Youngest cousin wants no-kids wedding

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A lot of my cousins had no kids weddings out of town. I send a nice gift and decline.

The only problem arises when then they (or other family members) try to put pressure on you and complain about your choice - I've had one wedding where it was going to be somewhere rural, so we'd have to fly and then rent a car to drive to the wedding venue for over an hour. It was a no child wedding for all the events over two days and I had no interest in either leaving my husband and kids or flying with everyone to only then try to find a babysitter in an unfamiliar place in the middle of nowhere and leave the kids alone for the bulk of two days. The amount of pushback I got on that from various family members soured me on the whole thing. But if your cousin is not doing that, then all you should do is be gracious, send a nice present, and count all the money you saved in not going.

We had a wedding that was a flight + one hour drive. Not all of us are "blessed" to have grown up in sub/urban areas. We did not put a limit on child guests, though most people we knew had kids under five. We tracked down three possible sitters - a group of HS friends in the area - and provided the info to the guests. In the end, only two couples brought their kids - they used the sitters and were thrilled to have a night out with friends.

[Anonymous]

Shut up. It’s not about you. Decline. Whatever. Get a life.

[Anonymous]

There are two kinds of people who get all up in arms about "no kid" weddings.

1. Those who think their own kid is the Christ Child.

2. Those who don't spend enough time with their kids to not feel guilty about ditching them for a fun weekend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are two kinds of people who get all up in arms about "no kid" weddings.

1. Those who think their own kid is the Christ Child.

2. Those who don't spend enough time with their kids to not feel guilty about ditching them for a fun weekend.

In fairness it would be extremely entertaining to watch him flipping tables at the reception when he finds out that he's seated next to a banker.

[Anonymous]

My cousin is inviting only some cousins in our generation. Chose not to include those 5 and under and the adults living out of state on their own who they haven’t seen in years. Do you think that is rude?

[Anonymous]

Just don’t go. It’s fine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My cousin is inviting only some cousins in our generation. Chose not to include those 5 and under and the adults living out of state on their own who they haven’t seen in years. Do you think that is rude?

No I don't.

I have 27 first cousins, including two I've never met. There has never been an expectation in my family that all cousins be invited to anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: My own dd is having a no kids wedding (aside from her 7yo sister and the ring bearer). It's her and future dh's choice.

I had kids at my wedding, that was MY choice.

I do understand not having anyone to watch the kids-if my cousins had a no kid wedding, I would not have been able to go because anyone who'd watch the kids, would be AT the wedding.

That's weird. If you don't want kids at the reception, why include them in the ceremony?

[Anonymous]

One summer I went to two weddings. Wedding #1 was for my BIL's marriage to his husband. We kids were in the ceremony, as was I. Both grooms had their nieces and nephews in attendance. It was fun, family oriented wedding and reception and everyone enjoyed the mix.

Wedding #2 was for my best friend at a hotel in Napa Valley. I went by myself and extended an extra couple of days. It was extremely fun and adult and I had zero regrets about my young children being left at home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are two kinds of people who get all up in arms about "no kid" weddings.

1. Those who think their own kid is the Christ Child.

2. Those who don't spend enough time with their kids to not feel guilty about ditching them for a fun weekend.

In fairness it would be extremely entertaining to watch him flipping tables at the reception when he finds out that he's seated next to a banker.

😂

[Anonymous]

My wife’s cousin got married in Michigan and our then 2yo wasn’t invited. The hotel suggested for family was 25 mins from wedding venue and reception. We didn’t go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: My own dd is having a no kids wedding (aside from her 7yo sister and the ring bearer). It's her and future dh's choice.

I had kids at my wedding, that was MY choice.

I do understand not having anyone to watch the kids-if my cousins had a no kid wedding, I would not have been able to go because anyone who'd watch the kids, would be AT the wedding.

That's weird. If you don't want kids at the reception, why include them in the ceremony?

It's not weird...the flower girl is my 7yo dd (same mom and dad) and the ring bearer is her fiance's nephew. Of course the bride's SISTER, who is a child, will be there!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: My own dd is having a no kids wedding (aside from her 7yo sister and the ring bearer). It's her and future dh's choice.

I had kids at my wedding, that was MY choice.

I do understand not having anyone to watch the kids-if my cousins had a no kid wedding, I would not have been able to go because anyone who'd watch the kids, would be AT the wedding.

That's weird. If you don't want kids at the reception, why include them in the ceremony?

It's not weird...the flower girl is my 7yo dd (same mom and dad) and the ring bearer is her fiance's nephew. Of course the bride's SISTER, who is a child, will be there!

A wedding doesn't magically become appropriate for kids because of the blood tie between the bride or groom and the kid.

Ring bearers are ridiculous, but it's especially goofy to decide that there is One Chosen Nephew who needs to be there and any other young relatives would ruin things.

Have whatever wedding you like, but apply a little logical consistency.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: My own dd is having a no kids wedding (aside from her 7yo sister and the ring bearer). It's her and future dh's choice.

I had kids at my wedding, that was MY choice.

I do understand not having anyone to watch the kids-if my cousins had a no kid wedding, I would not have been able to go because anyone who'd watch the kids, would be AT the wedding.

That's weird. If you don't want kids at the reception, why include them in the ceremony?

It's not weird...the flower girl is my 7yo dd (same mom and dad) and the ring bearer is her fiance's nephew. Of course the bride's SISTER, who is a child, will be there!

A wedding doesn't magically become appropriate for kids because of the blood tie between the bride or groom and the kid.

Ring bearers are ridiculous, but it's especially goofy to decide that there is One Chosen Nephew who needs to be there and any other young relatives would ruin things.

Have whatever wedding you like, but apply a little logical consistency.

I disagree--just because you have some kids there (who are part of the ceremony) does not mean that you need to invite every child in the entire family. I would say a good half of the weddings I've been to had kids in the wedding and they were the only kids there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are two kinds of people who get all up in arms about "no kid" weddings.

1. Those who think their own kid is the Christ Child.

2. Those who don't spend enough time with their kids to not feel guilty about ditching them for a fun weekend.

In fairness it would be extremely entertaining to watch him flipping tables at the reception when he finds out that he's seated next to a banker.

At least he could turn the water into wine. It would be a cost saver!