What to do about sister's destination wedding

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, it's not even really about the bride. Don't you guys feel it's important to make an effort for your children to be part of family events?

It's important for children to be a part when the fact that there are children they would like to attend, and when the "host" understands, and is possibly willing to incur some of the cost, time, and emotional expense of having them there.

A destination wedding is about the venue, not about family. The bride chose that route when she chose to have a destination wedding. The very nature of them makes them at minimum a bone of contention, at worst prohibitive, for "guests".

So, in the words of the Rolling Stones " you can't always get what you want". The bride is getting her destination wedding. She should not expect everyone else to take extreme burden to accommodate and fulfill the rest of her very lofty wish list.

I guess this is just a reflection of a difference in value systems. OP, you have to decide your perspective is.

Ah, but one could argue that the bride's own "value system" places a destination wedding above her sister's family and their needs. When the venue takes top billing, it's clear what the bride's priority is.

OP, your children are not in the wedding, you said. So your sister doesn't want them to be ring bearers, flower girls, or whatever. Are YOU in the wedding party? Usually a sister is a matron of honor or bridesmaid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, it's not even really about the bride. Don't you guys feel it's important to make an effort for your children to be part of family events?

STUPID

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, it's not even really about the bride. Don't you guys feel it's important to make an effort for your children to be part of family events?

STUPID

Not the PP, and notwithstanding the asinine all caps response, but really, what could possibly be wrong with what the PP is saying here? Weddings aren't all about the bride. In my family, they're not all about the couple, either. It's about the whole family, together, welcoming and blessing and celebrating with the couple. It's impurtsnt for children, for the elderly, for all of us to be there. yMMV in your family but there's nothing all-caps stupid in what PP wrote.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, it's not even really about the bride. Don't you guys feel it's important to make an effort for your children to be part of family events?

STUPID

Not the PP, and notwithstanding the asinine all caps response, but really, what could possibly be wrong with what the PP is saying here? Weddings aren't all about the bride. In my family, they're not all about the couple, either. It's about the whole family, together, welcoming and blessing and celebrating with the couple. It's impurtsnt for children, for the elderly, for all of us to be there. yMMV in your family but there's nothing all-caps stupid in what PP wrote.

Originally quoted PP here. That's why I didn't bother to reply.

[Anonymous]

If they care, they can pay.

Decide first - if they did pay, would you still want to bring the twins? It's ok if you don't.

They do not dictate this.

[Anonymous]

If it was "all about family", they wouldn't be having a destination wedding.

Destination weddings are not convenient for anyone. Nice for the bride & groom - but not thinking about the convenience of everyone else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, it's not even really about the bride. Don't you guys feel it's important to make an effort for your children to be part of family events?

STUPID

Not the PP, and notwithstanding the asinine all caps response, but really, what could possibly be wrong with what the PP is saying here? Weddings aren't all about the bride. In my family, they're not all about the couple, either. It's about the whole family, together, welcoming and blessing and celebrating with the couple. It's impurtsnt for children, for the elderly, for all of us to be there. yMMV in your family but there's nothing all-caps stupid in what PP wrote.

When the bride and groom plan their wedding in such a way that it creates barriers to "the whole family, together, welcoming and blessing and celebrating with the couple" then it's not a family event. If you want a 'family event', you have to facilitate it. A destination wedding, in this case, is clearly not a 'family event'.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, it's not even really about the bride. Don't you guys feel it's important to make an effort for your children to be part of family events?

STUPID

Not the PP, and notwithstanding the asinine all caps response, but really, what could possibly be wrong with what the PP is saying here? Weddings aren't all about the bride. In my family, they're not all about the couple, either. It's about the whole family, together, welcoming and blessing and celebrating with the couple. It's impurtsnt for children, for the elderly, for all of us to be there. yMMV in your family but there's nothing all-caps stupid in what PP wrote.

NP here.

If your position is true that it is all about the family getting together to celebrate then Bridezilla should pick a venue that doesn't hurt her family to attend. She should be considering her family in choosing the location. As pp said, Bridezilla is all about the destination, not family. If that was true she would have her wedding in Largo or Silver Spring or Springfield.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All these wedding posts lately remind me of my own wedding, at which I probably spent 10 minutes tops with my closest family and friends and somehow didn't even say hi to like 8 people (only 110 attended). Weddings are only a few hours of your life and they are incredibly busy and I can't understand why people care if everyone comes as long as your immediate family is there.

They care because they are the center of the universe. It hurts mummy and sissy's feeewwings when any acts differently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's family...you must go. Its a wedding....that means your family does not count.

To quote a poster on another thread "Give me a family where everyone just trusts in what they mean to each other, rather than one with an attendance sheet."

I love this and will use this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What I would not be doing at a destination wedding: towing around and caring for two overtired, wired out, and very excited twin six year olds, so that my sister can have the perfect photo op with them for five minutes on her day. On top of this, incurring all expense and responsibility for the children and not much enjoying the trip.

What I would be doing: enjoying paradise and feeling happy for my sister's nuptuials. Dipping my feet in the pool, after trying to look ladylike while carrying two margaritas. Pretending to desperately miss my husband and children, while I soak up the rays (and much needed time off) maybe admire the cabana boy, while secretly mulling if he pronounces his name "Rawl" or "Ra-ooool". Go home happy and relaxed, and give my husband a much needed break by sending him out to cool off with the boys at the pub.

This is silly, immature, and utterly unrealistic. I swear you work in the wedding or travel industry or are 16.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's one thing to hold a destination wedding when you are young and invited a bunch of young people without kids, or older people without young kids. But to have one when you have immediately family members with young kids who YOU KNOW are going to go no matter what, that's just selfish and ridiculous. Even if they still wanted to do a destination wedding, there are plenty of nice places in this country with shorter flights and/or can just drive it.

"But it's our special day." BS. Get out of it and think about others for a second. How can you enjoy yourself at your wedding knowing that some of your guests resent you for holding it there. They are out financially, out vacation time, and can be stressed over the hassle like you will.

Unfortunately, I think you will have to suck it up and just go with the kids, but I feel for you. Destination weddings need to stop.

No, you don't HAVE to go and no one KNOWS that you are going no matter what because you don't have to go. That is an expectation you are putting on yourself. If you can;t go, then don't go., Don't get mad at the person having a destination wedding that they didn't make the wedding convenient to you and you missed out on a party.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, it's not even really about the bride. Don't you guys feel it's important to make an effort for your children to be part of family events?

Not if the family makes it difficult. It goes both ways.

Who says weddings, and this wedding in particular, are the only family events op and her family can attend? I wish we would all drop this fantasy of it costing op $2k to go. Everyone knows there will be all kinds of extra charges so this will be a lot more than that for a family of 4.

[Anonymous]

Tell your Mom that she or your sister is welcome to buy airline tickets for your kids! Otherwise, tell them to mind their own business

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is she planning on footing the bill? Then she has no say.

And frankly, even if she offered to pay, she still has no say.

+1
you and your husband decide what's best for the twins/your family..including how to spend YOUR money.

you can represent your family at the wedding....that should mean just as much to your mom and sis as having the twins there. And all the posts about weddings being about spending time with the family...there will be other family functions where sis, mom, and others can engage with the kids.