No children allowed at family members wedding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You are ridiculous OP. It is not "tacky" to not want kids at a wedding, even if the couple has kids. We had a kid when we got married, and debated the kid question while choosing a venue. In the end we wanted something nicer and not overrun with kids. My relatives were happy to have an adult night out and either left kids at home with local relatives or brought relatives in for the weekend or left their kids at our house with ours and a trusted paid nanny. My in-laws insisted on bringing the kid on their side. He sat around playing an iPad, got sick off too much junk food all day and didn't eat the expensive meal we had to buy him, and then his parents AND my in-laws left before the end of dinner to take care of him and never came back to the reception. He won't say it to them, but it really hurt my DH's feelings. If anything, that night solidified my view that people who feel their kids are entitled to go everywhere will end up being a pita regardless. It's been years, and we constantly have to cater to him/them and what they want.

X10000

Nailed it. When people show you their true colors, believe them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, if that's what they want, then that's what they want. You or I don't have to understand, support, or agree. It's THEIR wedding.

+1

It's ridiculous to call them "tacky". What's tacky (& entitled) is thinking that a couple is somehow obligated to to invite your kids to their wedding in order to make things easier for you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You are ridiculous OP. It is not "tacky" to not want kids at a wedding, even if the couple has kids. We had a kid when we got married, and debated the kid question while choosing a venue. In the end we wanted something nicer and not overrun with kids. My relatives were happy to have an adult night out and either left kids at home with local relatives or brought relatives in for the weekend or left their kids at our house with ours and a trusted paid nanny. My in-laws insisted on bringing the kid on their side. He sat around playing an iPad, got sick off too much junk food all day and didn't eat the expensive meal we had to buy him, and then his parents AND my in-laws left before the end of dinner to take care of him and never came back to the reception. He won't say it to them, but it really hurt my DH's feelings. If anything, that night solidified my view that people who feel their kids are entitled to go everywhere will end up being a pita regardless. It's been years, and we constantly have to cater to him/them and what they want.

X10000

Nailed it. When people show you their true colors, believe them.

+2!!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will never understand why people who hire babysitters so they can go on date nights and out their kids on day care all week get bent out of shape because they can't take their kids along to a wedding for a few hours. Hire a friggin baby sitter. It's not a big deal.

At a hotel? No. Op says a lot of people have to travel.

Yes. Ask people who live locally for recommended baby sitters. Why people think their are entitled to bring kids to their weddings is beyond me. It's bizarre - people leave their kids with baby sitters all the time but for an event like a wedding that just CANT be away from them for four or five hours?

Sounds like many of the guests have kids. You obviously don’t have kids. They are part of the family.

I'm not sure about the poster you are responding to but I have kids & I completely agree with him or her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will never understand why people who hire babysitters so they can go on date nights and out their kids on day care all week get bent out of shape because they can't take their kids along to a wedding for a few hours. Hire a friggin baby sitter. It's not a big deal.

At a hotel? No. Op says a lot of people have to travel.

Yes. Ask people who live locally for recommended baby sitters. Why people think their are entitled to bring kids to their weddings is beyond me. It's bizarre - people leave their kids with baby sitters all the time but for an event like a wedding that just CANT be away from them for four or five hours?

Sounds like many of the guests have kids. You obviously don’t have kids. They are part of the family.

I'm not sure about the poster you are responding to but I have kids & I completely agree with him or her.

Ditto

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP - have you ever planned a wedding? First of all, a person is person when counting for catering costs. I recently had a "no kids" wedding, but made exceptions for my niece/nephew and younger brothers who were in the ceremony, and I had to FIGHT with the caterer to get them out of the head count for the bar fees (they aren't 21 - how are you going to charge me for them drinking?!) So at a bare minimum, your kids are costing the couple money in addition to likely being a nuisance (to the couple, to other guests, to their own parents).

And hate to say it, but if you're not part of the "exception," you're not important enough to the couple to be there if you chose not to attend. So it's your call - the couple is going to enjoy the wedding they want either way.

Ugh. This whole wedding thing is so ugly. Why even invite people who you deem "not important enough" in any way? What's next, sell tickets to your wedding? Blah.

I'm the PP. It's not that they're not important at all, it's just that if you don't feel like getting a babysitter is worth attending my wedding (therefore deeming ME not important in a way), it's not important enough for me to go out of my way to make an exception for you to have your kids there. I want you there, but I'm not going to stress if you don't come. Sorry!

If your wedding is out of town, it's not just about getting a babysitter. It's either getting a full weekend of childcare (not cheap, and not always welcome by the kids), or buying plane tickets and renting hotel rooms for the kids plus figuring out childcare on location.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will never understand why people who hire babysitters so they can go on date nights and out their kids on day care all week get bent out of shape because they can't take their kids along to a wedding for a few hours. Hire a friggin baby sitter. It's not a big deal.

At a hotel? No. Op says a lot of people have to travel.

Yes. Ask people who live locally for recommended baby sitters. Why people think their are entitled to bring kids to their weddings is beyond me. It's bizarre - people leave their kids with baby sitters all the time but for an event like a wedding that just CANT be away from them for four or five hours?

Sounds like many of the guests have kids. You obviously don’t have kids. They are part of the family.

I'm not sure about the poster you are responding to but I have kids & I completely agree with him or her.

Ditto

I'm the one who said no to a strange babysitter in a hotel room.

I have kids. In this situation IF I had to travel I wouldn't go.

If I didn't have to travel my kids would stay home with a regular sitter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will never understand why people who hire babysitters so they can go on date nights and out their kids on day care all week get bent out of shape because they can't take their kids along to a wedding for a few hours. Hire a friggin baby sitter. It's not a big deal.

At a hotel? No. Op says a lot of people have to travel.

Yes. Ask people who live locally for recommended baby sitters. Why people think their are entitled to bring kids to their weddings is beyond me. It's bizarre - people leave their kids with baby sitters all the time but for an event like a wedding that just CANT be away from them for four or five hours?

Sounds like many of the guests have kids. You obviously don’t have kids. They are part of the family.

I'm not sure about the poster you are responding to but I have kids & I completely agree with him or her.

If it was just about 5 hours worth of babysitting, no one would have this conversation. It's the whole dragging the kids somewhere, paying for their tickets, rooms, food and random babysitter on location. Expensive and stressful.

[Anonymous]

When I was 7 months pregnant, my brother announced he was getting married in the Dominican when baby would be 9 weeks. Oh, and absolutely no kids, including mine. So we decided not to go. Too much of a hassle. Even if baby had been allowed, I'm not sure we would have gone, because of the hassle of getting passport for baby, general travel with a kid that nursed every 2-3 hours......

Anyways, that was 3 years ago and my brother hasn't spoken to me since. Not that I wasn't already aware that he is a self-absorbed prick, but come on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will never understand why people who hire babysitters so they can go on date nights and out their kids on day care all week get bent out of shape because they can't take their kids along to a wedding for a few hours. Hire a friggin baby sitter. It's not a big deal.

At a hotel? No. Op says a lot of people have to travel.

Yes. Ask people who live locally for recommended baby sitters. Why people think their are entitled to bring kids to their weddings is beyond me. It's bizarre - people leave their kids with baby sitters all the time but for an event like a wedding that just CANT be away from them for four or five hours?

Sounds like many of the guests have kids. You obviously don’t have kids. They are part of the family.

I'm not sure about the poster you are responding to but I have kids & I completely agree with him or her.

If it was just about 5 hours worth of babysitting, no one would have this conversation. It's the whole dragging the kids somewhere, paying for their tickets, rooms, food and random babysitter on location. Expensive and stressful.

Then don't go.

It still doesn't mean that the couple getting married is doing anything wrong by not wanting to greatly expand their guest list by including everyone's kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will never understand why people who hire babysitters so they can go on date nights and out their kids on day care all week get bent out of shape because they can't take their kids along to a wedding for a few hours. Hire a friggin baby sitter. It's not a big deal.

At a hotel? No. Op says a lot of people have to travel.

Yes. Ask people who live locally for recommended baby sitters. Why people think their are entitled to bring kids to their weddings is beyond me. It's bizarre - people leave their kids with baby sitters all the time but for an event like a wedding that just CANT be away from them for four or five hours?

Sounds like many of the guests have kids. You obviously don’t have kids. They are part of the family.

I'm not sure about the poster you are responding to but I have kids & I completely agree with him or her.

If it was just about 5 hours worth of babysitting, no one would have this conversation. It's the whole dragging the kids somewhere, paying for their tickets, rooms, food and random babysitter on location. Expensive and stressful.

Then don't go.

It still doesn't mean that the couple getting married is doing anything wrong by not wanting to greatly expand their guest list by including everyone's kids.

We don't. Who said they are doing anything wrong? People are just explaining why an invitation like this is a pain, not a pleasure. I don't feel anyone should bend to accommodate me, and I don't feel bad declining.

[Anonymous]

OP, the invitation was very clear it was intended for only you and your husband per how it was addressed. As for your children, can’t your in-laws (DH’s parents or siblings?!) watch your children for the weekend at your home or theirs? You are looking at this myopically and need to be flexible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, the invitation was very clear it was intended for only you and your husband per how it was addressed. As for your children, can’t your in-laws (DH’s parents or siblings?!) watch your children for the weekend at your home or theirs? You are looking at this myopically and need to be flexible.

Not OP, but not everyone has local family. In my case, for example, we'd have to fly in a set of grandparents (no siblings live close enough to travel to our home without taking time off of work), on top of our own travel expenses.

Also, OP *doesn't* need to be remotely flexible. Just as a bride and groom can decide that they don't want kids, and don't need to be flexible about other people's kids or make any extra effort to accommodate people's desire to bring their kids, so, too, people with kids can decide that they don't want to travel to attend a wedding if their kids are not invited. They don't need to be flexible or make extra effort to accommodate the couple's desire to have a kid-free wedding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, the invitation was very clear it was intended for only you and your husband per how it was addressed. As for your children, can’t your in-laws (DH’s parents or siblings?!) watch your children for the weekend at your home or theirs? You are looking at this myopically and need to be flexible.

Not OP, but not everyone has local family. In my case, for example, we'd have to fly in a set of grandparents (no siblings live close enough to travel to our home without taking time off of work), on top of our own travel expenses.

Also, OP *doesn't* need to be remotely flexible. Just as a bride and groom can decide that they don't want kids, and don't need to be flexible about other people's kids or make any extra effort to accommodate people's desire to bring their kids, so, too, people with kids can decide that they don't want to travel to attend a wedding if their kids are not invited. They don't need to be flexible or make extra effort to accommodate the couple's desire to have a kid-free wedding.

And I've flown in a grandma before to attend a wedding when the person meant that much to me. It's about priorities on both sides: the bride & groom's priorities to have the kind of event they want understanding some people may not attend, and the parents' priorities of money and familial favors to make it happen.

Both our moms and all our au pairs have been happy to travel with us to the wedding destination and then do some sightseeing before and after the wedding activities. As long as we are all traveling might as well enjoy Chicago/San Diego/Vermont etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will never understand why people who hire babysitters so they can go on date nights and out their kids on day care all week get bent out of shape because they can't take their kids along to a wedding for a few hours. Hire a friggin baby sitter. It's not a big deal.

At a hotel? No. Op says a lot of people have to travel.

Yes. Ask people who live locally for recommended baby sitters. Why people think their are entitled to bring kids to their weddings is beyond me. It's bizarre - people leave their kids with baby sitters all the time but for an event like a wedding that just CANT be away from them for four or five hours?

Sounds like many of the guests have kids. You obviously don’t have kids. They are part of the family.

I'm not sure about the poster you are responding to but I have kids & I completely agree with him or her.

If it was just about 5 hours worth of babysitting, no one would have this conversation. It's the whole dragging the kids somewhere, paying for their tickets, rooms, food and random babysitter on location. Expensive and stressful.

Then don't go.

It still doesn't mean that the couple getting married is doing anything wrong by not wanting to greatly expand their guest list by including everyone's kids.

We don't. Who said they are doing anything wrong? People are just explaining why an invitation like this is a pain, not a pleasure. I don't feel anyone should bend to accommodate me, and I don't feel bad declining.

This makes zero sense. People are upset that the kids aren't invited to the wedding - in other words, they would attend the wedding if they were invited. So you'd still have to pay for their tickets, room, and food - the only extra is the babysitter. Traveling with them would be just as stressful, and slightly less expensive. Use your head.