said weddings were public occasions according to the Book of Common Prayer.

As part of the ceremony involved allowing any member of the public declare reasons why the marriage should not proceed.

"It would be absurd to make the wedding so secure as to exclude any possible objectors," said Justice Lindsay.

"It is an affirmation of a new relationship, a public sign of a private arrangement."
"

thats on the zeta wedding hoo ha

I'd tell them you have to stay at the hotel, as you will need to sit down to bf and don't fancy sitting down on a tombstone!

We were invited a wedding when ds was 6 months old - fortunately he was invited too! I ended up breastfeeding him in the church, as the bride walk back up the aisle! But it did keep him quiet!

I am quite cross about his and you dont want t se the fish angry

I think what your friend has asked you to do is unreasonable. We simply didn't invite children on the invitations to our wedding, but also took the time to explain to people it was because children get bored, don't really enjoy being there and eventually start whining. People with babies however, were a different thing. Children can be left happily all day with a relative, but babies aren't so accommodating. So we said babies were fine. In then end, some people were offended when they saw the babies there, but their children were around the 10yo mark and that is a totally different kettle of fish. I found myself having to explain my actions on my own wedding day! It wasn't even a money issue (meals etc) its just that children get bored at weddings.
On the day, we had a 4 yo, (my bridesmaid) a 19 month old, and 2 x 4 week old babies and that was it. They were all in bed after the meal and speeches with a shared babysitter arranged by the hotel, so the parents could relax.
Anyway, enough of my rambling, what I wanted to say was, don't go. Babies are different to children, I can see why they said no children, but think they are being totally unreasonable about your bf baby.

growl

I disagree Ithink they should be allowed to go - its family life - but thats your choice.

why does t bother you if kids get bored? surely its the prents problem?
my friend has doen this - invited selected kids but ignored her godson - who she inicdentally said she didnt like as mucha s another friends baby recently

hulababy, I'm with you on this one. I find the exclusion of children from weddings very sad . I don't think it makes me old fashioned - I have never been invited to a wedding where children have been unwelcome or excluded and I find the whole idea rather strange.

what if they banned women?
or black people?

My MIL tried to ban children from our wedding- told her to get stuffed (we have loads of kids in our family). I like children at weddings stops everyone getting too up their own arses!

We've taken DSs to 3 weddings and for 2 of those I wish they'd been child free. At one (BILs) I spent the whole time entertaingin DS1 (2 1/2) or feeding/entertaining DS2 (6 months) or nipping up to the room to ensure they were sleeping safely - not very enjoyable. On the other I was pregnant with DS2, DS1 was 18 months old and I missed the vows because I was changing him, I missed the speeches because I was trying to get him to stay with the children's entertainer and spent the evening, you've guessed it, checking on him in the room. The only wedding they were "good" at was where DS1 fell asleep underneath a table and DS2 slept in his pram.

In fact, the parents of DHs godson said they wouldn't be bringing their children, even though we'd specifically invited them, as they wanted some child free time.

I'd never heard of children being excluded from weddings until recently. I find it really strange too. I think it's lovely having children in attendance as well as elderly friends and relations not just people who fit in. But then I am old fashioned as there seem to be a lot of new fangled unfamiliar wedding conventions that have been introduced these days. I can't imagine that weddings in Italy, France or Spain are child free zones are they?

Very, very rude and unreasonable of them.

When we arranged our wedding, we did not take the attitude that it was "our" day. I just don't agree with this attutude. If you are going to invite guests, it is as much "their" day too. If you know they have children, I think it is really inconsiderate to say they can't bring them as it makes life very difficult for that family in terms of organisation.

If the guests want to bring their children (or need to because there is no-one else to look after them), they know they can. If they want to come without the kids, they can make that choice.

Don't you think it's their day and they ought to be able to choose how they want to have it?

I too think it's sad, and that weddings are really "about" children, and that having them there makes everyone behave altogether better & be more relaxed - all kind of good reasons - but I am not sure that reasonableness-or-not is the point here - it is more like an issue of say a bride having set her heart on purple flowers only.

So I think you have to appear to take them seriously and say sorry, but you hope they understand their ban on all offspring means that with such a very young baby you cannot be there. (Then you may find them begging you to come - at which point you have leverage.)

And yes ANYONE can walk into the church and sit during the service - that's the law - so there. Bloody ridiculous. GGGRRRR!

We only invited 4 kids, who were close to US: my best friend's two elder kids (her youngest one was allergis to cats and would have been a handful anyway, so was left in Wales, and No.4 was still just a small bump) and my old boss's two adopted kids - who I had "adopted" at the same time as my "adopted neice and nephew". The best man didn't want to bring his kids as they wanted to enjoy "child free" time - plus it would have been hassle to look after them as well as being best man. One SIL (who dh is close to) had young kids that didn't want to bring and the other SIL (who dh doesn't get on with so well) who at the time had kids ranging in age from 4 to 20 was only being invited on sufference, so her kids definitely weren't coming (I'm not even sure I had met them at that time!).

It worked because we didn't have that many other friends with young kids - and none with babies - and those children that were there were "special" to us.

I can see both points of view - but at the end of the day, it's the wedding couple's day - although they need to understand the implications of their requests.

Prufrock - agree with everyone else etc, but you know what, I suspect they JUST SIMPLY DON'T UNDERSTAND...

I say that because, at the risk of being thrown out of MN, I have to confess that DH & I were EXACTLY the same when we got married:

• we said 'no kids' because I was sick of going to weddings with screaming kids running up the aisle and we couldn't really afford £16 per child for chicken nuggets and chips.
• an old university friend of mine had a 4 month old, baby who she was still breastfeeding, and like you, she asked if she could bring him to the church (other two children were going to grandparents). I'm ashamed to say that I also said 'No' . As far as I was concerned, I didn't understand the difference between babies needs and children's needs.
• I didn't realise a baby wasn't just 'something' that could be left anywhere with anyone
• didn't have a clue about breastfeeding and times of feeds etc In the event, my friend just turned up with the baby anyway, and when he cried during the service her dh went outside the church with him.

I was a bit pissed off, but never said anything.

Finally, about 2 years later, when we had our own DS1 and were invited somewhere without him, I suddenly realised what a complete bitch I'd been. But I honestly hadn't meant to be...

I suggest you call your friend and explain the situation - WHY you can't leave DS anywhere, WHY he will need feeding etc. Be polite, but firm "I'm not sure that perhaps you fully understand the needs of a small baby"
If they still say 'no' then you have a choice, either don't go, or turn up with him anyway - bet they don't notice.

I have now been to two 'no children' weddings - both of youngish couples who are both unlikely to have children, if not ever, then for a very long time. One was since DD was born, but luckily it was in the same town as we live and my parents were able to look after DD. I called home after the wedding ceremony to check on her too.

Have to say that we went to a wedding reception recently with DD and she didn't get bored at all. Once the music and dancing started she was away, dancing all night and having a fantastic time. As were my cousin's children. DD finally fell asleep, in the corner on the floor, at about 10pm.

prufrock, i'm sorry but i agree with binkie et al. i also think you don't have much of a leg to stand on since you didn't have children at your own wedding! presumably the bride and groom don't want them for the same reasons you didn't want them then? it's their day, and i agree it's sad, but you should of course turn down the invite without a qualm if the conditions placed upon it are unreasonable...

cross posted with mo2, is it worth explaining to them in more detail what it will mean?

ooh ho! lol at that bit Pru! didnt see you didnt have htem!

Think you should stay at the hotel and join the recption/meal later ! Not rude at all.

just in case i'm sounding too pious, i wasn't keen on kids at our wedding either, but thank goodness dh talked me round - it was the right thing. but there is no way i would have understood the implications of not inviting the kids to parents of small children then.