No children allowed at family members wedding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know someone who said no kids, knowing that many of the families on their guest list would be unable to arrange child care since they'd be far from home. The couple marrying needed to have a small wedding because of costs and figured that this would trim the guest list down without them having to make decisions about who not to invite.

As it turned out, a lot of people just couldn't do it, between the travel and having to arrange child care, so they declined.
Then, the bride was all upset because so few people were able to make it to her wedding!

Weddings are emotional times, you just have to do what works best for you and your family.

I’m sure that’s what will happen. They reserved places for about 400 people (my aunt and uncle paid for the chunk of this wedding). Most guests are family members and friends, most have children. It’s across the state held in a rural area and we were looking forward to using it as a family reunion but now we may skip out.

I’ll also add it wasn’t clear upfront no children were allowed. The invite said Mr. and Mrs. Larlo and then after we RSVPd we received a mass email to all guest saying no kids under 16.

How is that not clear? It said Mr. and Mrs. Larlo. NOT Mr. and Mrs. Larlo and Larlas

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is OK for them to have a party to which they are only inviting adult guests. If you don't like it, don't go.

ok, if the wedding is just “a party,” then I won’t go. I don’t spend $1000s to attend just “a party.”

That's fine. Doesn't sound like you'll be missed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know someone who said no kids, knowing that many of the families on their guest list would be unable to arrange child care since they'd be far from home. The couple marrying needed to have a small wedding because of costs and figured that this would trim the guest list down without them having to make decisions about who not to invite.

As it turned out, a lot of people just couldn't do it, between the travel and having to arrange child care, so they declined.
Then, the bride was all upset because so few people were able to make it to her wedding!

Weddings are emotional times, you just have to do what works best for you and your family.

I’m sure that’s what will happen. They reserved places for about 400 people (my aunt and uncle paid for the chunk of this wedding). Most guests are family members and friends, most have children. It’s across the state held in a rural area and we were looking forward to using it as a family reunion but now we may skip out.

I’ll also add it wasn’t clear upfront no children were allowed. The invite said Mr. and Mrs. Larlo and then after we RSVPd we received a mass email to all guest saying no kids under 16.

How is that not clear? It said Mr. and Mrs. Larlo. NOT Mr. and Mrs. Larlo and Larlas

+1
That is clear as a bell. If children were invited it would've said their names specifically, or Mr. And Mrs. Larlo and family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What is the big deal about having a sitter watch children in a hotel? Is the hotel on the Gaza Strip? Why is that being seen as more dangerous than babysitting for children in a house? This constant proclamation of the horror of getting a sitter in a HOTEL of all places is baffling.

It’s not that it’s dangerous, but it means leaving your kids with a babysitter you don’t know. At home, we use the same handful of sitters who we know and are comfortable with - and have references for them, other people we know who’ve used them and liked them, etc.

[Anonymous]

Maybe if so many parents today didn't shirk real parenting and brought up nicer, better-behaved kids then so many people wouldn't have "no kids" events. Far too many kids today are horribly behaved brats that should not be in public ever.

Plus, weddings are not places for children. Never have been except to lower class people. Hire a babysitter or don't go. Somehow I suspect you wont even be missed OP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know someone who said no kids, knowing that many of the families on their guest list would be unable to arrange child care since they'd be far from home. The couple marrying needed to have a small wedding because of costs and figured that this would trim the guest list down without them having to make decisions about who not to invite.

As it turned out, a lot of people just couldn't do it, between the travel and having to arrange child care, so they declined.
Then, the bride was all upset because so few people were able to make it to her wedding!

Weddings are emotional times, you just have to do what works best for you and your family.

I’m sure that’s what will happen. They reserved places for about 400 people (my aunt and uncle paid for the chunk of this wedding). Most guests are family members and friends, most have children. It’s across the state held in a rural area and we were looking forward to using it as a family reunion but now we may skip out.

I’ll also add it wasn’t clear upfront no children were allowed. The invite said Mr. and Mrs. Larlo and then after we RSVPd we received a mass email to all guest saying no kids under 16.

But it’s not a family reunion. It’s their wedding.

Now I understand why you’re so mad. They’re running your plans by having a wedding in the middle of your dream reunion.

Do you even care about theM getting married or do you judge them so severely for daring to cohabit first? Kinda the feeling I got from your OP.

[Anonymous]

I feel like the people saying “just hire a sitter “ have little ones, and relatives who get married in a quickie ceremony at the hotel, right before the reception.

I’ve had multiple cousins marry with 2 pm full Catholic masses, a 2-3 hour gap (there were family gatherings in between), then a 5-6 hour reception.

When my kids were 6 and 8 or 8 and 10, I couldn’t leave them in a single hotel room with a random lady from 1pm (travel time to ceremony) until 11 pm. Pizza and movies would do it. Btw, these weddings were all a plane flight away.

I’m not saying kids need to be invited, but I’d like a LOT of understanding from the couple when I attend alone (and my brother skipped it).

[Anonymous]

** wouldn’t do it.

[Anonymous]

Have weddings ever been kid places? I never went to any weddings until I was 16 or so (so 30 years ago). And these were middle class midwestern weddings (not NYC black tie affairs). Everyone just knew that children weren't invited. Lots of time for catching up with people's kids with all the events before and after though!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I feel like the people saying “just hire a sitter “ have little ones, and relatives who get married in a quickie ceremony at the hotel, right before the reception.

I’ve had multiple cousins marry with 2 pm full Catholic masses, a 2-3 hour gap (there were family gatherings in between), then a 5-6 hour reception.

When my kids were 6 and 8 or 8 and 10, I couldn’t leave them in a single hotel room with a random lady from 1pm (travel time to ceremony) until 11 pm. Pizza and movies would do it. Btw, these weddings were all a plane flight away.

I’m not saying kids need to be invited, but I’d like a LOT of understanding from the couple when I attend alone (and my brother skipped it).

Did you clarify with the hosts? All DH's cousins had full Catholic ceremonies and kids did attend that part, but went to the babysitters afterwards. Crying babies or toddlers weren't supposed to be there during the ceremony though.

[Anonymous]

"No kids" is an easy way to not leave anyone off the invite list while guaranteeing that a certain percentage will decline.

[Anonymous]

This happened in my huge Catholic family and raised hell.

My cousin was in his mid-20s and fiancé was in her early 30s and was financially established. She wanted this massive wedding that was over the top by Catholic standards. Massive guest list, $15,000 dress, huge expensive venue etc... Our family found out kids were not invited and were not happy. My poor cousin got the brunt of it, and half of our family members didn’t attend. I was childless and went and remember them turning away a cousin who had bought her newborn.

It caused a massive rift in our family for years and years. They ended up having four kids. My niece got married in 2016 and sent them an invitation that said no kids. They RSVP and showed up and of course everyone else bought their kids.

This was under the influence of my aunt who was the queen of petty and never let it go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the big deal about having a sitter watch children in a hotel? Is the hotel on the Gaza Strip? Why is that being seen as more dangerous than babysitting for children in a house? This constant proclamation of the horror of getting a sitter in a HOTEL of all places is baffling.

It’s not that it’s dangerous, but it means leaving your kids with a babysitter you don’t know. At home, we use the same handful of sitters who we know and are comfortable with - and have references for them, other people we know who’ve used them and liked them, etc.

I can understand that. I don't know if it was you, but some poster seemed horrified by even using someone she was acquainted with in a hotel, the hotel seemed to be the issue and it's unclear why.

[Anonymous]

I’m sorry, I can’t even imagine in what alternate universe some people must live in that this causes major rifts in families.

Then again, my family has always done no kid weddings. The older cousins get hired to watch the younger ones in a nearby location, or in a separate room at the venue. Everyone is usually invited to a brunch the folllwing day, even if the bride and groom don’t attend that part.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the big deal about having a sitter watch children in a hotel? Is the hotel on the Gaza Strip? Why is that being seen as more dangerous than babysitting for children in a house? This constant proclamation of the horror of getting a sitter in a HOTEL of all places is baffling.

It’s not that it’s dangerous, but it means leaving your kids with a babysitter you don’t know. At home, we use the same handful of sitters who we know and are comfortable with - and have references for them, other people we know who’ve used them and liked them, etc.

I can understand that. I don't know if it was you, but some poster seemed horrified by even using someone she was acquainted with in a hotel, the hotel seemed to be the issue and it's unclear why.

Madeline McCain