magnificent_baby Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 Adult only weddings irritate me. Probably because they are rare here (midwest) and also very rare in my family. I also think it should be explicitly pointed out on the invitation. I never look at who the invite is addressed to and the envelope is always recycled or tossed immediately. Don't beat around the bush because it makes it very awkward to have to guess or call other people to find out when you've heard it through the grapevine. Announce it somehow on the invite. I am also less likely to attend unless the whole family is invited, it shouldn't bother me but it does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellie Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 The invitation is the heads up. If it doesn't include the kids names or "Mr and Mrs Smith and kids" than the kids are not invited. Most invitations go out well in advance of the wedding. :iagree: I was going to say that but I chickened out, lol. So many people do not understand invitation etiquette. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ktgrok Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 The invitation is the heads up. If it doesn't include the kids names or "Mr and Mrs Smith and kids" than the kids are not invited. Most invitations go out well in advance of the wedding. I believe etiquette is 4 weeks prior, which really isn't long enough for people making plane reservations etc. So I do think people traveling by plane should get a heads up, just so they can make some decisions. I wouldn't leave my kids with a baby sitter I don't know in a city that I'm traveling too. So I'd arrange for just one parent to go, or we'd send regrets, if kids were not invited. I'd want to know that before making plane reservations, which most people do 2 months out at least. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldberry Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 I used to think adult only weddings were a bit uppity (not offended or anything, just an opinion) until I started hearing some of the stories. Fortunately the weddings I have attended may have had a few rowdy children on the dance floor, a couple of criers during the ceremony that were quickly rushed out, etc. No big deal. Some of the stories... let's just say if I had been at any of those weddings I could see why an adult only wedding would be a serious option. The worst one was someone who did a ton of beautiful DIY work. The second a certain kid got there, he went around tearing things down and destroying everything. The bridal party tried to stop him when they could, but the parents did nothing but weakly say, "Stop it Johnny..." as he ran around. DIY takes so much work and it was supposedly quite beautiful... before it was all destroyed by a single kid. Yep, I would seriously be adult-only or elopement. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ktgrok Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 :iagree: I was going to say that but I chickened out, lol. So many people do not understand invitation etiquette. Actually, that includes people sending them! We got one recently and it just had the adults' names on it. I assumed kids were not going. Decided to stay home with the kids and just send DH. Two days before, he talked with the bride who was telling him how she'd bought coloring books for the kids and couldn't wait to dance with them!!! Um...what? She BEGGED us to bring them. Mind you, the wedding was at 6pm or later, I forget, with the buffet dinner starting after 9pm. Really not a kid friendly event. SaveSave 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ktgrok Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 It can be so hard NOT to offend people with weddings. Kids only offends. Not inviting as many people because you do have kids there (expense) offends. Inviting someone you know probably won't come offends (gift grab). Not inviting them offends (left out!). That's why my second wedding (husband's first) we just went to Scotland and did it on our honeymoon, just us. We considered a destination wedding, but then those that can't afford to go end up with hurt feelings, and the people you really don't care about hosting DO have the money and show up, and that seemed silly. So we didn't invite anyone. And had a casual party when we got back. At our house. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seasider Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 But the least stress is elope/destination. I really do understand what you are saying with regard to drama and ill-mannered guests. However, I believe there is a significant difference between eloping and having a destination wedding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gardenmom5 Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 It is so sad, gardenmom, that you and I have dealt with and seen so many narcissists in action that we get why eloping is a necessity for so many people. I don't know if narcissism is actually worse than in previous generations or if it is just more socially acceptable to be ill mannered apes at formal events so not enough social pressure to conform to minimal decency standards. I doubt it is actually worse - but I do think it is more recognized, and people are more likely to push back instead of just "sucking it up" and tolerating it. and then there is the whole 70's thing of "say what you actually feel". (which seems to have taken a whole new level) after all, manners are just about being stuffy, as opposed to courteousness. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldberry Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 :iagree: I was going to say that but I chickened out, lol. So many people do not understand invitation etiquette. I think some people understand but just don't really care. It's a lot like FaithManor said, it's just narcissism. Too many people thinking, "That clearly doesn't apply to me." 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QueenCat Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 :iagree: I was going to say that but I chickened out, lol. So many people do not understand invitation etiquette. I was waiting for you to say it!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gardenmom5 Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 I really do understand what you are saying with regard to drama and ill-mannered guests. However, I believe there is a significant difference between eloping and having a destination wedding. only in that a destination wedding is known to others in advance, and others can come - if they're willing to shell out (sometimes $$$$+ PER PERSON). I have nieces who deliberatly chose destination weddings to prevent a relative from coming. generally, when people elope, it's to avoid dealing with at least one relative. especially when the relative is the brides mother. (I have two - unrelated to each other - nieces who eloped to escape their mothers.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QueenCat Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 I believe etiquette is 4 weeks prior, which really isn't long enough for people making plane reservations etc. So I do think people traveling by plane should get a heads up, just so they can make some decisions. I wouldn't leave my kids with a baby sitter I don't know in a city that I'm traveling too. So I'd arrange for just one parent to go, or we'd send regrets, if kids were not invited. I'd want to know that before making plane reservations, which most people do 2 months out at least. We usually get invitations for non-local weddings further in advance. One out of town one that didn't include kids was near my parents. They found a sitter for me. She wasn't known to me but she was known to my parents. And I later figured out that her dad had been my art teacher in middle school. There was one that dh went to alone but it was more because it was a distant relative in his family and we didn't feel it was as important for me to go. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reefgazer Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 (edited) But let's be clear - their presence isn't really valued, or the kids would have been invited. *That's* the reason for the insulted feeling. It's not hard to provide childcare and a pizza for a group of kids, and if it's not affordable for the bride and groom, a provision for the parents to pay on-site sitters organized by the bride and groom isn't difficult to arrange. Because if you didn't invite them, they'd be insulted you didn't invite them. Edited September 14, 2016 by reefgazer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateReignRemix Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 But let's be clear - their presence isn't really valued, or the kids would have been invited. *That's* the reason for the insulted feeling. It's not hard to provide childcare and a pizza for a group of kids, and if it's not affordable for the bride and groom, a provision for the parents to pay on-site sitters organized by the bride and groom isn't difficult to arrange. I never expected my kids to be valued at every event to which I was invited 13 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murphy101 Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 But let's be clear - their presence isn't really valued, or the kids would have been invited. *That's* the reason for the insulted feeling. It's not hard to provide childcare and a pizza for a group of kids, and if it's not affordable for the bride and groom, a provision for the parents to pay on-site sitters organized by the bride and groom isn't difficult to arrange. What the heck? How often on these boards do parents comment about how hard it is for them to find childcare or to find it affordably just so they can have a date night with their spouse? Making childcare arrangements is a huge pita. One could just as easily argue, if it's really not that hard, the invitee doesn't really value going to the wedding or they'd make their own childcare arrangements for their own kids so they can go. 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valley Girl Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 But let's be clear - their presence isn't really valued, or the kids would have been invited. *That's* the reason for the insulted feeling. It's not hard to provide childcare and a pizza for a group of kids, and if it's not affordable for the bride and groom, a provision for the parents to pay on-site sitters organized by the bride and groom isn't difficult to arrange. People should not be required to provide daycare in order to prove they value their guests! That is a parental responsibility. I'm trying to think about what's involved with providing childcare for other people's children: you need the space. Not every venue has it or is willing to provide it at an extra, yet reasonable cost. How many babysitters will need to be hired? What if you don't have enough or have too many? What if you don't know someone you can personally vouch for? Plus, besides planning the wedding and all that comes with it, now you have to plan activities for the kids plus backup activities, food, etc. in case little Johnny isn't happy with what's offered. Oh, and liability? No thanks. Not dealing with that. It's lovely if people want to provide that accommodation and have the means to do so. But seriously. Come or don't come. Your kids, your responsibility. 12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KungFuPanda Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 Now I certainly wouldn't hold a grudge against someone who didn't want my kids at their wedding; I would just not attend. Here's the thing though: if you are running an out of town affair and ask a couple with young kids to attend and exclude those kids, it's almost a given that they can't attend. So why bother issuing the invite in the first place? If their presence was really valued, the kids would be invited and accommodated somehow. Because it's not a given for everyone. Some people with kids have no problem finding childcare. Even for some who find it difficult, they may pull it off for a wedding. It's more polite to invite someone and let them decline than it is to assume they can't manage and not invite them. I've gotten a sitter for a wedding. I've also taken my kids to a destination wedding. I've even declined to attend a wedding. It's different every time and I wouldn't expect a young, unmarried couple to understand those logistics. 10 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SproutMamaK Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 But let's be clear - their presence isn't really valued, or the kids would have been invited. *That's* the reason for the insulted feeling. It's not hard to provide childcare and a pizza for a group of kids, and if it's not affordable for the bride and groom, a provision for the parents to pay on-site sitters organized by the bride and groom isn't difficult to arrange. You think it's not a huge deal to -find a book both a church and reception venue that has extra facilities large enough to host a large group of children and caregivers -find a number of caregivers you trust, but don't care enough about personally to have already invited to your wedding, to look after children of people you care about - convince a facility that while their normal purpose is hosting events, you're going to use it like a daycare and that if anything goes wrong, their insurance will TOTALLY cover it, of course -convince your caterers to either charge very little for lots of extra kids, or to be okay with a secondary party like a pizza place bringing food to an event to which they have contracted? -convince the parents to be okay with their children being cared for, for hours on end, by people they may never have met. And if a bride and groom DON't do all of that because a parent doesn't want to find their own sitter for the day, the bride and groom are the selfish ones who don't value others? Um, ok. 12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellie Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 But let's be clear - their presence isn't really valued, or the kids would have been invited. *That's* the reason for the insulted feeling. It's not hard to provide childcare and a pizza for a group of kids, and if it's not affordable for the bride and groom, a provision for the parents to pay on-site sitters organized by the bride and groom isn't difficult to arrange. Wow. That's not really true at all. If you think it's "not hard to provide childcare and pizza for a group of kids," then you have never done it. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StephanieZ Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 I don't think it's offensive, but I don't personally like it. :) I think that if they used Save the Date cards, they could/should have included a comment about "adults only" on that card. Otherwise, I do agree that it'd have been thoughtful to have had the various parents/etc mention it to relatives with kids as far in advance as possible. Planning a trip for adults only is entirely different than bringing the kids . . . so I'd think that info should go on the Save the Date card one way or another if at all possible. All that said, I think it's fine if people want an adults only event. Some affairs are not suitable for kids. I also personally think that any babe-in-arms should be permitted to any event unless it is dangerous (sky diving, lol) *if* you want to make welcome nursing mothers. When I host adult events, we *always* explicitly allowed babes in arms to adult events. The purpose (for me) of having adult events is to allow parents to speak freely/dance/relax, not worry about kids getting into dangerous bonfires, etc. So, for my purposes, it has always worked fine to permit babes in arms. If I were hosting an adults-only wedding, I'd permit babes in arms (unless we were skydiving or similar, lol), and I'd also include the adults-only aspect as soon as possible via Save the Date or an intentional rumor mill. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FaithManor Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 Actually, that includes people sending them! We got one recently and it just had the adults' names on it. I assumed kids were not going. Decided to stay home with the kids and just send DH. Two days before, he talked with the bride who was telling him how she'd bought coloring books for the kids and couldn't wait to dance with them!!! Um...what? She BEGGED us to bring them. Mind you, the wedding was at 6pm or later, I forget, with the buffet dinner starting after 9pm. Really not a kid friendly event. SaveSave Wow! Serious oversight and planning problem on the part of the bride and groom. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carrie12345 Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 I should add, I did take 4 kids to my (first) cousin's wedding, and I spent the whole time... taking care of my kids! (Well, dh and I played Zone defense.) We chose to stay home from his brother's wedding, with our 5 kids, the following year. Didn't need them to spend a fortune for DH and I to parent in fancy clothes. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ktgrok Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 Wow! Serious oversight and planning problem on the part of the bride and groom. Agreed. However, they are very nice people. And there may be cultural issues, she is from India and her husband's family is from Trinidad, but has Indian background. However, the whole wedding thing was crazy. The rehearsal was at 2pm during the week, so everyone had to take off work. Then the rehearsal dinner was not following, it was at 8pm. And it was a pay for yourself event!!!! They wanted to do it at Medieval Times, and said to paypal the groom the money, with tickets at at discount. THEN!!! The DAY OF THE REHEARSAL he texts everyone to tell them he couldn't get discount tickets after all (probably not enough people) and to please paypal him the extra $20 per person!!!! Needless to say, DH did not go, and neither did I. (DH was performing the ceremony). So in comparison, leaving off the kids' names on the invitation,when meaning to invite them, was minor in comparison. Now, expecting kids at such a late event...that's another whole issue. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JennSnow Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 (edited) I should add, I did take 4 kids to my (first) cousin's wedding, and I spent the whole time... taking care of my kids! (Well, dh and I played Zone defense.) We chose to stay home from his brother's wedding, with our 5 kids, the following year. Didn't need them to spend a fortune for DH and I to parent in fancy clothes. So your husband missed his brother's wedding? I obviously don't know your situation but would it really have been IMPOSSIBLE to find a sitter for the day? If you absolutely couldn't have found a sitter couldn't your dh have just gone on his own so at least he was able to see his brother married? ETA: This really must be a regional/cultural thing because I'm having a really hard time wrapping my head around this "..our family is a package deal invite all of us or none of us will come.." mentality. I love my kids..I love spending time with them. My husband's brother was married about two months ago. The wedding was held in a town about an hour and a half away. While the wedding was primarily an adults only event the bride was very sweet and told us since we are close family the kids are of course welcome. Guess what..I got a sitter and the kids stayed home. My husband was in the wedding party so I knew he'd be occupied and I didn't want to spend the entire day entertaining and chasing my 4 year old around. I didn't want to have to possibly miss the vows if he decided to act up..I wanted to chat and catch up with folks I only get to see once a year..and sit down with a glass of wine and have nice dinner.. and dance with my husband..and enjoy coffee and cake while catching up with old friends and relatives. Edited September 14, 2016 by JennSnow 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jane in NC Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 Years ago my son was the ring bearer at a wedding. The couple hosted a picnic reception that included everyone but the rehearsal dinner (attended by the wedding party and out of town guests) was adult only. The groom's parents hired some college students to take the kids to a carnival and out for pizza. The kids had far more fun than they would have had at the fancy pants restaurant. We were very grateful. I'm surprised more couples don't elope. One bride to be was telling me recently that her husband's father is one of nine children. He expects all of his siblings, their spouses, their children, their grandchildren to be invited to the wedding. This is a list of about 100 people, most of whom the bride has never met. Granted many will probably not travel to the wedding. I asked the bride if the groom's father was ponying up for the cost of having all of these people at the wedding. She snorted. If the family culture is to get married, have a piece of cake and a glass of punch, then perhaps everyone can be accommodated. But most weddings that I have attended in recent years involve people traveling to the event. Meals are served (frequently the night before and then after the wedding). Limiting the number of people due to budgetary or venue restrictions seems reasonable to me. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-rap Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 I think I used to feel a little more judgy about things like that, but I don't anymore. In fact, probably going to a wedding alone with my husband and not worrying about my young children (which I don't have anymore) would even be fun! In my hometown, they were not uncommon. Which is I guess why I don't remember going to a single wedding in all the years I lived there! They seem far more uncommon here in the Midwest, and I personally do like the idea so much of an entire family, all ages, being part of the celebration. But if a bride and groom don't want that, that's fine with me too. I expect that young children would probably just be bored, anyway. Last year my nephew and his wife were married in a Las Vegas chapel. At first I thought, "What in the world??" But my dh, grown-up dd and I flew there to support them, and actually ended up having fun! (not that a wedding is supposed to be all about fun. :)) But it was a very sweet wedding. They even had a pastor. It was in a tiny little chapel on the grounds of a casino hotel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FaithManor Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 Wow. That's not really true at all. If you think it's "not hard to provide childcare and pizza for a group of kids," then you have never done it. EXACTLY THIS! I live in a rural county surrounded by rural counties. Churches have exactly ONE meeting place. One. One fellowship hall. Most Sunday School rooms are small. So where is this infamous bunch of kids supposed to meet for pizza away from the parents? What is the procedure for notifying parents when the two year old has a melt down that the teenagers can't get under control? Who is going to go get the pizza, serve it, clean up after it, and do the custodial work so the family isn't charged because Buford finger painted with pizza sauce on the walls. Frankly, a lot of churches have had to give up having VBS's because they can't get workers. No one wants to do it. It is hard work to deal with a large number of mixed age children, potty issues, food issues, potential food allergies,meltdowns, tired babies etc. And you have to find a place to have it, and you have to have all the emergency numbers handy, and you can't do anything that even smacks of bossing a kid around because the special snowflake parents will birth a cow when they find out about it, and you have to have a place to have it and in case of emergency that place has to be close at hand. We have a VFW hall, a Moose Lodge, and a Gun Club....none of these can seat more than 100, and also only have one meeting room. There are two golf courses that do weddings, but they have only one conference room/restaurant area and facility rules are no one under 13 admitted, and one county over the golf course that has a wedding venue says no one under 14. The schools do not rent their gyms anymore because the school schedule is heavy anyway, and they get a lot of damage because people aren't considerate anymore. It is a one hour drive each way to a hotel that could even do this. Average cost? $50 per head, two meat buffet, nothing fancy food wise. I have never priced out what they would charge for the second room and food for kids. No outside food allowed other than standard diaper bag fare due to county and state health codes for licensed facilities. Maybe in an urban venue if one can afford a wedding at a hotel with two conference rooms, it might be possible. I could see that. Paid staff in one room with the venue providing the pizza or kid friendly foods - likely to cost $20.00 per child possibly more depending on what is provided and how big the damage deposit on the room. I know that as much as I love my niece who is getting married next summer, there is no way in heck I'd volunteer my large home as a venue for a bunch of kids because I've seen her soon to be nieces and nephews and little cousins on the groom's side in action at a summer picnic, and I can't afford to fix everything that would end up broken here, nor the repaint job! On top of which, the "trusted babysitters" that most brides and grooms know are likely to be friends and family that are also invited to the wedding. I don't know many parents that are interested in leaving their kids alone with with a bunch of teens who are strangers to them. Since I listen often to the sounds of screaming babies in church and parents really don't make a move to take them out, I wouldn't trust them to sit in the back and head out at the first sign of crying. Doesn't happen that way. Not any more. As IMP used to say, Common sense is now so rare, it's a super power!" I totally get the no babes in arms thing as well. Sucks if you are the person with the baby, but other parents, a lot of other parents who are completely self centered, have ruined it for everyone else. Typical. However, if the bride and groom make an exception for one, the parents that they know will be considerate, they end up confronted with the anger and fit throwing of those that caused the rule in the first place none of which is a nice thing to have on your wedding day. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poppy Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 But let's be clear - their presence isn't really valued, or the kids would have been invited. *That's* the reason for the insulted feeling. It's not hard to provide childcare and a pizza for a group of kids, and if it's not affordable for the bride and groom, a provision for the parents to pay on-site sitters organized by the bride and groom isn't difficult to arrange. How insulting --- if they really wanted our family to attend they would have gluten free and dairy free meals! 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FaithManor Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 It can be so hard NOT to offend people with weddings. Kids only offends. Not inviting as many people because you do have kids there (expense) offends. Inviting someone you know probably won't come offends (gift grab). Not inviting them offends (left out!). Seen that too! I mean there is only so much money and space to go around. So if you invite the nieces and nephews but that means your parent's favorite pastor or priest can't come, or the neighbor lady that babysat for you and feels entitled to attend, or the grown up second cousins.... Where do you cut it off? That's the problem. There is always someone to offend. It is hard to justify the per head cost, if your venue isn't free and your food being provided by family and friends who are doing it out of love as a wedding gift to you, for young children over inviting more adults. It isn't likely to be all that meaningful to the young children invited, but very meaningful to the adults left out. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellie Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 If I had a large family, I'd have a very small wedding at the church, followed by a big reception at a park or someplace--not a big catered meal--where everyone could come. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
medawyn Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 I'm not a fan. Last year, I chose to have none of my kids go to my nephew's wedding because only my over-18yo was invited. I thought that was awful. I'm not having only one of my kids attend their first cousin's wedding. Yes, people can do what they want for their weddings, but when/if my kids have weddings, all first cousins are invited regardless of age. I'm way behind on this thread, but THIS is odd to me. I'm one of 32 first cousins on one side of my family and one of the oldest ones to boot. I could not imagine inviting part of a family. In my case, we had "no kids", but that was considered under 13ish (I think my youngest cousin at the time was 12). I certainly wouldn't have included one or two "child" members of a family but not the rest. Some of my cousins have followed my example and invited everyone in the family; others have invited just the aunts and uncles. We make up a crowd of close to 100 (with spouses and now the newest generation), so I'm never offended not to be invited or to have my kids not invited. That's a lot of mouths to feed! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
medawyn Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 What are we defining as children, btw? I had a "no kids" wedding, but really it was anyone 12/13 and up. It was a formal, seated black tie affair. We served a several course dinner. There were cigars at the reception (a big thing in my mom's family). As the parent of small children, I absolutely would NOT have wanted to chase after my little people at any part of the event. But by early teen years? Yee gods, I hope I've hammered enough civilization into them that they could at least be expected to behave themselves, if not enjoy themselves. Providing childcare (pizza/movie/sitter) sounds great in theory, if everyone is bringing children in the 6-10 range. But what about older babies and toddlers? Who, btw, are the ones most likely to cause the biggest disruptions. I will admit to being a little miffed when one of DH's friends made it clear that our two week old wasn't welcome (hello, I was willing to fly half way across the country, and I was looking forward to leaving the toddlers behind), because I do feel like nursing babies are a separate entity. But that was selfish on MY part, because I was looking forward to two nights of sleep interrupted by only one child, not 2-3. I still feel like it was/is the bride and groom's right to decide. And not because I think the day is "all about them," but because they (or their parents) are the hosts. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluegoat Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 I don't understand. Is that a stab at my parents' church? The event was private. We rented the facility. We paid the minister. It wasn't during a church service. That's pretty standard Protestant operating procedure AFAIK. I don't think it says anything about a church to expect that only invited guests attend a private event. She was rude for not taking the crying baby out regardless of whether the baby had been invited. It wasn't even someone with close ties to us who would be heartbroken to miss something. It was exceedingly strange, even to my parents. (None of their friends from church who didn't know us personally brought or sent gifts. I have no idea why they even came given no connection to us whatsoever. I guess they just like cake? Anyway, it was out of my control and yet another reason why we should've just eloped!) A stab? No. But the fact that a wedding can be a private event does relate to their theology of marriage or at least how it is being acted upon - what it suggests is that a wedding is essentially a kind of private affair. That is an idea that has become very common in our society, and I'm never very sure if churches that seem to accept that really embrace that deep down or whether it is just adopting the common attitude. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AimeeM Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 But let's be clear - their presence isn't really valued, or the kids would have been invited. *That's* the reason for the insulted feeling. It's not hard to provide childcare and a pizza for a group of kids, and if it's not affordable for the bride and groom, a provision for the parents to pay on-site sitters organized by the bride and groom isn't difficult to arrange. It can be difficult, yes. For large weddings, where you may be talking 50+ children (from infant through tweens), you would be talking MANY sitter and assuming the venue has several extra rooms to accommodate such a sitting arrangement (rooms that are also infant-proofed, toddler-proofed, etc). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julie Smith Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 I was the first one on my side of the family to have a no kids wedding. I have 32? older cousins - most married with kids. Of the 15 or so who live in Canada all got lived in, and got married in the same general area and had a wedding of 200+ people. Instead I had a destination wedding. (According to my complaining aunt) I got married at my in-laws house 45 minutes away from my parents house. The problem is that place was 5 hours from where almost everyone in my family lived. I also only invited my aunts and uncles, no cousins except one who I was closest to. She was also the photographer. I had 115 people at the wedding - including the two grooms, two brides, ... it was a double wedding, my husband's sister got married at the same time. To fit everyone in the house and the very near by reception area I had to limit my invite list to 35 people. That way we could fit everyone in, and everyone coming in from out of town could squeeze into my parents house. I do still laugh about the fact my one aunt talked about crazy selfish kids picking destination weddings forcing everyone to travel. She also complained about her son not being invited and showed up with him. It's not like she had to worry about babysitting. He was 20 at the time. (No he did not have any special needs). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skimomma Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 I don't care either way as long as the wedding couple accepts a polite decline to the invite if not including children is difficult for a guest for whatever reason. We have attended no kids weddings when we could arrange childcare and not attended when we couldn't. Of the weddings we have been invited to, most are kid-free. The only time it was an issue was one where dh was in the wedding and it was across the country. Dd was 4 and the wedding couple wanted us to just "call a service" to get a sitter to watch dd at our hotel room. That was not OK with us so dh flew out there alone and I stayed home with dd. The couple was mad that I declined. I shrugged it off. If it mattered that much to them, they could have helped to identify a more comfortable and safe child care arrangement. We also had a kid-free wedding after trying to do that whole "simple" pizza-in-another-room-for-the-kids thing. The venue practically laughed us out of the room when we discussed our plans. We had not even gotten to the point of finding sitters that were not invited, we trusted, and were willing to watch what would have been up to 50 children. We were at the limit of our budget and the capacity of the venue after paring down the guest list as much as possible. We could either cut family and close friends who would enjoy the wedding or children under the age of 10 who would have found the whole thing boring anyway. It was not our preference but it was what it was. As far as I know it was not an issue. We did provide help in making safe child care arrangements for out of town guests with children. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greta Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 (edited) Weddings bring out the evil in relatives. Period. This is no joke! My Mom is normally very laid-back, always there to support me, but never tries to control my life or my decisions in any way. She's the best. She became a totally different person when I was trying to plan my wedding!!! For weddings in general, she says that she thinks people get too carried away and spend too much money on one party, and that it should be kept simple. But when it came to my wedding she sure was singing a different tune. None of the venues I wanted in my small hometown were acceptable (this is due partly to her crazy religious beliefs) so I was going to have to go with something a LOT more expensive than I wanted to in order to make her happy (and no, she was not the one paying for it!), and in another city which was going to be a logistical nightmare. Plus, she was insisting on this rule that if I invited a family member with whom I had a close relationship, I had to invite ALL THE FAMILY MEMBERS up to and including that same "degree of separation" on both sides, because you have to be "fair" even if you haven't talked to those people in years. So the simple little 50-guest wedding at the lakeside chapel that I had envisioned was becoming a 300-guest mega party in the city instead. We eloped. I know that a lot of people have persevered through wedding planning challenges a great deal worse than mine. And they have my admiration! I wimped out pretty early on in the process, but that wasn't entirely do to my mom's sudden obnoxiousness, it was also because a traditional wedding meant nothing to my husband. So, since nothing was making my mother happy, and my husband didn't want to deal with any of it anyway, it started to seem pointless pretty quickly. Part of me wishes I'd had that simple little wedding at the lakeside chapel, but there is no part of me that longs for the mega party. I feel I made the right choice given the options available. I sincerely hope and pray that if/when my daughter gets married, I will be a support to her, and not a challenge!!! ETA: Nothing wrong with mega parties for those who want them! Being a super shy introvert who despises being the center of attention, it just wasn't what I wanted. Edited September 14, 2016 by Greta 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoobie Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 But let's be clear - their presence isn't really valued, or the kids would have been invited. *That's* the reason for the insulted feeling. It's not hard to provide childcare and a pizza for a group of kids, and if it's not affordable for the bride and groom, a provision for the parents to pay on-site sitters organized by the bride and groom isn't difficult to arrange. How does putting children in a separate room and providing pizza and a babysitter = valuing them? They're still not at the wedding. What exactly is the child getting out of that experience? It's not as if the 2 year old is going to have fond family memories of this wedding whether he's at the event or in another room. This puts the Special Snowflake status squarely on parents of infants expecting this level of service from a bride and groom. Why should they have to pay for their guests' babysitting? Are they also going to provide skilled nursing for my grandmother with dementia? They must not value her! If they host a party for children, omitting one child of several in a family group would show a lack of value for that particular child. Not inviting children in general means it's not an event for children. It doesn't make some blanket statement that they think children are valueless. 12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoobie Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 A stab? No. But the fact that a wedding can be a private event does relate to their theology of marriage or at least how it is being acted upon - what it suggests is that a wedding is essentially a kind of private affair. That is an idea that has become very common in our society, and I'm never very sure if churches that seem to accept that really embrace that deep down or whether it is just adopting the common attitude. Still not understanding you. It's bad for churches to suggest that weddings are private affairs? If you get married in a church, you should publish it in the paper and invite in anyone and everyone who wants to appear? Churches should be public free-for-all spaces? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foxbridgeacademy Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 Their wedding so if they don't want kids there then they can do that, I wouldn't go to a family wedding/event that my kids weren't invited to. but that's just me. Not telling me would be an issue if I had planned to bring the kids and had already spent $$ on their travel or such, so yeah it might have been a good idea for them to let people know early. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 I'm way behind on this thread, but THIS is odd to me. I'm one of 32 first cousins on one side of my family and one of the oldest ones to boot. I could not imagine inviting part of a family. In my case, we had "no kids", but that was considered under 13ish (I think my youngest cousin at the time was 12). I certainly wouldn't have included one or two "child" members of a family but not the rest. Some of my cousins have followed my example and invited everyone in the family; others have invited just the aunts and uncles. We make up a crowd of close to 100 (with spouses and now the newest generation), so I'm never offended not to be invited or to have my kids not invited. That's a lot of mouths to feed! There are a lot of first cousins in this family, too. I guess the bride and groom/party planners said, "we're drawing the line at 18. If a cousin is 18 or older, they are invited, if not, they aren't." So, for our family unit, our eldest child was invited (actually on the invitation) our younger two boys (not babies, BTw) were not invited. We were the only family unit with kids on both sides of the age limit. I guess they just figured if they did NOT invite our eldest, we would wonder why she was not invited, since the other older cousins were, but they couldn't make an exception for our younger boys, because then they would have to invite the other seven underage cousins as well. (personally, I don't think this ultimately would have mattered as far as "mouths to feed," because my other two SIL have not brought their kids to any of the other weddings, even though their kids WERE invited to those weddings. So, actually, they could have invited all the first cousins and it would still most likely have only amounted to my two additional boys on the guest list. Since they made the invitation awkward, I just said to my eldest I didn't want her to go; I actually told her I thought it was crappy for one of our kids to get to go to a wedding but not all of them. (It wasn't convenient for DD anyway because she was away at college.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirstenhill Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 I generally think it is ok as along as the bride and groom understand and are ok with some people sending their regrets if they can't get a sitter. We were recently invited to the wedding of a college budy of DH whom I barely know. It's in a small town 4+ hours from our house where we know no one (the bride's hometown, I assume). Given that it's an evening wedding we would almost certainly have to stay overnight. DH and I haven't had an overnight alone in 3 years since it is so hard to convince any family members to watch our kids overnight and none of our paid high school age sitters are old enough for an overnight. So, I am pretty unlikely to call in favors to find an overnight sitter for this wedding, DH doesn't want to go alone, so I think we'll have to decline. On the other hand if one of our young adult nieces or nephews decided to have an adults only wedding I think I would still be really sad they didn't want to include their cousins, our kids. Still "their choice"...but given the close family relationships we all have it would be hard not to feel a bit hurt by it. I doubt that will happen given our family/regional culture....but I can relate to some PPs who felt that it is a bummer for kids not to be included. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluegoat Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 (edited) If I had a large family, I'd have a very small wedding at the church, followed by a big reception at a park or someplace--not a big catered meal--where everyone could come. This is I think the flip side of, we can't afford to have kids eat a meal or take up room. If the expectation is that there will be a sit down meal, $500 dress, and so on, that will eat up a lot of money. Realistically, is it really what most people can afford for a wedding with all the people who they are really close enough that they would want them at the wedding? (And that group may vary depending on the background of the couple of course.) For myself, I could probably have either chosen a large extended family wedding, or very small immediate family one, with no problems from family. What would have been tricky would have been to make differentiations within those groups. The number of people in the group then, would be the starting point, and how much I had to spend would be what determined what sort of wedding it was. It seems like a lot of people do it in the opposite sort of way. Edited September 14, 2016 by Bluegoat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shellydon Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 Crying babies and yaking kids can totally ruin a wedding ceremony. I totally get why people want adult only. 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluegoat Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 Still not understanding you. It's bad for churches to suggest that weddings are private affairs? If you get married in a church, you should publish it in the paper and invite in anyone and everyone who wants to appear? Churches should be public free-for-all spaces? Many would say that yes, churches are by their very nature public spaces, that is the point of them. A religious ceremony or service in a church is by its nature not private, even if it has been arranged by a particular individual. It's an act of the church, and to some extent the community, that goes beyond individuals, it isn't like a lawyer watching someone sign a private contract in a nice setting. This is why in many denominations they do not restrict who can come into the church for the wedding, even if it isn't advertised in some way. I don't think the idea of a religious marriage or the ceremony as a private affair is very healthy, no, nor very theologically defensible. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gardenmom5 Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 he bride and groom/party planners said, "we're drawing the line at 18. If a cousin is 18 or older, they are invited, if not, they aren't." So, for our family unit, our eldest child was invited (actually on the invitation) our younger two boys (not babies, BTw) were not invited. We were the only family unit with kids on both sides of the age limit. I guess they just figured if they did NOT invite our eldest, we would wonder why she was not invited, since the other older cousins were, but they couldn't make an exception for our younger boys, because then they would have to invite the other seven underage cousins as well. (personally, I don't think this ultimately would have mattered as far as "mouths to feed," because my other two SIL have not brought their kids to any of the other weddings, even though their kids WERE invited to those weddings. So, actually, they could have invited all the first cousins and it would still most likely have only amounted to my two additional boys on the guest list. Since they made the invitation awkward, I just said to my eldest I didn't want her to go; I actually told her I thought it was crappy for one of our kids to get to go to a wedding but not all of them. (It wasn't convenient for DD anyway because she was away at college.) honestly - that's pretty presumtuous of you "oh, they can invite my underage kids since they invite my of age kid. the other underage kids wouldn't have come even if they were invited." really? you don't know what would have happened. the hosts get to choose. by telling your child that the hosts were 'crappy' for inviting her, but not her minor siblings - you are *teaching* her to take offense when none was intended. (and if booze it being served, the age of those in attendance affects liquor licenses.) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 honestly - that's pretty presumtuous of you "oh, they can invite my underage kids since they invite my of age kid. the other underage kids wouldn't have come even if they were invited." really? you don't know what would have happened. the hosts get to choose. by telling your child that the hosts were 'crappy' for inviting her, but not her minor siblings - you are *teaching* her to take offense when none was intended. (and if booze it being served, the age of those in attendance affects liquor licenses.) No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm thinking, they could have invited them all and been 90% certain none of the other seven underage cousins would come. I didn't teach my daughter to take offense. I was not "offended." I simply think it's awkward and crappy for one kid to come enjoy the party while the younger two are stuck at home. I said something like, "you are invited, but I don't want you to go because I think it would be crappy for you to enjoy your first cousin's wedding while your slightly younger brother has to miss it." It didn't matter to her anyway; she was at college. I have no idea what you're talking about with liquor licenses. My over-18 kid is not legal age to drink, either. We have been to and hosted parties that had alcohol and also had underage people in attendance. My own wedding was at a hall with alcohol, yet children were there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murphy101 Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 Still not understanding you. It's bad for churches to suggest that weddings are private affairs? If you get married in a church, you should publish it in the paper and invite in anyone and everyone who wants to appear? Churches should be public free-for-all spaces? From a RCC perspective, yes, weddings are flat out declared to be NOT private affairs. And yes, it is often/usually published in some form or another and they are informed that that anyone who appears at the mass will not be told they can't enter just because at that mass there happens to be a weddings in progress too. Churches are not public free for all spaces, but in a RCC, the sanctuary specificly are the house of God where His tabernacle resides and that takes priority over anyone's desire to have a pretty wedding or to only mingle with those of their choosing. Also, a wedding is a sacrament that actually requires public notice and witnesses in the RCC. Usually the wedding ceremony is not a private event, but the after celebrations are bc those are private parties separate from the sacramental ceremony and the mass. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scrapbookbuzz Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 (edited) Personally, I think too many adults today have forgotten what a joy children can be. Sure the youngers interrupt inappropriately and don't lend to a serene environment. They enliven whatever is going on around them! True, it IS up to the host, but I think in the OP's situation, and for invited guests who have young children, it was rather rude not to give a heads up. Edited September 19, 2016 by scrapbookbuzz 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoobie Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 From a RCC perspective, yes, weddings are flat out declared to be NOT private affairs. And yes, it is often/usually published in some form or another and they are informed that that anyone who appears at the mass will not be told they can't enter just because at that mass there happens to be a weddings in progress too. Churches are not public free for all spaces, but in a RCC, the sanctuary specificly are the house of God where His tabernacle resides and that takes priority over anyone's desire to have a pretty wedding or to only mingle with those of their choosing. Also, a wedding is a sacrament that actually requires public notice and witnesses in the RCC. Usually the wedding ceremony is not a private event, but the after celebrations are bc those are private parties separate from the sacramental ceremony and the mass. Would they move people so the invited guests could have seats or space? If a hundred people randomly appear for mass? Do the couple pay a rental fee for the facility? I wouldn't be upset about random people appearing but more people who were specifically not invited. BPD family members who've been cut out and would appear to create a spectacle type thing. They had a cop at the funeral home for one side of the family (not mine, lol). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.