Anonymous wrote:If your family is willing, yes, but I would not pay a sitter and stay home. They don't want the entire family, so if it were me, I'd stay home.

Anonymous wrote:This place is so funny to me. In another thread, you guys trashed a woman because she didn't want to fly across the world to Australia on three-weeks' notice to go to her brother in law's second wedding. But this OP shouldn't bother going because you just happen to know the husband's nephew wouldn't want her there anyways and the invitation was just a formality.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’d still attend. Right now it seems all about your kids, but eventually it won’t be. It’s good to maintain relationships and be open to doing things without your kids unless it’s truly impossible. I’d be a good sport and go and enjoy a break from mothering.

Meh. These are her in-laws excluding her kids. I don’t think there is much of a relationship to maintain there. If she wants to go as a break, sure.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is such a ridiculous thread. OP has FOUR kids who aren't little. It's a NEPHEW getting married. In all likelihood it's the bride's family paying for the bulk of the wedding. And posters are laying guilt trips on the nephew for not inviting the whole, gigantic family.

OP chose to have a huge family. Good for her. But they can't ALL be invited to everything.

If OP wants to go, get a sitter and go. If she's doesn't want to do that, then great, the husband goes. Nobody is going to blink an eye. But the idea expressed by many that the couple should be "punished" or "face the consequences" of not inviting kids is so self-centered and ridiculous.

Yes, you have kids. You love them. That's great. Doesn't make any of them the Second Coming in the eyes of others.

Ok bridezilla. The point is the couple is also not the Second Coming so hopefully nobody is surprised when people decline the invite.

Right. That in your eyes would be their "punishment" for not inviting four kids. You've proven my point.

The whole point is that it is extremely gauche to invite people you know will not accept the invite because you excluded their kids. $$$ grab.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it's really untenable for parents to go to the wedding without their children, I'd have sympathy. But it sounds like some of you are advising not to go out of spite. "It's a child-free wedding so they reap what they sow!"

Um yes … that is exactly it. Not spite, but you certainly have zero right to expect people will come if you exclude their kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How far is the travel? I would consider bringing them and using a local babysitter. I’ve done this approach twice successfully. I am also fine leaving my kids with family, but 4 is a lot to leave someone with, so this is another option.

Pack up 4 kids to travel for a wedding where they are not welcome? Are you nuts? That kind of effort would only be worth it if they were attending the wedding.

I travel with my kids all the time. We enjoy it. Not seeing the issue.

You’re not seeing the issue of carting 4 kids off to a wedding they cannot actually attend? Ok.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is such a ridiculous thread. OP has FOUR kids who aren't little. It's a NEPHEW getting married. In all likelihood it's the bride's family paying for the bulk of the wedding. And posters are laying guilt trips on the nephew for not inviting the whole, gigantic family.

OP chose to have a huge family. Good for her. But they can't ALL be invited to everything.

If OP wants to go, get a sitter and go. If she's doesn't want to do that, then great, the husband goes. Nobody is going to blink an eye. But the idea expressed by many that the couple should be "punished" or "face the consequences" of not inviting kids is so self-centered and ridiculous.

Yes, you have kids. You love them. That's great. Doesn't make any of them the Second Coming in the eyes of others.

I'm a parent of four (now grown) kids and I disagree with the bolded.

One, four kids is not a "huge" or "gigantic" family. One or two kids is small, three-five is kind of average, six-eight or nine is a large family. I feel like you need get into the double digits before you start describing a family as "gigantic."

But two, family size shouldn't dictate whether or not kids are included. If I found out my sibling with two kids had the whole family invited, but mine was not because we have more kids, I'd be very offended. I wouldn't go to the wedding, wouldn't send a gift.

The bride doesn't want 4 kids she's probably never met before taking up half a round table. It's a lot of kids and mouths to feed. She likely hasn't met OP before either. This was a family obligatory invite. Just send the husband and be done with it. Nobody cares if a distant relative will be offended her giant brood can't come.

But it's ok if a family with 2 kids (assuming approx. the same age) she's never met are taking up 1/3 of a round table?
Yeah, the couple can choose to invite or exclude whoever they want because it's their wedding, but to not invite someone because they have more siblings than their cousins do is just rude.
That doesn't appear to be the case in OP's situation though. OP said it's a 21+ wedding.

Where are you getting this from?

Look back at the quotes.
A pp indicated that OP's whole family couldn't be invited because they would take up 1/2 of a round table. That if you have 4 kids you should expect to not be invited, whereas a smaller family would.

I have no problem with kid-free events and weddings. I totally support any bride and groom choosing that.
But the pp seemed to think that (for example):
the nephew has two uncles (brothers) Jack and Steve.

Jack has 2 kids (ages 5 and 7)
Steve has 4 kids (ages 5, 7, 9, and 11)

Both Jack and Steve are equally close to their nephew.
Jack's whole family should be invited, but not Steve's, because Steve has more kids? Screw that.

OP has made it pretty clear that the kids aren't close to the B&G. OP has met the bride once she said? So yeah, if you have a large family and are that far out of the inner circle you should expect any of your kids to be invited, let alone 4. People with larger families get how this works. I have 3. If we show up with our 3, and so do a few other families it would be overrun by kids. I'm not selfish enough to realize this isn't practical or feasible for every host.

I guess I wouldn’t know then, because I don’t have a larger family. I only have four kids, just like OP.

I still think it would be rude to say “we didn’t invite your family because you have four kids. We invited your brother’s family because he has two” if family size is the ONLY reason (and not just closer relationship, age of rhe kids, etc.)

I have NO issue with child free weddings.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is such a ridiculous thread. OP has FOUR kids who aren't little. It's a NEPHEW getting married. In all likelihood it's the bride's family paying for the bulk of the wedding. And posters are laying guilt trips on the nephew for not inviting the whole, gigantic family.

OP chose to have a huge family. Good for her. But they can't ALL be invited to everything.

If OP wants to go, get a sitter and go. If she's doesn't want to do that, then great, the husband goes. Nobody is going to blink an eye. But the idea expressed by many that the couple should be "punished" or "face the consequences" of not inviting kids is so self-centered and ridiculous.

Yes, you have kids. You love them. That's great. Doesn't make any of them the Second Coming in the eyes of others.

Ok bridezilla. The point is the couple is also not the Second Coming so hopefully nobody is surprised when people decline the invite.

The bride knows. If she cared she would have invited all these extra people. 21+ is a very specific party. Don't be a guestzilla and make it about you. RSVP: No.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is such a ridiculous thread. OP has FOUR kids who aren't little. It's a NEPHEW getting married. In all likelihood it's the bride's family paying for the bulk of the wedding. And posters are laying guilt trips on the nephew for not inviting the whole, gigantic family.

OP chose to have a huge family. Good for her. But they can't ALL be invited to everything.

If OP wants to go, get a sitter and go. If she's doesn't want to do that, then great, the husband goes. Nobody is going to blink an eye. But the idea expressed by many that the couple should be "punished" or "face the consequences" of not inviting kids is so self-centered and ridiculous.

Yes, you have kids. You love them. That's great. Doesn't make any of them the Second Coming in the eyes of others.

I'm a parent of four (now grown) kids and I disagree with the bolded.

One, four kids is not a "huge" or "gigantic" family. One or two kids is small, three-five is kind of average, six-eight or nine is a large family. I feel like you need get into the double digits before you start describing a family as "gigantic."

But two, family size shouldn't dictate whether or not kids are included. If I found out my sibling with two kids had the whole family invited, but mine was not because we have more kids, I'd be very offended. I wouldn't go to the wedding, wouldn't send a gift.

The bride doesn't want 4 kids she's probably never met before taking up half a round table. It's a lot of kids and mouths to feed. She likely hasn't met OP before either. This was a family obligatory invite. Just send the husband and be done with it. Nobody cares if a distant relative will be offended her giant brood can't come.

But it's ok if a family with 2 kids (assuming approx. the same age) she's never met are taking up 1/3 of a round table?
Yeah, the couple can choose to invite or exclude whoever they want because it's their wedding, but to not invite someone because they have more siblings than their cousins do is just rude.
That doesn't appear to be the case in OP's situation though. OP said it's a 21+ wedding.

Where are you getting this from?

Look back at the quotes.
A pp indicated that OP's whole family couldn't be invited because they would take up 1/2 of a round table. That if you have 4 kids you should expect to not be invited, whereas a smaller family would.

I have no problem with kid-free events and weddings. I totally support any bride and groom choosing that.
But the pp seemed to think that (for example):
the nephew has two uncles (brothers) Jack and Steve.

Jack has 2 kids (ages 5 and 7)
Steve has 4 kids (ages 5, 7, 9, and 11)

Both Jack and Steve are equally close to their nephew.
Jack's whole family should be invited, but not Steve's, because Steve has more kids? Screw that.

Anonymous wrote:OP: I spoke to DH about it, and he said that MIL isn't very happy about our girls not being invited. She's a very douting, loving, and involved grandma to my kids but a very headstrong and willful person so she most likely will try to fight it but I won't get involved and will let it just play out. Most of my kids cousins on DH's side are adults (in relationships or newly married with no kids) so my kids and two of my SIL's kids who are 6 & 9 and also aren't invited are the only young kids in the family.

Anonymous wrote:OP: I spoke to DH about it, and he said that MIL isn't very happy about our girls not being invited. She's a very douting, loving, and involved grandma to my kids but a very headstrong and willful person so she most likely will try to fight it but I won't get involved and will let it just play out. Most of my kids cousins on DH's side are adults (in relationships or newly married with no kids) so my kids and two of my SIL's kids who are 6 & 9 and also aren't invited are the only young kids in the family.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’d still attend. Right now it seems all about your kids, but eventually it won’t be. It’s good to maintain relationships and be open to doing things without your kids unless it’s truly impossible. I’d be a good sport and go and enjoy a break from mothering.

Meh. These are her in-laws excluding her kids. I don’t think there is much of a relationship to maintain there. If she wants to go as a break, sure.

Obviously you view this in a very extreme way. First off, it’s not only her in-laws at the wedding.

It’s okay to exclude someone’s children. OP doesn’t OWN her children and is an independent person outside of her children. Just like sometimes a friend or person wants to hang with OP and not her husband, they also sometimes want an adults only event.

If you’re the type who gets super hung up and upset over a childfree wedding, you’ve likely lost yourself to having kids and it’s too much of your identity. Take a step back. They aren’t sharing they never ever want to hang with your kids. It’s just for one night they want an adults only event or for whatever reason couldn’t include your kids.