Siblings kids not invited to wedding

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My sibling is having a weekday, outdoor, daytime, destination wedding and I was just informed that children under 18 are not invited. I thought I may have a special exception since my toddler ages kids are her nieces and nephews, but I’m now expected not to bring them. My sibling is totally clueless about childcare logistics and separation anxiety, so doesn’t realize what a burden this is. How can I politely ask if my kids can attend either the ceremony or reception?

OP, My nieces kids were not invited to her sister's upcoming wedding. The niece has a newborn. My niece and her husband are flying husband's Dad and Step Mom to the town of the wedding. Dad and Step Mom are going to stay in the hotel and babysit the newborn while niece and husband are at the wedding. Niece is actually in the wedding. Their other two sons will be watched by husband's Mom and Step Dad in their home town.

It is a huge burden. Niece is paying for two extra airfares and also an extra hotel room for Dad and Step Mom to watch the newborn. The two older boys would be fine at a wedding.

I find it very, very sad.

Not “sad” at all and “paying for two extra airfares and also an extra hotel room” was her CHOICE. She goes to the wedding and the children stay at home with their FATHER. Done.

I’m going to guess that he is also invited to the wedding, if not in it.

Do other people seriously not consider their SIL or BIL family members?

My DH is definitely considered part of my extended family, but I am the oldest and do not live in my hometown, so when we had young kids as my cousins had no-kid weddings everyone understood that both of us could not come. The no-kid weddings didn’t bother me, but my family also did not hassle me if I couldn’t make it or just came solo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It doesn't make sense to you because you have decided there is a right way and a wrong way to do a wedding. You want to know how anyone can do it wrong and why they bother at all because in your mind it's not a wedding and they should just go the courthouse. The condescension is loud and clear. I have been to lots of weddings and fhave never been to one where all the friends of the bride and groom bring their entire families. It's just not done, and it's known to get a sitter.

I haven’t decided there is a right or wrong way to do a wedding. I haven’t decided that if you are doing it the “wrong” way, then you should go to a courthouse, (although I understand why pp said that because if I didn’t feel so much pressure to invite family and friends, that’s what I would have done).

Have the wedding you want. I don’t care if you have kids there or not or whether you invite your mom or your grandma. If you want to have a huge wedding that is attended by people that you invited off the street or paid actors or a troop of jugglers that meets you at the top of a mountain, that’s fine by me. I was just curious about your motivation for it.

You really do care about the wedding others want. You say all that but then you're like "I just really want to know why...." make up your mind.

I honestly feel like this is what I have been saying over and over again from the beginning.
Why is it more important to have no kids at your wedding than it is to have the people you love there?
I just want to know why.

All anyone has done is swear at me or call me judgmental. I’m not judging. I’m just curious.

Because it's not an either or. The people will come and will leave their kids with a sitter. Why do you think nobody will come if the kids aren't invited?

I think that the other poster explained this well.

It isn’t that I think that no one will come. It’s that if you don’t care about your sister coming, then you probably don’t really care about any specific person coming. And, from my perspective, if you don’t care about the people who are coming, then why do it?

I see what pp said though, annd with that lens, I can go back annd understand previous comments. They see the wedding and reception as being about the bride and groom and their vision for that day. Maybe they are recreating something from the time they were dating or something else. The guests are more of an afterthought. It’s not really about them, and they are welcome to attend or not.

This is why some people are saying “don’t go to your sister’s wedding” like it’s not a big deal. For them, it really wouldn’t be a big deal. The point of the wedding is to have this special moment with their spouse. They can see their sister another time. She’s not what this day is about.
And others, like me, are saying, “just tell your sister that you want to bring your baby” like it’s not a big deal. For me, the point of the wedding was to have guests there with us. If my sister needed to bring her kids or her goat or whatever to feel comfortable, then that was fine with me. I have many opportunities to have special moments between myself and my husband. This event was about my guests.

Anyway, I really appreciate pp’s perspective.

I think you're overestimating the extent that people want to bring their kids to a wedding and won't go if they can't bring the kids. If you read the other wedding related thread a whole lot of people aren't bothered by no kids, even when they have kids. It's not a hardship for them to get a sitter. It's not a matter of "not caring" rather its an expected norm that a wedding and reception are for adults with maybe a very small handful of kids. There is no expectation to bring the whole family because there are plenty of other opportunities for that kind of get together, like a BBQ any other weekend.

To be fair, I would have exactly the same response of “why” if people wanted a backyard BBQ feel and insisted that people bring their children.
I just didn’t get why you would feel the need to specify what people do with their children rather than just do whatever is easiest.
I get it now though.

Nobody is telling you what to do with the kids they are saying they aren’t hosting them. The kids are not invited. If kids are welcome at the bbq its not a demand, you can still leave them home with a sitter. This is all so very easy to understand.

Not everyone has a sitter available that they can leave their children with for several days while they fly out to a wedding, and it’s more trouble to find one than to bring them. Some people do have a sitter available and find it easier to leave the kids.

Most people tell their guests to do whatever is easiest.

As I said above, I actually do understand now why some people would rather have their close family members not come than bring their children. This thread has been helpful.

I’m not sure why you are struggling to understand that many people don’t have reliable options for multi day, overnight childcare.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I saw kids ruin a first dance at a wedding. Everyone else is supposed to leave, let the couple have their moment. But, no, the kids were break dancing, running and sliding, and all over the place. And just ruined the moment and their parents thought it was just so gosh darn cute. Like they couldn't just tell the kids to wait a few minutes. I felt badly for the bride who tried to stay out of the way yet still have her dance. She wasn't going to get a father/daughter dance b/c her dad was dying of ALS at the time.

This is terribly sad. It is not anyone else's day, but the bride and groom. I think selfish people have a hard time understanding this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It doesn't make sense to you because you have decided there is a right way and a wrong way to do a wedding. You want to know how anyone can do it wrong and why they bother at all because in your mind it's not a wedding and they should just go the courthouse. The condescension is loud and clear. I have been to lots of weddings and fhave never been to one where all the friends of the bride and groom bring their entire families. It's just not done, and it's known to get a sitter.

I haven’t decided there is a right or wrong way to do a wedding. I haven’t decided that if you are doing it the “wrong” way, then you should go to a courthouse, (although I understand why pp said that because if I didn’t feel so much pressure to invite family and friends, that’s what I would have done).

Have the wedding you want. I don’t care if you have kids there or not or whether you invite your mom or your grandma. If you want to have a huge wedding that is attended by people that you invited off the street or paid actors or a troop of jugglers that meets you at the top of a mountain, that’s fine by me. I was just curious about your motivation for it.

You really do care about the wedding others want. You say all that but then you're like "I just really want to know why...." make up your mind.

I honestly feel like this is what I have been saying over and over again from the beginning.
Why is it more important to have no kids at your wedding than it is to have the people you love there?
I just want to know why.

All anyone has done is swear at me or call me judgmental. I’m not judging. I’m just curious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It doesn't make sense to you because you have decided there is a right way and a wrong way to do a wedding. You want to know how anyone can do it wrong and why they bother at all because in your mind it's not a wedding and they should just go the courthouse. The condescension is loud and clear. I have been to lots of weddings and fhave never been to one where all the friends of the bride and groom bring their entire families. It's just not done, and it's known to get a sitter.

I haven’t decided there is a right or wrong way to do a wedding. I haven’t decided that if you are doing it the “wrong” way, then you should go to a courthouse, (although I understand why pp said that because if I didn’t feel so much pressure to invite family and friends, that’s what I would have done).

Have the wedding you want. I don’t care if you have kids there or not or whether you invite your mom or your grandma. If you want to have a huge wedding that is attended by people that you invited off the street or paid actors or a troop of jugglers that meets you at the top of a mountain, that’s fine by me. I was just curious about your motivation for it.

You really do care about the wedding others want. You say all that but then you're like "I just really want to know why...." make up your mind.

I honestly feel like this is what I have been saying over and over again from the beginning.
Why is it more important to have no kids at your wedding than it is to have the people you love there?
I just want to know why.

All anyone has done is swear at me or call me judgmental. I’m not judging. I’m just curious.

Ha! It worked though. I got my question answered

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw kids ruin a first dance at a wedding. Everyone else is supposed to leave, let the couple have their moment. But, no, the kids were break dancing, running and sliding, and all over the place. And just ruined the moment and their parents thought it was just so gosh darn cute. Like they couldn't just tell the kids to wait a few minutes. I felt badly for the bride who tried to stay out of the way yet still have her dance. She wasn't going to get a father/daughter dance b/c her dad was dying of ALS at the time.

This is terribly sad. It is not anyone else's day, but the bride and groom. I think selfish people have a hard time understanding this.

I really think you both are projecting here. Most couples don’t think of their wedding as “their day.” It’s something you do for your family and your guests.

It’s possible that the bride was upset and felt that her wedding was ruined, but it’s equally possible that she thought the kids were cute or that she didn’t really care that much as long as everyone was happy.

[Anonymous]

For a sibling, I’d leave the kids back at the hotel with my spouse who would not be joining me for the event. My in laws can’t babysit and I wouldn’t leave children that young with strangers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It doesn't make sense to you because you have decided there is a right way and a wrong way to do a wedding. You want to know how anyone can do it wrong and why they bother at all because in your mind it's not a wedding and they should just go the courthouse. The condescension is loud and clear. I have been to lots of weddings and fhave never been to one where all the friends of the bride and groom bring their entire families. It's just not done, and it's known to get a sitter.

I haven’t decided there is a right or wrong way to do a wedding. I haven’t decided that if you are doing it the “wrong” way, then you should go to a courthouse, (although I understand why pp said that because if I didn’t feel so much pressure to invite family and friends, that’s what I would have done).

Have the wedding you want. I don’t care if you have kids there or not or whether you invite your mom or your grandma. If you want to have a huge wedding that is attended by people that you invited off the street or paid actors or a troop of jugglers that meets you at the top of a mountain, that’s fine by me. I was just curious about your motivation for it.

You really do care about the wedding others want. You say all that but then you're like "I just really want to know why...." make up your mind.

I honestly feel like this is what I have been saying over and over again from the beginning.
Why is it more important to have no kids at your wedding than it is to have the people you love there?
I just want to know why.

All anyone has done is swear at me or call me judgmental. I’m not judging. I’m just curious.

Ha! It worked though. I got my question answered

I am glad, truly, and I caught up after posting and saw that you were sincere.

Thank you for the good grace in your reply!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw kids ruin a first dance at a wedding. Everyone else is supposed to leave, let the couple have their moment. But, no, the kids were break dancing, running and sliding, and all over the place. And just ruined the moment and their parents thought it was just so gosh darn cute. Like they couldn't just tell the kids to wait a few minutes. I felt badly for the bride who tried to stay out of the way yet still have her dance. She wasn't going to get a father/daughter dance b/c her dad was dying of ALS at the time.

This is terribly sad. It is not anyone else's day, but the bride and groom. I think selfish people have a hard time understanding this.

Personally, this would not have ruined by fist dance. Similarly, my toddler nephew cried through my ceremony and it did not ruin it. As a matter of fact, I never heard it until I watched back the video. My brother and SIL were both in the ceremony (and were freaking out!) but I was in my own world with DH. People are too uptight.

That said, I am fully in favor of no-kid weddings, but the couple need to understand that some people will not be able to come. We had weddings we skipped, weddings DH or I went to alone, and a wedding that FIL and MIL met us in the wedding location (they drove, we flew, they would not let us pay for their hotel room) to babysit at the hotel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It doesn't make sense to you because you have decided there is a right way and a wrong way to do a wedding. You want to know how anyone can do it wrong and why they bother at all because in your mind it's not a wedding and they should just go the courthouse. The condescension is loud and clear. I have been to lots of weddings and fhave never been to one where all the friends of the bride and groom bring their entire families. It's just not done, and it's known to get a sitter.

I haven’t decided there is a right or wrong way to do a wedding. I haven’t decided that if you are doing it the “wrong” way, then you should go to a courthouse, (although I understand why pp said that because if I didn’t feel so much pressure to invite family and friends, that’s what I would have done).

Have the wedding you want. I don’t care if you have kids there or not or whether you invite your mom or your grandma. If you want to have a huge wedding that is attended by people that you invited off the street or paid actors or a troop of jugglers that meets you at the top of a mountain, that’s fine by me. I was just curious about your motivation for it.

You really do care about the wedding others want. You say all that but then you're like "I just really want to know why...." make up your mind.

I honestly feel like this is what I have been saying over and over again from the beginning.
Why is it more important to have no kids at your wedding than it is to have the people you love there?
I just want to know why.

All anyone has done is swear at me or call me judgmental. I’m not judging. I’m just curious.

Because it's not an either or. The people will come and will leave their kids with a sitter. Why do you think nobody will come if the kids aren't invited?

I think that the other poster explained this well.

It isn’t that I think that no one will come. It’s that if you don’t care about your sister coming, then you probably don’t really care about any specific person coming. And, from my perspective, if you don’t care about the people who are coming, then why do it?

I see what pp said though, annd with that lens, I can go back annd understand previous comments. They see the wedding and reception as being about the bride and groom and their vision for that day. Maybe they are recreating something from the time they were dating or something else. The guests are more of an afterthought. It’s not really about them, and they are welcome to attend or not.

This is why some people are saying “don’t go to your sister’s wedding” like it’s not a big deal. For them, it really wouldn’t be a big deal. The point of the wedding is to have this special moment with their spouse. They can see their sister another time. She’s not what this day is about.
And others, like me, are saying, “just tell your sister that you want to bring your baby” like it’s not a big deal. For me, the point of the wedding was to have guests there with us. If my sister needed to bring her kids or her goat or whatever to feel comfortable, then that was fine with me. I have many opportunities to have special moments between myself and my husband. This event was about my guests.

Anyway, I really appreciate pp’s perspective.

I think you're overestimating the extent that people want to bring their kids to a wedding and won't go if they can't bring the kids. If you read the other wedding related thread a whole lot of people aren't bothered by no kids, even when they have kids. It's not a hardship for them to get a sitter. It's not a matter of "not caring" rather its an expected norm that a wedding and reception are for adults with maybe a very small handful of kids. There is no expectation to bring the whole family because there are plenty of other opportunities for that kind of get together, like a BBQ any other weekend.

To be fair, I would have exactly the same response of “why” if people wanted a backyard BBQ feel and insisted that people bring their children.
I just didn’t get why you would feel the need to specify what people do with their children rather than just do whatever is easiest.
I get it now though.

Nobody is telling you what to do with the kids they are saying they aren’t hosting them. The kids are not invited. If kids are welcome at the bbq its not a demand, you can still leave them home with a sitter. This is all so very easy to understand.

Not everyone has a sitter available that they can leave their children with for several days while they fly out to a wedding, and it’s more trouble to find one than to bring them. Some people do have a sitter available and find it easier to leave the kids.

Most people tell their guests to do whatever is easiest.

As I said above, I actually do understand now why some people would rather have their close family members not come than bring their children. This thread has been helpful.

I’m not sure why you are struggling to understand that many people don’t have reliable options for multi day, overnight childcare.

You don’t have to go. Send your regrets. We totally understand. But, no kids. Sorry you can’t make it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It doesn't make sense to you because you have decided there is a right way and a wrong way to do a wedding. You want to know how anyone can do it wrong and why they bother at all because in your mind it's not a wedding and they should just go the courthouse. The condescension is loud and clear. I have been to lots of weddings and fhave never been to one where all the friends of the bride and groom bring their entire families. It's just not done, and it's known to get a sitter.

I haven’t decided there is a right or wrong way to do a wedding. I haven’t decided that if you are doing it the “wrong” way, then you should go to a courthouse, (although I understand why pp said that because if I didn’t feel so much pressure to invite family and friends, that’s what I would have done).

Have the wedding you want. I don’t care if you have kids there or not or whether you invite your mom or your grandma. If you want to have a huge wedding that is attended by people that you invited off the street or paid actors or a troop of jugglers that meets you at the top of a mountain, that’s fine by me. I was just curious about your motivation for it.

You really do care about the wedding others want. You say all that but then you're like "I just really want to know why...." make up your mind.

I honestly feel like this is what I have been saying over and over again from the beginning.
Why is it more important to have no kids at your wedding than it is to have the people you love there?
I just want to know why.

All anyone has done is swear at me or call me judgmental. I’m not judging. I’m just curious.

Because it's not an either or. The people will come and will leave their kids with a sitter. Why do you think nobody will come if the kids aren't invited?

I think that the other poster explained this well.

It isn’t that I think that no one will come. It’s that if you don’t care about your sister coming, then you probably don’t really care about any specific person coming. And, from my perspective, if you don’t care about the people who are coming, then why do it?

I see what pp said though, annd with that lens, I can go back annd understand previous comments. They see the wedding and reception as being about the bride and groom and their vision for that day. Maybe they are recreating something from the time they were dating or something else. The guests are more of an afterthought. It’s not really about them, and they are welcome to attend or not.

This is why some people are saying “don’t go to your sister’s wedding” like it’s not a big deal. For them, it really wouldn’t be a big deal. The point of the wedding is to have this special moment with their spouse. They can see their sister another time. She’s not what this day is about.
And others, like me, are saying, “just tell your sister that you want to bring your baby” like it’s not a big deal. For me, the point of the wedding was to have guests there with us. If my sister needed to bring her kids or her goat or whatever to feel comfortable, then that was fine with me. I have many opportunities to have special moments between myself and my husband. This event was about my guests.

Anyway, I really appreciate pp’s perspective.

I think you're overestimating the extent that people want to bring their kids to a wedding and won't go if they can't bring the kids. If you read the other wedding related thread a whole lot of people aren't bothered by no kids, even when they have kids. It's not a hardship for them to get a sitter. It's not a matter of "not caring" rather its an expected norm that a wedding and reception are for adults with maybe a very small handful of kids. There is no expectation to bring the whole family because there are plenty of other opportunities for that kind of get together, like a BBQ any other weekend.

To be fair, I would have exactly the same response of “why” if people wanted a backyard BBQ feel and insisted that people bring their children.
I just didn’t get why you would feel the need to specify what people do with their children rather than just do whatever is easiest.
I get it now though.

Nobody is telling you what to do with the kids they are saying they aren’t hosting them. The kids are not invited. If kids are welcome at the bbq its not a demand, you can still leave them home with a sitter. This is all so very easy to understand.

Not everyone has a sitter available that they can leave their children with for several days while they fly out to a wedding, and it’s more trouble to find one than to bring them. Some people do have a sitter available and find it easier to leave the kids.

Most people tell their guests to do whatever is easiest.

As I said above, I actually do understand now why some people would rather have their close family members not come than bring their children. This thread has been helpful.

I’m not sure why you are struggling to understand that many people don’t have reliable options for multi day, overnight childcare.

You don’t have to go. Send your regrets. We totally understand. But, no kids. Sorry you can’t make it.

I get where you are coming from, pp.
You want to have the wedding you want to have, and your family and friends are free to come or not come. It isn’t about them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It doesn't make sense to you because you have decided there is a right way and a wrong way to do a wedding. You want to know how anyone can do it wrong and why they bother at all because in your mind it's not a wedding and they should just go the courthouse. The condescension is loud and clear. I have been to lots of weddings and fhave never been to one where all the friends of the bride and groom bring their entire families. It's just not done, and it's known to get a sitter.

I haven’t decided there is a right or wrong way to do a wedding. I haven’t decided that if you are doing it the “wrong” way, then you should go to a courthouse, (although I understand why pp said that because if I didn’t feel so much pressure to invite family and friends, that’s what I would have done).

Have the wedding you want. I don’t care if you have kids there or not or whether you invite your mom or your grandma. If you want to have a huge wedding that is attended by people that you invited off the street or paid actors or a troop of jugglers that meets you at the top of a mountain, that’s fine by me. I was just curious about your motivation for it.

You really do care about the wedding others want. You say all that but then you're like "I just really want to know why...." make up your mind.

I honestly feel like this is what I have been saying over and over again from the beginning.
Why is it more important to have no kids at your wedding than it is to have the people you love there?
I just want to know why.

All anyone has done is swear at me or call me judgmental. I’m not judging. I’m just curious.

Because it's not an either or. The people will come and will leave their kids with a sitter. Why do you think nobody will come if the kids aren't invited?

I think that the other poster explained this well.

It isn’t that I think that no one will come. It’s that if you don’t care about your sister coming, then you probably don’t really care about any specific person coming. And, from my perspective, if you don’t care about the people who are coming, then why do it?

I see what pp said though, annd with that lens, I can go back annd understand previous comments. They see the wedding and reception as being about the bride and groom and their vision for that day. Maybe they are recreating something from the time they were dating or something else. The guests are more of an afterthought. It’s not really about them, and they are welcome to attend or not.

This is why some people are saying “don’t go to your sister’s wedding” like it’s not a big deal. For them, it really wouldn’t be a big deal. The point of the wedding is to have this special moment with their spouse. They can see their sister another time. She’s not what this day is about.
And others, like me, are saying, “just tell your sister that you want to bring your baby” like it’s not a big deal. For me, the point of the wedding was to have guests there with us. If my sister needed to bring her kids or her goat or whatever to feel comfortable, then that was fine with me. I have many opportunities to have special moments between myself and my husband. This event was about my guests.

Anyway, I really appreciate pp’s perspective.

I think you're overestimating the extent that people want to bring their kids to a wedding and won't go if they can't bring the kids. If you read the other wedding related thread a whole lot of people aren't bothered by no kids, even when they have kids. It's not a hardship for them to get a sitter. It's not a matter of "not caring" rather its an expected norm that a wedding and reception are for adults with maybe a very small handful of kids. There is no expectation to bring the whole family because there are plenty of other opportunities for that kind of get together, like a BBQ any other weekend.

To be fair, I would have exactly the same response of “why” if people wanted a backyard BBQ feel and insisted that people bring their children.
I just didn’t get why you would feel the need to specify what people do with their children rather than just do whatever is easiest.
I get it now though.

Nobody is telling you what to do with the kids they are saying they aren’t hosting them. The kids are not invited. If kids are welcome at the bbq its not a demand, you can still leave them home with a sitter. This is all so very easy to understand.

Not everyone has a sitter available that they can leave their children with for several days while they fly out to a wedding, and it’s more trouble to find one than to bring them. Some people do have a sitter available and find it easier to leave the kids.

Most people tell their guests to do whatever is easiest.

As I said above, I actually do understand now why some people would rather have their close family members not come than bring their children. This thread has been helpful.

I’m not sure why you are struggling to understand that many people don’t have reliable options for multi day, overnight childcare.

You don’t have to go. Send your regrets. We totally understand. But, no kids. Sorry you can’t make it.

I get where you are coming from, pp.
You want to have the wedding you want to have, and your family and friends are free to come or not come. It isn’t about them.

It isn't about them. Why did you think it was? People plan things like destination weddings knowing full well only some friends and family will come, in fact, they really only want some to come. But they have to invite a bunch of people who might otherwise get angry they weren't invited so they get the obligatory invite, which they decline, and everyone is happy. Nobody expects people to move heaven and earth to find a babysitter. It's really not that important. You will send the gift anyway, and not feel snubbed at being left off the invite list. Wedding planners tell you to plan on something like 2/3 or 3/4 of guests to come. Nobody expects 100% perfect attendance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It doesn't make sense to you because you have decided there is a right way and a wrong way to do a wedding. You want to know how anyone can do it wrong and why they bother at all because in your mind it's not a wedding and they should just go the courthouse. The condescension is loud and clear. I have been to lots of weddings and fhave never been to one where all the friends of the bride and groom bring their entire families. It's just not done, and it's known to get a sitter.

I haven’t decided there is a right or wrong way to do a wedding. I haven’t decided that if you are doing it the “wrong” way, then you should go to a courthouse, (although I understand why pp said that because if I didn’t feel so much pressure to invite family and friends, that’s what I would have done).

Have the wedding you want. I don’t care if you have kids there or not or whether you invite your mom or your grandma. If you want to have a huge wedding that is attended by people that you invited off the street or paid actors or a troop of jugglers that meets you at the top of a mountain, that’s fine by me. I was just curious about your motivation for it.

You really do care about the wedding others want. You say all that but then you're like "I just really want to know why...." make up your mind.

I honestly feel like this is what I have been saying over and over again from the beginning.
Why is it more important to have no kids at your wedding than it is to have the people you love there?
I just want to know why.

All anyone has done is swear at me or call me judgmental. I’m not judging. I’m just curious.

Because it's not an either or. The people will come and will leave their kids with a sitter. Why do you think nobody will come if the kids aren't invited?

I think that the other poster explained this well.

It isn’t that I think that no one will come. It’s that if you don’t care about your sister coming, then you probably don’t really care about any specific person coming. And, from my perspective, if you don’t care about the people who are coming, then why do it?

I see what pp said though, annd with that lens, I can go back annd understand previous comments. They see the wedding and reception as being about the bride and groom and their vision for that day. Maybe they are recreating something from the time they were dating or something else. The guests are more of an afterthought. It’s not really about them, and they are welcome to attend or not.

This is why some people are saying “don’t go to your sister’s wedding” like it’s not a big deal. For them, it really wouldn’t be a big deal. The point of the wedding is to have this special moment with their spouse. They can see their sister another time. She’s not what this day is about.
And others, like me, are saying, “just tell your sister that you want to bring your baby” like it’s not a big deal. For me, the point of the wedding was to have guests there with us. If my sister needed to bring her kids or her goat or whatever to feel comfortable, then that was fine with me. I have many opportunities to have special moments between myself and my husband. This event was about my guests.

Anyway, I really appreciate pp’s perspective.

I think you're overestimating the extent that people want to bring their kids to a wedding and won't go if they can't bring the kids. If you read the other wedding related thread a whole lot of people aren't bothered by no kids, even when they have kids. It's not a hardship for them to get a sitter. It's not a matter of "not caring" rather its an expected norm that a wedding and reception are for adults with maybe a very small handful of kids. There is no expectation to bring the whole family because there are plenty of other opportunities for that kind of get together, like a BBQ any other weekend.

To be fair, I would have exactly the same response of “why” if people wanted a backyard BBQ feel and insisted that people bring their children.
I just didn’t get why you would feel the need to specify what people do with their children rather than just do whatever is easiest.
I get it now though.

Nobody is telling you what to do with the kids they are saying they aren’t hosting them. The kids are not invited. If kids are welcome at the bbq its not a demand, you can still leave them home with a sitter. This is all so very easy to understand.

Not everyone has a sitter available that they can leave their children with for several days while they fly out to a wedding, and it’s more trouble to find one than to bring them. Some people do have a sitter available and find it easier to leave the kids.

Most people tell their guests to do whatever is easiest.

As I said above, I actually do understand now why some people would rather have their close family members not come than bring their children. This thread has been helpful.

I’m not sure why you are struggling to understand that many people don’t have reliable options for multi day, overnight childcare.

You don’t have to go. Send your regrets. We totally understand. But, no kids. Sorry you can’t make it.

I get where you are coming from, pp.
You want to have the wedding you want to have, and your family and friends are free to come or not come. It isn’t about them.

It isn't about them. Why did you think it was? People plan things like destination weddings knowing full well only some friends and family will come, in fact, they really only want some to come. But they have to invite a bunch of people who might otherwise get angry they weren't invited so they get the obligatory invite, which they decline, and everyone is happy. Nobody expects people to move heaven and earth to find a babysitter. It's really not that important. You will send the gift anyway, and not feel snubbed at being left off the invite list. Wedding planners tell you to plan on something like 2/3 or 3/4 of guests to come. Nobody expects 100% perfect attendance.

Well, people are different. I expected 100% attendance by my siblings at my wedding, and I would have moved Heaven and Earth to have them come.

And for a lot of people, the big wedding and reception are kind of a hardship and done out of love and respect for the people who want to see you married.

I can see though, that for some people, the wedding is about a special moment that they had with their spouse, or something that tradition dictates, and that, while they love their family, this day isn’t about that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It doesn't make sense to you because you have decided there is a right way and a wrong way to do a wedding. You want to know how anyone can do it wrong and why they bother at all because in your mind it's not a wedding and they should just go the courthouse. The condescension is loud and clear. I have been to lots of weddings and fhave never been to one where all the friends of the bride and groom bring their entire families. It's just not done, and it's known to get a sitter.

I haven’t decided there is a right or wrong way to do a wedding. I haven’t decided that if you are doing it the “wrong” way, then you should go to a courthouse, (although I understand why pp said that because if I didn’t feel so much pressure to invite family and friends, that’s what I would have done).

Have the wedding you want. I don’t care if you have kids there or not or whether you invite your mom or your grandma. If you want to have a huge wedding that is attended by people that you invited off the street or paid actors or a troop of jugglers that meets you at the top of a mountain, that’s fine by me. I was just curious about your motivation for it.

You really do care about the wedding others want. You say all that but then you're like "I just really want to know why...." make up your mind.

I honestly feel like this is what I have been saying over and over again from the beginning.
Why is it more important to have no kids at your wedding than it is to have the people you love there?
I just want to know why.

All anyone has done is swear at me or call me judgmental. I’m not judging. I’m just curious.

Because it's not an either or. The people will come and will leave their kids with a sitter. Why do you think nobody will come if the kids aren't invited?

I think that the other poster explained this well.

It isn’t that I think that no one will come. It’s that if you don’t care about your sister coming, then you probably don’t really care about any specific person coming. And, from my perspective, if you don’t care about the people who are coming, then why do it?

I see what pp said though, annd with that lens, I can go back annd understand previous comments. They see the wedding and reception as being about the bride and groom and their vision for that day. Maybe they are recreating something from the time they were dating or something else. The guests are more of an afterthought. It’s not really about them, and they are welcome to attend or not.

This is why some people are saying “don’t go to your sister’s wedding” like it’s not a big deal. For them, it really wouldn’t be a big deal. The point of the wedding is to have this special moment with their spouse. They can see their sister another time. She’s not what this day is about.
And others, like me, are saying, “just tell your sister that you want to bring your baby” like it’s not a big deal. For me, the point of the wedding was to have guests there with us. If my sister needed to bring her kids or her goat or whatever to feel comfortable, then that was fine with me. I have many opportunities to have special moments between myself and my husband. This event was about my guests.

Anyway, I really appreciate pp’s perspective.

I think you're overestimating the extent that people want to bring their kids to a wedding and won't go if they can't bring the kids. If you read the other wedding related thread a whole lot of people aren't bothered by no kids, even when they have kids. It's not a hardship for them to get a sitter. It's not a matter of "not caring" rather its an expected norm that a wedding and reception are for adults with maybe a very small handful of kids. There is no expectation to bring the whole family because there are plenty of other opportunities for that kind of get together, like a BBQ any other weekend.

To be fair, I would have exactly the same response of “why” if people wanted a backyard BBQ feel and insisted that people bring their children.
I just didn’t get why you would feel the need to specify what people do with their children rather than just do whatever is easiest.
I get it now though.

Nobody is telling you what to do with the kids they are saying they aren’t hosting them. The kids are not invited. If kids are welcome at the bbq its not a demand, you can still leave them home with a sitter. This is all so very easy to understand.

Not everyone has a sitter available that they can leave their children with for several days while they fly out to a wedding, and it’s more trouble to find one than to bring them. Some people do have a sitter available and find it easier to leave the kids.

Most people tell their guests to do whatever is easiest.

As I said above, I actually do understand now why some people would rather have their close family members not come than bring their children. This thread has been helpful.

I’m not sure why you are struggling to understand that many people don’t have reliable options for multi day, overnight childcare.

You don’t have to go. Send your regrets. We totally understand. But, no kids. Sorry you can’t make it.

I get where you are coming from, pp.
You want to have the wedding you want to have, and your family and friends are free to come or not come. It isn’t about them.

It isn't about them. Why did you think it was? People plan things like destination weddings knowing full well only some friends and family will come, in fact, they really only want some to come. But they have to invite a bunch of people who might otherwise get angry they weren't invited so they get the obligatory invite, which they decline, and everyone is happy. Nobody expects people to move heaven and earth to find a babysitter. It's really not that important. You will send the gift anyway, and not feel snubbed at being left off the invite list. Wedding planners tell you to plan on something like 2/3 or 3/4 of guests to come. Nobody expects 100% perfect attendance.

Well, people are different. I expected 100% attendance by my siblings at my wedding, and I would have moved Heaven and Earth to have them come.

And for a lot of people, the big wedding and reception are kind of a hardship and done out of love and respect for the people who want to see you married.

I can see though, that for some people, the wedding is about a special moment that they had with their spouse, or something that tradition dictates, and that, while they love their family, this day isn’t about that.

I guess we'll agree to disagree. I don't see a wedding as gift or favor to family and friends. Same for when I plan a birthday party for a kid, I take into consideration the birthday child's wants and desires and plan the event around that. A wedding is more or less the same. The theme, date, food, special touches, traditions, are done according to the wishes of the bride and groom. And then they invite people to share the day, celebrate, and witness the vows. If that's not your cup of tea be in the minority who can't make it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It doesn't make sense to you because you have decided there is a right way and a wrong way to do a wedding. You want to know how anyone can do it wrong and why they bother at all because in your mind it's not a wedding and they should just go the courthouse. The condescension is loud and clear. I have been to lots of weddings and fhave never been to one where all the friends of the bride and groom bring their entire families. It's just not done, and it's known to get a sitter.

I haven’t decided there is a right or wrong way to do a wedding. I haven’t decided that if you are doing it the “wrong” way, then you should go to a courthouse, (although I understand why pp said that because if I didn’t feel so much pressure to invite family and friends, that’s what I would have done).

Have the wedding you want. I don’t care if you have kids there or not or whether you invite your mom or your grandma. If you want to have a huge wedding that is attended by people that you invited off the street or paid actors or a troop of jugglers that meets you at the top of a mountain, that’s fine by me. I was just curious about your motivation for it.

You really do care about the wedding others want. You say all that but then you're like "I just really want to know why...." make up your mind.

I honestly feel like this is what I have been saying over and over again from the beginning.
Why is it more important to have no kids at your wedding than it is to have the people you love there?
I just want to know why.

All anyone has done is swear at me or call me judgmental. I’m not judging. I’m just curious.

Because it's not an either or. The people will come and will leave their kids with a sitter. Why do you think nobody will come if the kids aren't invited?

I think that the other poster explained this well.

It isn’t that I think that no one will come. It’s that if you don’t care about your sister coming, then you probably don’t really care about any specific person coming. And, from my perspective, if you don’t care about the people who are coming, then why do it?

I see what pp said though, annd with that lens, I can go back annd understand previous comments. They see the wedding and reception as being about the bride and groom and their vision for that day. Maybe they are recreating something from the time they were dating or something else. The guests are more of an afterthought. It’s not really about them, and they are welcome to attend or not.

This is why some people are saying “don’t go to your sister’s wedding” like it’s not a big deal. For them, it really wouldn’t be a big deal. The point of the wedding is to have this special moment with their spouse. They can see their sister another time. She’s not what this day is about.
And others, like me, are saying, “just tell your sister that you want to bring your baby” like it’s not a big deal. For me, the point of the wedding was to have guests there with us. If my sister needed to bring her kids or her goat or whatever to feel comfortable, then that was fine with me. I have many opportunities to have special moments between myself and my husband. This event was about my guests.

Anyway, I really appreciate pp’s perspective.

I think you're overestimating the extent that people want to bring their kids to a wedding and won't go if they can't bring the kids. If you read the other wedding related thread a whole lot of people aren't bothered by no kids, even when they have kids. It's not a hardship for them to get a sitter. It's not a matter of "not caring" rather its an expected norm that a wedding and reception are for adults with maybe a very small handful of kids. There is no expectation to bring the whole family because there are plenty of other opportunities for that kind of get together, like a BBQ any other weekend.

To be fair, I would have exactly the same response of “why” if people wanted a backyard BBQ feel and insisted that people bring their children.
I just didn’t get why you would feel the need to specify what people do with their children rather than just do whatever is easiest.
I get it now though.

Nobody is telling you what to do with the kids they are saying they aren’t hosting them. The kids are not invited. If kids are welcome at the bbq its not a demand, you can still leave them home with a sitter. This is all so very easy to understand.

Not everyone has a sitter available that they can leave their children with for several days while they fly out to a wedding, and it’s more trouble to find one than to bring them. Some people do have a sitter available and find it easier to leave the kids.

Most people tell their guests to do whatever is easiest.

As I said above, I actually do understand now why some people would rather have their close family members not come than bring their children. This thread has been helpful.

I’m not sure why you are struggling to understand that many people don’t have reliable options for multi day, overnight childcare.

You don’t have to go. Send your regrets. We totally understand. But, no kids. Sorry you can’t make it.

I get where you are coming from, pp.
You want to have the wedding you want to have, and your family and friends are free to come or not come. It isn’t about them.

It isn't about them. Why did you think it was? People plan things like destination weddings knowing full well only some friends and family will come, in fact, they really only want some to come. But they have to invite a bunch of people who might otherwise get angry they weren't invited so they get the obligatory invite, which they decline, and everyone is happy. Nobody expects people to move heaven and earth to find a babysitter. It's really not that important. You will send the gift anyway, and not feel snubbed at being left off the invite list. Wedding planners tell you to plan on something like 2/3 or 3/4 of guests to come. Nobody expects 100% perfect attendance.

Well, people are different. I expected 100% attendance by my siblings at my wedding, and I would have moved Heaven and Earth to have them come.

And for a lot of people, the big wedding and reception are kind of a hardship and done out of love and respect for the people who want to see you married.

I can see though, that for some people, the wedding is about a special moment that they had with their spouse, or something that tradition dictates, and that, while they love their family, this day isn’t about that.

I guess we'll agree to disagree. I don't see a wedding as gift or favor to family and friends. Same for when I plan a birthday party for a kid, I take into consideration the birthday child's wants and desires and plan the event around that. A wedding is more or less the same. The theme, date, food, special touches, traditions, are done according to the wishes of the bride and groom. And then they invite people to share the day, celebrate, and witness the vows. If that's not your cup of tea be in the minority who can't make it.

Well, you didn’t invite me to your wedding.
I’m sure that your family and social circle sees things the way you do and feels free not to attend if it’s inconvenient.