Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Parenting

For free parenting resources please check out the Early Years Alliance's Family Corner.

Original poster

DS not invited to brother's wedding

184 replies

shawad · 09/12/2008 10:00

What would you do - I'm supposed to be his best man, and my son will be the only 'child' who is being excluded by their 'no children' policy (other than 2 friends who wouldn't have brought their children anyway).

He'll be 20 months, and #2 is on the way and will be 4 months by then (next August). Both will be too much to leave with the mother in law.

It's not really that much of a surprise, she doesn't like children, and doesn't want any herself, but I had hoped that she'd have been talked round by my brother.

My parents are both upset and angered by the decision, as are my wife and I. We see the wedding as a family event, and she is joining our family so better get used to children being part of it. She sees her wedding as a big party for her friends, to the point my Parents aren't even getting to invite any of their family/friends.

I'm most disappointed with my brother in all this - it's his wedding too, so I think he should be putting his foot down and having his family there, but he's probably just wanting to keep the peace.

At the moment I've decided that I can't be his best man (although I've not told him yet), my wife will probably be staying at home to look after both kids, and I'm not even sure I want to go now at all.

Am I overreacting? What have other ppl on here done when they've been in this situation?

OP posts:
BitOfFun · 09/12/2008 12:07

I get that people can see a wedding as a family event, but it's not like the baby is gonna care! I do tend to think people get a bit precious about these things, and it makes me think that when I get married I'd probably rather do it on our own abroad or something and just have a party when we get back where I wouldn't give a crap about who came. Which is a shame, because if you think about it, creating all this hoo-haa and argy-bargy is far more likely to spoil an important day for the couple getting married than who they invite or don't is likely to impact on your life in the long run. Lighten up, I reckon, it's not about you.

squeaver · 09/12/2008 12:11

I've been to weddings with loads of children there and I've been to weddings with no children there. And the ones with no kids are SO much better (for all the reasons traceybath and wannabe give)

Personally, I would love to go to a wedding without my dd. And it is up to the couple getting married (whether that couple is dominated by one party or not) to decide what they want.

Honestly, my advice to the OP is suck it up. Or you'll end up with an even bigger row and many more hurt feelings. If you say to your brother that you won't be his best man, he will never speak to you again. Consider that.

ComeOVeneer · 09/12/2008 12:14

Oh come off it FF, "they are dead to us"? Nobody really speaks like that. It is a wind up for sure.

Interested in this thread?

Then you might like threads about these subjects:

Families General parenting Weddings
familyfeud · 09/12/2008 12:16

As far as we are concerned, they don't exist.

McDreamy · 09/12/2008 12:17

All because of the wedding or is there more to it than that?

pooka · 09/12/2008 12:18

While the baby might not care, by excluding the children, the brother is essetially excluding one or other of the parents who will have to stay at home and look after said childrne.

I had this problem when my dcs (2.5 and 4 weeks) were not invited to a very good friend's wedding. While ahppy to leave dd with my mother, ds was 4 weeks old and breastfed and could not be left. End result was that I couldn't go and that dh went but left asap (his decision - he was cross).

skidoodle · 09/12/2008 12:18

BitOfFun - it's really not that hard to keep everybody happy if you are just a little bit flexible. If you plan your wedding according to what kind of family and close friends you have and what particular needs will have to be met then you can put something together that most people will enjoy.

People you are less close to can always choose not to go if your arrangements (e.g. child-free, too far away etc.) don't suit them. For very close family and friends who you expect to be there and who would be devastated to miss that, you need to compromise a bit so they can make it (maybe they are broke, or ill so can't travel, maybe they have a small baby, whatever)

If you're being generally agreeable, you will be shielded by others from any really unreasonable demands.

Wedding guests are mostly incredibly accommodating and will really go out of their way not to cause any hassle for their hosts.

And no, it's not my time of the month. I'm just genuinely shocked at what I've read. My brother got married in September and had a child-free wedding because that's what SIL wanted. My DD was 5 months old, my sister's DS 6 weeks. There was never any question that they would be coming. If SIL had excluded them my family would have been really hurt and upset. I think she would have done permanent damage to her relationship with my mother and my mother has the patience of a saint (very unlike me, I realise)

chequersandroastedchestnuts · 09/12/2008 12:19

See I don't mind going to stuff without DH - my cousin is having an engagement party in the new year 200 miles away and I think I'll just go without them both. It's only one night.

chequersandroastedchestnuts · 09/12/2008 12:22

"Wedding guests are mostly incredibly accommodating and will really go out of their way not to cause any hassle for their hosts."

Definitely not always the case.

I still think you were very rude to pinkjenny and unnecessarily so.

BitOfFun · 09/12/2008 12:23

Skidoodle, I'm starting to think it might be my time of the month- do you ever have days where you just think jeez, bugger the lot of ya then? I think I probably need to get off the computer- luckily I am not planning said wedding until I am considerably richer, so hopefully the PMT will have receded by then

iggypiggy · 09/12/2008 12:27

Just a small point of view from someone who has just got married.

We don't have children (ttc at the mo) - none of our siblings or cousins have children. My mum wanted us to ban children from the wedding - however we didn't. I quite liked the idea of it being a big celebration for all ages - so some of our friends brought their children - some didn't - we left it up to them.

I think weddings are really tricky, but I totally understand when people prefer not to invite children - after all it's their special day - everyone has the right to choose what they do for their wedding.

Incidentally - my parents invited some of their friends too - but they also did contribute to the wedding. If you are paying for it yourselves - you should do whatever you want - it's your day and no-one elses. So back to OP - I think Juules' original response was best

jujumaman · 09/12/2008 12:30

This is such a mumsnet perennial

People without kids want childfree weddings because they just don't get what a hassle it is to find childcare at weekends/overnight etc. They're not trying to hurt you personally, they are just insensitive. As soon as they have kids they almost invariably regret their decision and realise how unreasonable they were being. So many of my friends have said that to me. And so many are now no longer talking to friends/relations because dcs were excluded. It's such a shame.

Talk to your brother. Don't get too emotional and go on about this being a family affair as that only gets backs up. Say calmly it's a logistical thing that you have no one to leave the children with and that therefore your dw can't attend. Say if your dcs came you would take them out of the church if they kicked off during the vows, ditto the speeches at the reception. But if he still says no, then you should still be best man. It's simply not worth the alternative of an everlasting feud.

SazzlesIsASleighBell · 09/12/2008 12:31

We had a child free wedding (otherwise children would have been >1/3 of the guests

However the 4 nieces and nephews were invited, my cousin's daughter (from NZ as no real childcare options as aunt & uncle obv at wedding) and a breastfed 4 month old. My other cousins came on their own and left their OH at home with their children. I think you can make reasonable exceptions, and in the case of the OP think that very close family should be an exception

I am going to a wedding in Sept (DD's will be 2.6 and 12 months) and I am SO looking forward to going without the DD's to have a lovely time without chasing under tables as another poster said.

SazzlesIsASleighBell · 09/12/2008 12:35

Oh, and all the people with DC's stayed at the hotel where the wedding & reception was so children could go for naps/go to bed when they wanted so no real disruption to the day from overtired children and parents got to enjoy the evening with us and not bail out early - is this a possibility?

KristinaM · 09/12/2008 12:41

i think that inviting someone who has babies of 4 montsh and 20 montsh and not inviting the babies is effectively excluding them. Is a 4 month old to starve for the duration of the wedding? Not everyone can express. Not everyone has a handy babysitter. Its like inviting someone who uses a wheelchair when there is no access

I'm not saying that the bride and groom dont have the right to make that choice. I'm just saying they shoudl have discussed it with their best man first - its inconsiderate

Sawyer64 · 09/12/2008 12:41

I've been married twice,and at my first wedding,paid for by my parents,only close family kids were invited.At the 2nd wedding,we paid for it all,and each morsel of food and drink was "accounted" for,we couldn't have had friends kids,as we were on a strict budget and could barely afford the 40 guests we did have.

However saying that,I would never have "turned down" a perfectly reasonable request IMO, if someone was BF or had recently had a baby and didn't feel happy or couldn't leave them with someone.

Would seem sensible to talk to DB, and say whilst you understand their wishes for a "childfree" wedding,surely there are certain circumstances where this could be lifted when the baby is so young.I'd send the older child to a close relative or friend,as they will be oblivious,and take the baby whatever.

flowerytaleofNewYork · 09/12/2008 12:46

familyfeud so even though your DS was invited to the wedding, because he was excluded from the actual service portion of the day, your BIL and SIL are now 'dead' to you? You can't possibly be serious.

dollius · 09/12/2008 12:48

I don't have a problem with child-free weddings, but you can't exclude breast-feeding babies in my opinion, because they are still physically attached to their mothers and can't be separated for a whole day, certainly not overnight.

Do you think your DW is likely to be breast-feeding your littlest at the time of the wedding? If so, you should probably tell your brother that you won't be able to come if you can't bring the baby.

I would second Sawyer, and ask your MIL to look after your eldest, but insist on taking the baby with you. It's too much to expect someone to leave their 4-month-old baby for such a long time.

wannaBe · 09/12/2008 12:53

clearly familyfude is either:

A troll, in which case it is best not to feed it.

or she is the sil from hell in which case the family is best shot of her anyway.

BitOfFun · 09/12/2008 12:55

Blimey, familyfeud- I'm surprised you got invited at all with that attitude. It must have been like the bad fairy godmother at the christening with you going all cat's arse mouth in the corner.

familyfeud · 09/12/2008 12:55

The service is the main family part of the day - he should have been invited to it.

beanieb · 09/12/2008 12:56

I thik it's quite mean to invite you as such an integral part of the wedding and then not invite your kids, but at the same time it is their choice and they are free to make it.

You Say "to the point my Parents aren't even getting to invite any of their family/friends."

I find it a bit odd that anyone would expect to be able to invite friends or extended family to a wedding when they are not in charge of the guestlist so I think you are wrong to be even slightly upset about this.

Also you seem to be blaming the bride, I assume the couple have made these decisions together.

morningpaper · 09/12/2008 12:59

agree with juules first post - just be factual about it, your wife will have to stay and look after the children

harpsichordcarrier · 09/12/2008 13:06

I once went to a wedding where the B&G excluded all children (they offered a random nanny we had never met to look after them - I saw her in the afternoon with about 10 children )
when we got to the reception, they had brought their dog and he had a great big dog bed by the top table
dogs welcome.
by not children.
nice
I hope that now they have children of their own they are embarrassed but I doubt it.

catweazle · 09/12/2008 13:09

I think there is a world of difference between not inviting children of friends because of numbers, but to exclude immediate family is not fair. We always get this crap about "their day" on these threads. Weddings are about the joining of 2 families, not about a woman playing "princess for a day".

We took our DD to 2 weddings this year (she was invited ) when she was 11 mo. There were other children there. None of them created a disturbance or screamed though the speeches, and none of them spoiled the day.

OP I think your brother is being totally unreasonable. I'd be inclined to have a quiet word with him.