It's family coming together. Family celebrating. What a wonderful thing. I think first there is a talk about wants. Not "needs", not what money is needed but what kind of experience the B & G would want to have - IF they could have what they want. Then there is research. What does it cost. What feels like a reasonable overall budget. Way down the list, is also, what would the parents (both sides) want - again, they may not get any of it. If it's a big wedding it is reasonable that parents might have a few people, special to them, invited - usually those are adults who have been deeply involved/influential in the lives of the B or G. Different scenarios are considered ... what if it's this way ... what if it's this other way. Again, what's the cost, the cost of each scenario.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You have zero input on whether the other set of parents should contribute money. So drop that “bride’s family and groom’s family attitude” right now. If you want to give money, give a check. Give a check in an amount you are combo for table with, with no strings attached. Expect no input, and do not expect to be consulted. This is a GIFT, so give it.

Agree with the bolded. Implicit in the question is that the parties should be entitled to opinions about what the other parties contribute. I’ve seen groom’s families pay for the whole thing because the bride’s family’s budget was too modest for their tastes—fair enough! Every dynamic is different.

I disagree though that you can either give a “no strings” gift or nothing. Parents can absolutely say “I’ll give you this money but only if you invite these people and serve a traditional dinner etc.” The couple is free to say no, but it’s not “a GIFT” it’s money for a specific event.

Then you’re not giving money for their wedding. You’re giving money for a family reunion or family party that you want. No thanks.

DH and I had plenty of money. We accepted a gift from my parents, and my parents made it clear it was for anything we wanted—wedding, downpayment, savings, a vacation, a honeymoon, etc. That’s exactly what we’ll be doing for our children.

No YOU aren’t giving them money for a wedding. I’m literally giving them money for a wedding. Not a down payment, not a honeymoon, not a shopping spree, a wedding.

+1 I'm a PP who wrote that my parents paid for my wedding. There were strings attached (in terms of expecting we would invite certain ppl etc) but that was clear and I was fine with it. There's nothing wrong with paying with strings attached, rh couple is also free to say No. I could have paid for my own wedding from savings if I wanted to.

Pp here. The trend continues…my parents gave us a substantial check for Xmas and when I thanked them my dad said “please don’t put it all toward the kids’ college funds or orthodontia or whatever. We really want you to go to some good dinners, hire babysitters, and take a family vacation.” They obviously can’t control it when it’s in our bank account, but it’s nice knowing they would like us to use their money to do something nice for ourselves.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Three of our daughters have gotten married. All three were in their mid 20s or so. We happily paid for the bulk of all three weddings. Each wedding could not have been more different from the other, but each was exactly what the couple wanted and was very, very nice. I’d say the cheapest of the 3 was about $50k and the most expensive was closer to $100k.

We accepted when offered but never requested any help from the grooms’ parents or the couples, and never ever talked to any of them about money. One of the grooms’ parents wanted to spring for the wedding cake, for example, and another wanted to provide the booze - in both cases we said “sure, thank you very much” and that was that. Had they not offered, we wouldn’t have cared or judged.

There’s so much acrimony on DCUM when it comes to family, in laws, kids, who pays for what, etc etc etc. We have never experienced any of that. We’re lucky, I guess.

You've lots of money and willing to spend it on parties so good for you. Not everyone can need or want to.

Well, they weren’t parties they were weddings. A one time thing. So we didn’t mind. We also have pretty sensible kids who didn’t go overboard. They had a pretty good sense for what was reasonable and what wasn’t. We also learned from our mistakes with the first wedding, which was the most expensive. We trimmed the guest list for the other weddings, for example, inviting fewer of our friends who had less of a connection to the couple. After all, weddings are mostly about the couple, their family, and their friends.

Sensible "kids" don't let their UMC parents throw fancy $100k events for them.

Well, as I said, the first wedding was $100k because it was larger than it needed to be. The second and third weddings were cheaper because we cut the guest list and didn’t invite our own friends. Just friends of the bride and groom. One of the grooms had a rule that he didn’t want to meet people for the first time at his own wedding, which was real helpful ha ha.

My parents paid for our wedding 15 years ago, which ended up being 80 people and about $25k. They didn’t give me a budget (I think they spent about $40k on both my siblings’ weddings which were much bigger) and in fact kept trying to make it bigger. The reception place we chose had a main dining room and then a bunch of side rooms and I kept trying to tell them if we went bigger either we’d have to give up some or all of the dance floor for tables or we’d have to put some tables in the other rooms. I didn’t want either. My parents visited a cousin of my mom’s I’d never met shortly after I was engaged and my dad said “you should come to the wedding!” So then my mom felt she needed to invite all 12 of her cousins and their spouses. Finally I said to my parents, “if I can’t give them a big hug and say ‘it means the world to me and / or DH that you are here’ then I don’t want them here.” My family including cousins, aunts, uncles were 40 of the guests, my DH’s siblings, in-laws, and parents were 10. His parents invited 6 close friends and my parents invited about 10. After the minister and his wife that left room for about 12 of our friends! My parents kept saying “your siblings gave us freedom for 20-30 guests at their weddings” but I pointed out their weddings were 250 or so. To this day my mom tells me how much she loved the more intimate wedding and she’s glad I reigned them in a bit. I felt like it was crazy to spend even $25k on a wedding, but they wanted to do it for me and they could.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You have zero input on whether the other set of parents should contribute money. So drop that “bride’s family and groom’s family attitude” right now. If you want to give money, give a check. Give a check in an amount you are combo for table with, with no strings attached. Expect no input, and do not expect to be consulted. This is a GIFT, so give it.

Agree with the bolded. Implicit in the question is that the parties should be entitled to opinions about what the other parties contribute. I’ve seen groom’s families pay for the whole thing because the bride’s family’s budget was too modest for their tastes—fair enough! Every dynamic is different.

I disagree though that you can either give a “no strings” gift or nothing. Parents can absolutely say “I’ll give you this money but only if you invite these people and serve a traditional dinner etc.” The couple is free to say no, but it’s not “a GIFT” it’s money for a specific event.

Then you’re not giving money for their wedding. You’re giving money for a family reunion or family party that you want. No thanks.

DH and I had plenty of money. We accepted a gift from my parents, and my parents made it clear it was for anything we wanted—wedding, downpayment, savings, a vacation, a honeymoon, etc. That’s exactly what we’ll be doing for our children.

No YOU aren’t giving them money for a wedding. I’m literally giving them money for a wedding. Not a down payment, not a honeymoon, not a shopping spree, a wedding.

Keep up the controlling attitude. Keep making their wedding about you. See where it leads. Good luck!

They can always just pay for it themselves. Their choice. But if they’re taking my money they’re taking my strings. It’s not a secret, they already know the deal.

Oh yes, they know the deal. They will make decisions accordingly in the future. Hope you like being secondary grandma!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You have zero input on whether the other set of parents should contribute money. So drop that “bride’s family and groom’s family attitude” right now. If you want to give money, give a check. Give a check in an amount you are combo for table with, with no strings attached. Expect no input, and do not expect to be consulted. This is a GIFT, so give it.

Agree with the bolded. Implicit in the question is that the parties should be entitled to opinions about what the other parties contribute. I’ve seen groom’s families pay for the whole thing because the bride’s family’s budget was too modest for their tastes—fair enough! Every dynamic is different.

I disagree though that you can either give a “no strings” gift or nothing. Parents can absolutely say “I’ll give you this money but only if you invite these people and serve a traditional dinner etc.” The couple is free to say no, but it’s not “a GIFT” it’s money for a specific event.

Then you’re not giving money for their wedding. You’re giving money for a family reunion or family party that you want. No thanks.

DH and I had plenty of money. We accepted a gift from my parents, and my parents made it clear it was for anything we wanted—wedding, downpayment, savings, a vacation, a honeymoon, etc. That’s exactly what we’ll be doing for our children.

No YOU aren’t giving them money for a wedding. I’m literally giving them money for a wedding. Not a down payment, not a honeymoon, not a shopping spree, a wedding.

Keep up the controlling attitude. Keep making their wedding about you. See where it leads. Good luck!

They can always just pay for it themselves. Their choice. But if they’re taking my money they’re taking my strings. It’s not a secret, they already know the deal.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You have zero input on whether the other set of parents should contribute money. So drop that “bride’s family and groom’s family attitude” right now. If you want to give money, give a check. Give a check in an amount you are combo for table with, with no strings attached. Expect no input, and do not expect to be consulted. This is a GIFT, so give it.

Agree with the bolded. Implicit in the question is that the parties should be entitled to opinions about what the other parties contribute. I’ve seen groom’s families pay for the whole thing because the bride’s family’s budget was too modest for their tastes—fair enough! Every dynamic is different.

I disagree though that you can either give a “no strings” gift or nothing. Parents can absolutely say “I’ll give you this money but only if you invite these people and serve a traditional dinner etc.” The couple is free to say no, but it’s not “a GIFT” it’s money for a specific event.

Then you’re not giving money for their wedding. You’re giving money for a family reunion or family party that you want. No thanks.

DH and I had plenty of money. We accepted a gift from my parents, and my parents made it clear it was for anything we wanted—wedding, downpayment, savings, a vacation, a honeymoon, etc. That’s exactly what we’ll be doing for our children.

No YOU aren’t giving them money for a wedding. I’m literally giving them money for a wedding. Not a down payment, not a honeymoon, not a shopping spree, a wedding.

Keep up the controlling attitude. Keep making their wedding about you. See where it leads. Good luck!

Anonymous wrote:I personally would contribute a set amount and my child could do with it whatever they want -- destination wedding, big blowout, small affair blowout honeymoon, small affair overage invested, elope -- because I love my child. YMMV.

Please don’t use “YMMV.” It’s sooo annoying.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You have zero input on whether the other set of parents should contribute money. So drop that “bride’s family and groom’s family attitude” right now. If you want to give money, give a check. Give a check in an amount you are combo for table with, with no strings attached. Expect no input, and do not expect to be consulted. This is a GIFT, so give it.

Agree with the bolded. Implicit in the question is that the parties should be entitled to opinions about what the other parties contribute. I’ve seen groom’s families pay for the whole thing because the bride’s family’s budget was too modest for their tastes—fair enough! Every dynamic is different.

I disagree though that you can either give a “no strings” gift or nothing. Parents can absolutely say “I’ll give you this money but only if you invite these people and serve a traditional dinner etc.” The couple is free to say no, but it’s not “a GIFT” it’s money for a specific event.

Then you’re not giving money for their wedding. You’re giving money for a family reunion or family party that you want. No thanks.

DH and I had plenty of money. We accepted a gift from my parents, and my parents made it clear it was for anything we wanted—wedding, downpayment, savings, a vacation, a honeymoon, etc. That’s exactly what we’ll be doing for our children.

No YOU aren’t giving them money for a wedding. I’m literally giving them money for a wedding. Not a down payment, not a honeymoon, not a shopping spree, a wedding.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Three of our daughters have gotten married. All three were in their mid 20s or so. We happily paid for the bulk of all three weddings. Each wedding could not have been more different from the other, but each was exactly what the couple wanted and was very, very nice. I’d say the cheapest of the 3 was about $50k and the most expensive was closer to $100k.

We accepted when offered but never requested any help from the grooms’ parents or the couples, and never ever talked to any of them about money. One of the grooms’ parents wanted to spring for the wedding cake, for example, and another wanted to provide the booze - in both cases we said “sure, thank you very much” and that was that. Had they not offered, we wouldn’t have cared or judged.

There’s so much acrimony on DCUM when it comes to family, in laws, kids, who pays for what, etc etc etc. We have never experienced any of that. We’re lucky, I guess.

You've lots of money and willing to spend it on parties so good for you. Not everyone can need or want to.

Well, they weren’t parties they were weddings. A one time thing. So we didn’t mind. We also have pretty sensible kids who didn’t go overboard. They had a pretty good sense for what was reasonable and what wasn’t. We also learned from our mistakes with the first wedding, which was the most expensive. We trimmed the guest list for the other weddings, for example, inviting fewer of our friends who had less of a connection to the couple. After all, weddings are mostly about the couple, their family, and their friends.

Sensible "kids" don't let their UMC parents throw fancy $100k events for them.

Well, as I said, the first wedding was $100k because it was larger than it needed to be. The second and third weddings were cheaper because we cut the guest list and didn’t invite our own friends. Just friends of the bride and groom. One of the grooms had a rule that he didn’t want to meet people for the first time at his own wedding, which was real helpful ha ha.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Three of our daughters have gotten married. All three were in their mid 20s or so. We happily paid for the bulk of all three weddings. Each wedding could not have been more different from the other, but each was exactly what the couple wanted and was very, very nice. I’d say the cheapest of the 3 was about $50k and the most expensive was closer to $100k.

We accepted when offered but never requested any help from the grooms’ parents or the couples, and never ever talked to any of them about money. One of the grooms’ parents wanted to spring for the wedding cake, for example, and another wanted to provide the booze - in both cases we said “sure, thank you very much” and that was that. Had they not offered, we wouldn’t have cared or judged.

There’s so much acrimony on DCUM when it comes to family, in laws, kids, who pays for what, etc etc etc. We have never experienced any of that. We’re lucky, I guess.

You've lots of money and willing to spend it on parties so good for you. Not everyone can need or want to.

Well, they weren’t parties they were weddings. A one time thing. So we didn’t mind. We also have pretty sensible kids who didn’t go overboard. They had a pretty good sense for what was reasonable and what wasn’t. We also learned from our mistakes with the first wedding, which was the most expensive. We trimmed the guest list for the other weddings, for example, inviting fewer of our friends who had less of a connection to the couple. After all, weddings are mostly about the couple, their family, and their friends.

Sensible "kids" don't let their UMC parents throw fancy $100k events for them.

Sorry if it makes you jealous.

I personally would contribute a set amount and my child could do with it whatever they want -- destination wedding, big blowout, small affair blowout honeymoon, small affair overage invested, elope -- because I love my child. YMMV.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You have zero input on whether the other set of parents should contribute money. So drop that “bride’s family and groom’s family attitude” right now. If you want to give money, give a check. Give a check in an amount you are combo for table with, with no strings attached. Expect no input, and do not expect to be consulted. This is a GIFT, so give it.

Agree with the bolded. Implicit in the question is that the parties should be entitled to opinions about what the other parties contribute. I’ve seen groom’s families pay for the whole thing because the bride’s family’s budget was too modest for their tastes—fair enough! Every dynamic is different.

I disagree though that you can either give a “no strings” gift or nothing. Parents can absolutely say “I’ll give you this money but only if you invite these people and serve a traditional dinner etc.” The couple is free to say no, but it’s not “a GIFT” it’s money for a specific event.

Then you’re not giving money for their wedding. You’re giving money for a family reunion or family party that you want. No thanks.

DH and I had plenty of money. We accepted a gift from my parents, and my parents made it clear it was for anything we wanted—wedding, downpayment, savings, a vacation, a honeymoon, etc. That’s exactly what we’ll be doing for our children.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think its very medieval for parents of the bride to pay for the wedding? Do you expect dowry as well?

Parents spend on education of their daughters, daughters have careers, they earn and contribute to the family finances. They aren't underage girls with no earnings, no need to spend retirement resources on parties to impress people who wouldn't care next day.

I’m the poster who paid for three daughters’ weddings. I didn’t use “retirement resources” to pay for them. And all of my daughters are feminists. You can be a feminist and still want a nice wedding.

but a feminist won't let mommy and daddy pay for her wants

A feminist can absolutely accept a gift from their parents. Why is there this weird view here that people with means should let their children struggle or suffer otherwise they aren't adults? Didn't we struggle so that our children don't have to? Weirdos, the whole lot of ya.

Anyone wanting a $100k wedding isn't struggling or in need of rescue.

And parents who can and want to pay for that can and do.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You have zero input on whether the other set of parents should contribute money. So drop that “bride’s family and groom’s family attitude” right now. If you want to give money, give a check. Give a check in an amount you are combo for table with, with no strings attached. Expect no input, and do not expect to be consulted. This is a GIFT, so give it.

Agree with the bolded. Implicit in the question is that the parties should be entitled to opinions about what the other parties contribute. I’ve seen groom’s families pay for the whole thing because the bride’s family’s budget was too modest for their tastes—fair enough! Every dynamic is different.

I disagree though that you can either give a “no strings” gift or nothing. Parents can absolutely say “I’ll give you this money but only if you invite these people and serve a traditional dinner etc.” The couple is free to say no, but it’s not “a GIFT” it’s money for a specific event.

You are giving money so THEY can celebrate THEIR wedding how THEY want, not for YOU to celebrate it YOUR way.

That might be how you feel but it’s not how I feel. For example I wouldn’t pay for a destination wedding. If that’s what they want they can pay for it.