send one spouse! I don’t get why more people don’t embrace this solution. The wedding spouse gets critical solo time and to celebrate with the couple. The other spouse stays home with the kids and knows there will be a trade eventually. It costs a lot less. Everyone wins!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know this is an old thread... but I really hate when people say no kids and then still invite kids.

If an event is truly 18+ or 21+ that is totally fine! Say that! But dont say "no kids" and then invite other peoples kids. Just invite the adults.

I had an 18+ wedding. No kids were invited, no kids attended.

It's their party and they can do what they want to.

It's improper etiquette and poor hosting.

But sure, they can also charge people a cover fee. It's their party. Doesnt not make it tacky and rude.

They don't like your kids.

It's normal for kids who are related to be invited and kids who are in the wedding party to be invited while excluding other kids

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know this is an old thread... but I really hate when people say no kids and then still invite kids.

If an event is truly 18+ or 21+ that is totally fine! Say that! But dont say "no kids" and then invite other peoples kids. Just invite the adults.

I had an 18+ wedding. No kids were invited, no kids attended.

It's their party and they can do what they want to.

It's improper etiquette and poor hosting.

But sure, they can also charge people a cover fee. It's their party. Doesnt not make it tacky and rude.

Completely agree.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know this is an old thread... but I really hate when people say no kids and then still invite kids.

If an event is truly 18+ or 21+ that is totally fine! Say that! But dont say "no kids" and then invite other peoples kids. Just invite the adults.

I had an 18+ wedding. No kids were invited, no kids attended.

It's their party and they can do what they want to.

It's improper etiquette and poor hosting.

But sure, they can also charge people a cover fee. It's their party. Doesnt not make it tacky and rude.

Anonymous wrote:I know this is an old thread... but I really hate when people say no kids and then still invite kids.

If an event is truly 18+ or 21+ that is totally fine! Say that! But dont say "no kids" and then invite other peoples kids. Just invite the adults.

I had an 18+ wedding. No kids were invited, no kids attended.

It's their party and they can do what they want to.

I have been the wedding party member with kids at a no kids wedding and that’s no fun either let me tell you! My friend asked my kids to be flower girls weeks before I got the invitation that said kids weren’t generally invited so of course I wasn’t going to back out, but I spent the whole day desperately trying to manage two toddlers on a schedule not designed with them in mind and where they were they only potential sources of disruption. In future I only want to bring my kids to weddings where there are a plethora of other 3yos.

Anonymous wrote:Now that I’m a parent, I think it’s weird that more people don’t just split for weddings. If it’s important, it’s usually more important to one spouse. The other spouse stays with the kids, everybody wins! It’s not like you’ll be lonely at a wedding, especially if it’s your family.

I don’t get this. I’m not bringing uninvited kids, to be clear, but that doesn’t sound fun to me at all. But in our families spouses are considered family on both sides so….

I know this is an old thread... but I really hate when people say no kids and then still invite kids.

If an event is truly 18+ or 21+ that is totally fine! Say that! But dont say "no kids" and then invite other peoples kids. Just invite the adults.

I had an 18+ wedding. No kids were invited, no kids attended.

Anonymous wrote:I hate weddings and I no longer go out of my way to attend them. I'd be annoyed too but I have learned my lesson. Next time don't overexert yourself and skip it if it's a hassle.

My kids are grown, but we didn't go to no kids events unless they were local and we could use a babysitter we knew.

If it takes a bunch of effort, skip it. The couple will still be married.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hate weddings and I no longer go out of my way to attend them. I'd be annoyed too but I have learned my lesson. Next time don't overexert yourself and skip it if it's a hassle.

Feel the same.

Me too. Especially if you have to get a rando sitter in an unfamiliar city who could easily kidnap your kids. No thanks.

You seriously think the babysitter is going to kidnap your kids? How do you function in life with this level of paranoia?

Now that I’m a parent, I think it’s weird that more people don’t just split for weddings. If it’s important, it’s usually more important to one spouse. The other spouse stays with the kids, everybody wins! It’s not like you’ll be lonely at a wedding, especially if it’s your family.

“No kids” is just something people made up because guests were not reading the names on the invitation. Like people who were invited would just show up with their kids, who were not. So people had to find a way to try to reinforce the invitation list.

Anonymous wrote:Yes, it’s normal. A niece as flower girl or nephew as ring bearer is different than your random kids.

+1000

They can invite the kids that they want at the wedding (just like they invite the other adults guest that they want). Also most venues do have guest limits - inviting everyone plus all of their children may not have worked logistically or financially. And honestly, more kids = more chaos.

If you didn't want to spend the money on a sitter etc, you should not have gone to the wedding.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hate weddings and I no longer go out of my way to attend them. I'd be annoyed too but I have learned my lesson. Next time don't overexert yourself and skip it if it's a hassle.

Feel the same.

Me too. Especially if you have to get a rando sitter in an unfamiliar city who could easily kidnap your kids. No thanks.