[Donna Jean]

My son and his fiancé are getting married in July. They want to have a no children's wedding and reception. The problem lies in that they are having 2 children in the wedding and her nieces and nephews have jobs for the wedding ex:-guest book etc. This will be for all of her nieces and nephews. The grooms side is not involved in this. I have tried to explain to her that it will cause hurt feelings on our side when relatives come who had to find babysitting arrangements or not bring their children no matter how old and you have I believe around 8 nieces and nephews there from her side. It is causing hard feelings. Any ideas?

[bushg]

I agree that this will probably cause a big rift. I also think she is being a bit selfish in allowing children from her family to be there and not his. Bad way to start a marriage if you want my opinion.

[s_cianci]

Well, my response is this ; if my children aren't welcome, then neither am I. I vehemently disagree with such an attitude. Especially when it only involves one side of the family, i.e. "her nieces and nephews have jobs for the wedding", but children on his side are out. Children are part of families too. And presumably the bride and groom-to-be are soon going to have children of their own. If cost is an issue then it's the planners' responsibility to keep costs such that they can afford to have all intended guests and their immediate families in attendance. If some of the intended guests have children, that needs to be taken into consideration. Now if the guests choose of their own accord not to bring their children and to make babysitting arrangements, that's something else and that's their perrogative. But to flat-out tell guests not to bring their children, that's unacceptable in my book. Just out of curiosity, who's idea was all of this? I certainly hope not the bride's. If so, then your son really ought to rethink marrying this woman. After all, how ironic that children of all people wouldn't be welcome at an event that marks the start of a new family! That doesn't speak well for the fiancee's family values!

[Wondergirl]

I look back on my wedding and reception years later and remember with laughter all the supposedly tragic and weird and goofy things that happened that day, from the pouring rain and my sister dropping her bridesmaid gown in a puddle to the antics of my manic-depressive uncle to a very dry unappetizing wedding cake that came from a highly-recommended bakery to my headpiece that showed up crooked in the 15 slides that we have of the day.

Trust me. No matter how carefully the bride plans, a perfect wedding is rare.

[Marriedguy]

This is one of the reasons I hate weddings. There is this stress about trying to have this perfect day. So someone decide that not having children was a good idea. If couples focus more on the actual union itself vs the ceremony, marriages would actually last.

I think asking your guests not to bring there children is plain rude. Only thing I hate more is when there request money instead of gifts. As a parent I don't bring my children to wedding because weddings are boring and I find it hard myself to sit there so imagine a 2 year old or even 10 year old.

Now you have a double standard here because there is no children at the wedding however there are children performing in the wedding ceremony.

Idea 1: Is change the standard and allow children. Then hope that parents don't bring their children. That is the decent thing to do.

Idea 2: Remove the children from the wedding ceremony. This idea is probably not going to happen because the children are hand selected.

Idea 3: Don't allow any children at the wedding but allow the children in the reception. The halls are normally huge have any area just for the children. Where these children can actual have fun.

Idea 4: The only reason why people bring children is because the can't find someone to care for them. Find people everyone trust that is willing to supervise and babysit at the hotel (Having everyone in the stand hotel room would be great) and these people will take the children McDonald playroom or whatever. If the person is like me I rather stay with the kids playing Nintendo Wii and eating pizza then sit through the wedding and reception.

Hope this helped.

[Fr_Chuck]

Yes, it will, and it can cause rifts that may follow them the rest of their married life. Normally even on closer relastions, if kids were not invited I just did not go myself.

[wewed100606]

Well, my response is this ; if my children aren't welcome, then neither am I. I vehemently disagree with such an attitude. Especially when it only involves one side of the family, i.e. "her nieces and nephews have jobs for the wedding", but children on his side are out. Children are part of families too. And presumably the bride and groom-to-be are soon going to have children of their own. If cost is an issue then it's the planners' responsibility to keep costs such that they can afford to have all intended guests and their immediate families in attendance. If some of the intended guests have children, that needs to be taken into consideration. Now if the guests choose of their own accord not to bring their children and to make babysitting arrangements, that's something else and that's their perrogative. But to flat-out tell guests not to bring their children, that's unacceptable in my book. Just out of curiosity, who's idea was all of this? I certainly hope not the bride's. If so, then your son really ought to rethink marrying this woman. After all, how ironic that children of all people wouldn't be welcome at an event that marks the start of a new family! That doesn't speak well for the fiancee's family values!

Their wedding is about them... not everybody else! It is their day to have everything how they want. As long as the bride and groom agree it is fine and the rest of everybody better learn to deal with it and if they can't they don't belong at the wedding either. This is exactly why I had only my bro and sis, mom and dad and my wife had the same at our wedding. Everybody has the tendency to make what should be the most wonderful day of your life into a year long stress fest.

Tell me this... are they better off starting their marriage with a little childish squabble between their extended families, most of which will never see each other again, or are they better off letting the 60 children come to the wedding and being another couple thousand dollars in debt to start the marriage?

This isn't a bride and groom issue (ie. The only people who matter). This is an over involved family issue that has lost sight of what this day is truly suppose to be about.

[bushg]

Wewed I don't think the real problem is her asking for a childless wedding. The only children she wants in the wedding is her side of the family. I think that is where the problem lies.

[wewed100606]

This is one of the reasons why I hate weddings. There is this stress about trying to have this perfect day. So someone decide that not having children was a good idea. If couples focus more on the actual union itself vs the ceremony, marriages would actually last.

I think asking your guests not to bring there children is plain rude. Only thing I hate more is when there request money instead of gifts. As a parent I don't bring my children to wedding because weddings are boring and I find it hard myself to sit there so imagine a 2 year old or even 10 year old.

Now you have a double standard here because there is no children at the wedding however there are children performing in the wedding ceremony.

Idea 1: Is change the standard and allow children. Then hope that parents dont bring their children. That is the decent thing to do.

Idea 2: Remove the children from the wedding ceremony. This idea is probably not going to happen because the children are hand selected.

Idea 3: Dont allow any children at the wedding but allow the children in the reception. The halls are normally huge have any area just for the children. Where these children can actual have fun.

Idea 4: The only reason why people bring children is because the can't find someone to care for them. Find people everyone trust that is willing to supervise and babysit at the hotel (Having everyone in the stand hotel room would be great) and these people will take the children McDonald playroom or whatever. If the person is like me I rather stay with the kids playing Nintendo Wii and eating pizza then sit through the wedding and reception.

Hope this helped.

I agree with a lot of his ideas. However, children at the reception is usually what people are trying to avoid (more $$$, seeing uncle larry s**t faced, having to take them home at 9 pm. etc.)

If I would be planning this... I would have the children in the wedding ceremony, but then they leave right after. That way it isn't about the children being there, because everyone can see they were only there to serve a purpose... not to be included in the social and emotional aspect... I think everyone could respect an idea like this?

[s_cianci]

wewed100606 disagrees: I agree on the her side/his side thing, but childless weddings are very normal. Don't tell someone they are evil for having a childless wedding. It keeps costs down and fit into a venue u might not otherwise. No crying babies during vows!

I know that childless weddings are "very normal." That's one of the reasons I'm opposed to them. To me it sends the unhealthy message that children are not significant, that their role in the family is unimportant. And I don't believe I called anyone "evil" for having a childless wedding. I expressed my disapproval and gave my opinions but I never labeled anyone as "evil". As for the cost issue, I addressed that in my response as well. If a lot of guests have children (and I would assume that in the case of a young couple getting married for the first time that a lot of the guests would have children), then the prospective bride and groom may have to settle for a $60/plate reception instead of a $150/plate reception. Either that or revise the guest list so that only childless guests are invited. And I also did mention that guests who do have children can decide of their own accord not to bring them ; I just don't like the idea of them being told not to bring them. As for babies crying during vows, oh well, babies cry ; get over it. You of all people should know that, having two of your own (that I know of.)

[wewed100606]

My point is... weddings are for the bride and groom. Not for you, not for their friends, or family. No one should pass judgement on anyone on a day that is for THEM. So, you feel like it is OK to not invite people who have children, but not invite the children? So, it is OK to not invite Uncle Vinny because he has kids, but not OK to invite Uncle Vinny and ask that he respects the Bride and Groom's wishes and not bring his children? Your logic is just not logical. If we use your logic, if we invite one person we should invite all people otherwise we are saying they are insignificant. Sorry, but dumb.

As for babies crying... yes I know they cry... and no it is not oh well... why force yourself to deal with a relative certainty of uncontrolable crying when you can all together avoid it?

THe focus is suppose to be on the bride and groom and their vows. Not little 8 month old Suzy in the third row who went poopy.

You are putting everybody else's feelings before the only two people who matter on this day. I am dead set on do what the bride and groom want. If you as a family member or close friend can't respect that this is what they want... you have no business being at the wedding to start with.

[wewed100606]

If I would be planning this...I would have the children in the wedding ceremony, but then they leave right after. That way it isn't about the children being there, because everyone can see they were only there to serve a purpose...not to be included in the social and emotional aspect...I think everyone could respect an idea like this?

I still think this is the best and easiest solution.

[lacuran8626]

First, I don't think people should be put out that their kids are not invited to a wedding just because other children are in the bridal party and are, therefore, invited. Weddings are very costly today and anyone should understand that difficult decisions have to be made. Wedding receptions are also typically adult functions where liquor is served, etc. It should not be a huge hardship for people with children to leave those children with relatives on the other side of the family, or to hire a sitter.

If you want to be super nice though, one suggestion is to invite the children to the ceremony, followed by their own wedding reception. This would just be a kids party with pizza, pop, junk food, and if you are having the wedding at a hotel, maybe they could go swimming and then watch a movie in the room. Hire favorite babysitters of the kids to come for the evening and be in charge of the festivities.

If they swim, you should have one adult for every 2 to 3 children minimum to supervise... hotel pools rarely have lifeguards.

Another option to having it at the hotel is to have it back at grandma's house. They bring pajamas and sleeping bags, and sleep over. Parents have an evening to themselves, and come get the kids in the morning.

[Synnen]

I was one of those "horrible" brides.

No kids at the ceremony. Period.

I provided babysitters in the church nursery. There was a way to view, through glass, the ceremony without the kids disrupting it. That was MY moment, MY ceremony, and I wanted it to go MY way, so that my memories were about my husband and I, and not about some little kid in the family or another crying, barfing, whining, or shouting when I was making the most solemn vow I'd ever make.

Thankfully, it wasn't a matter of cost for me at the reception--kids meals were a negligible cost. Otherwise, I would have happily rented ANOTHER room for kids during dinner, and provided pizza and/or happy meals, at $3 a kid rather than $16 a kid.

I understand that the point is that HER side is able to have kids, and HIS isn't. What does the groom say about the whole thing? Has he even spoken up, either to the bride, or to those complaining?

It is NOT the obligation of the wedding couple to feed and entertain every person they ever met at their wedding. If they invite Aunt Ginny and Uncle Joe and say no way to Aunt Rose and Uncle Stew--well, the bride and groom are the ones who will have to live with the resentment the rest of their lives.

HOWEVER--I find that more often than not the bride (and groom!) have input from everyone who want their wedding to go the way OTHER people want, and to take OTHER people's needs (like--why isn't there a kosher dish at the dinner for the ONE Jewish couple invited! My god! How could you ignore those needs!) into consideration, instead of just doing what THEY want to do.

I had a no-kids ceremony, against the wishes of EVERYONE on BOTH sides, and I had NO free liquor at the reception--because I KNEW too many people would just get drunk and then I'd be worrying about them driving home with their kids in the car, and I just didn't feel like contributing to that.

It's THEIR day. Offer, as a compromise, to pay for a sitter during the ceremony and dinner at a nearby hotel (someplace close enough that parents can pop over to check on their kids if they feel the need), if all kids would be welcome at the reception/dance.

But no one should EVER be obligated to pay for something they don't want, especially on a day that's about THEM, not about everyone else in both of their families.

And for those with kids that don't like it--Get used to seeing your families all together only at funerals, then, if you won't go without your kids. Kids are a GREAT way to cut costs, and they don't CARE, as a general rule, anyway.

[ang8318]

I think that if they want a childless wedding, then no children should be allowed, either that or all children should be allowed. I got married 2 1/2 years ago, and we had an adults only reception, partially because not a lot of my friends and family had children and those that did, did not have a problem with it. But we also did not have children participate in the ceremony. I do not think that it is awful that we did not invite children to our wedding, it saved money and also let all the adults relax without having to chase around their children. As a new mother if I was invited to a wedding now, with my two month old, I would leave him with a sitter anyway.

[Alty]

At my wedding the children were more than welcome to attend the ceremony but the reception was child free.

The reception is a celebration, there is usually alcohol, dancing, Uncle Fred fighting with Uncle Sam because of an incident that happened 35 years ago. You get the picture.

Receptions usually go on rather late, it's not fair to the parents of young children to have to leave early or deal with a grumpy child, nor is it pleasant for the rest of the guest to hear kids crying and screaming.

Unless you have a buffet, feeding extra guests will cost you plenty.

Weddings are usually pretty boring to a child. Sure, the dancing is fun for around 5 minutes but then it's usually "Mom, when can we go home, there's nothing to do." etc.

I do agree that if the bride is letting her side of the family bring their kids then so should his side of the family. All or nothing.

[joye68]

Their wedding is about them...not everybody else! It is their day to have everything how they want. As long as the bride and groom agree it is fine and the rest of everybody better learn to deal with it and if they can't they don't belong at the wedding either. ...

This isn't a bride and groom issue (ie. the only people who matter). This is an over involved family issue that has lost sight of what this day is truly suppose to be about.

I also agree with "Receptions usually go on rather late, it's not fair to the parents of young children to have to leave early or deal with a grumpy child, nor is it pleasant for the rest of the guest to hear kids crying and screaming."

I agree. Get a sitter. Sit back and enjoy a day to yourselves. Take time to renew your own vows with each other mentally. You can't take them everywhere. You can try... but children are just not welcome everywhere. Focus on the positives and... move on. There are better ways to "put your children first" without a battle of wills.

You were invited for a reason. Your friends want you to enjoy the day with them in an adult atmosphere without worrying about how sloshed Uncle Joe will get at the reception and how bad the language can get with folks drinking. I've been to probably 40 weddings and receptions where lots of parents don't mind their own kids. For them, it's a big babysitting fest. (This is NOT a cookout people). Stress levels are high enough for the bride and groom and their families. It gets really tiresome really fast with someone else's kids to worry about on top of it all. Most of the other parents just stand around and bark and moan about someone else's kid acting up, but nothing gets done because they don't want to "look bad". If their families are good with the "child free" aspect, then who are we to tell them what to do.

The children that are part of the wedding party are probably only going to put in a small appearance anyway at the reception - on the practical side - probably only long enough for pictures, then they'll surely be sent on their way. Common sense to shoo them off.

There's plenty of time for the bride and groom to figure out their own kids when they have them. I figured out mine. I rather enjoy a childfree wedding. It gives me time for myself and my partner to focus on our friends and not our kids (even though they are never far from our minds or sight) and to enjoy an adult evening out. If you get your panties in a bunch over something that has NOTHING to do with YOU, then you'll lose a good friend. If you say good riddance to them, then perhaps that's your loss, not theirs.