Children at Weddings?

Spicy123

My fiance and I have no children and from day one made clear nobody under the age of 18 would be invited to our wedding. My fiance has a neice and nephew who will be 4 and 1yr 9mths by the time we are getting married. My fiances sister (the childrens mother) assumed her kids would be invited regardless and we have had to tell her they are not. Shes not impressed and is kicking up a huge fuss and telling us they are the only grandchildren of the family etc. We really do love those kids but all we wanted was an adult only wedding. Is this a rare thing for people to want? Is it the norm to have children at your wedding if related to them? Are we being unreasonable?

lazygal

This is a really common issue and everyone handles it differently. We had a no child policy and there were no exceptions. We had seen other weddings with children and it wasn't for us. We also didn't have our wedding in a hotel venue with places to bring children out to and the venue had a rule about children being offsite after a certain hour. But mainly we didn't want children there.
I know this put some people out and we had one person openly angling for their child to be included but we had decided on how we wanted our day and told them unfortunately no children were being asked and if this meant they couldn't make it, we understood.
Family though might be trickier. We luckily had only one child to really consider and it wasn't a problem, but if the parents had really wanted them there we'd have had to decide if it was more important to have our day our way or deal with one family child. I'd probably stand my ground because I'm a firm believer in a wedding setting a marker for how you handle the families longer term. But only you can decide if you want to give in on this. Me, I've seen people cave on things to do with weddings and regret it as then they're expected to cave on this that and the other for a quiet life.

Milly33

MM I would not say its a rare thing to not have kids at weddings now a days, most of the ones I have been too had none..

I wouldn't think ye are being unreasonable if anything ye are just being honest from the get go.. She should be happy to accomdate what ye want on the day and be happy that she can be kid free for the day.

I would be the opposite and would love to have kids at ours, plan on having a few but then that is what we like so that's why we are saying it is culio but if we thought the other way we would be sure to say..

Maybe you could meet her half way if she got stropping and say they could come to the church and leave it at that...

eviltwin

Its a personal choice, we had children at ours but its a decision you and your fiance should make without pressure from anyone else.

Maybe she is worried about childcare on the day, could that be it? As a parent I love childfree do's, its not much fun as a guest when you have small children to mind. She will have to get used to it though, its your day, you make the decisions.

Spicy123

No its not a childcare issue because her kids have aunts, uncles, grandparents on the fathers side who already mind them from time to time. So Im thinking she is just really offended by our decision.

freshpopcorn

I suppose she thought that they might have being flower girl/pageboy and just assumed that they would have being invited because that what she's seen at her friends weddings in the past. Every wedding I've been to has had kids at it. I've heard of a few people having weddings without kids. Some people like the idea and some people don't.

Spicy123

Originally we said the kids could come to the ceremony but she basically said that wasnt good enough and they should be at the whole day etc. Its v frustrating but i am glad u dont think we are unreasonable.

Spicy123

We are having a humanist ceremony so no pageboy or flower girl.

eviltwin

Stick to your guns. She'll get over it. Don't let it get to you, people always have an opinion about what you should do but its your wedding, go with what you want to do. Kids that age won't be bothered anyway.

stinkle

It's not an uncommon thing at all to have a childfree wedding. In some cases the only "leeway" refers to nieces and nephews of the bride and groom, and from what I've seen online and heard anecdotally,other guests who have kids (eg cousins, friends etc) are grand about understanding that the only kids invited are immediate family only.

People are always goign to assume lots of things about weddings, so it's up to you whether this is something you want to give in to or not. Fair play for offering to compromise and have them at the ceremony, from that exchange alone it sounds like the mother is being difficult for the sake of it. Are a 4 year old and an almost 2 year old even going to be a)bothered about being there or not and b)awake/alert for much of the festivities anyway?

pwurple

The whole day? My goodness. Even the last time mine was a flower girl, she was there for the ceremony and her minder for the day took her away after the photos. I honestly thought a child would be bored at the full day of a wedding. Unless it's the kind of wedding where people put on childrens tables and special entertainers etc.

Seb_bixby

I'm interested in this issue too. We have a similar situation where we don't want children at our day either. Not because we don't want kids there but because there would be 41 of them between nieces and newphews and cousins, none of whom can be excluded.
So we are going to not invite any of them because we didn't want everyone leaving at a certain time to get the kids to bed. We know that there is going to be people with big problems about this but we have decided we are just going to have to accept that.
I think you should just stick to your guns on this one because what happens if someone else then feels that their children should be invited? That's what we were afraid of.

Sir Arthur Daley

Certainly they should be brought for the ceremony and meal but should be brought home say after the first band finishes, everyone starts getting well on the beer and vino then.

Toots

It's your wedding, and you're not being unreasonable. Your sister in law is. I had about 25 kids at my wedding cos there's a bunch of kids between my family and my husband's. It worked out well because there was so many of them they had a complete ball together.

If her kids are going to be the only two at the wedding they'll be bored out of their trees. I've a 3 year old and I wouldn't bring him to a wedding where he'd be the only kid there for that very reason. Stick to your guns, she has no right to insist her kids be there, and no right to make you feel bad for having a kid free wedding.

efb

IF ye don't want kids at your wedding- NO KIDS.

evolving_doors

Seb_bixby wrote: »

I'm interested in this issue too. We have a similar situation where we don't want children at our day either. Not because we don't want kids there but because there would be 41 of them between nieces and newphews and cousins, none of whom can be excluded.
So we are going to not invite any of them because we didn't want everyone leaving at a certain time to get the kids to bed. We know that there is going to be people with big problems about this but we have decided we are just going to have to accept that.
I think you should just stick to your guns on this one because what happens if someone else then feels that their children should be invited? That's what we were afraid of.

dont know what the big deal is tbh! If you think about it.. are those 41 going to be minded by other people at home ? chances are ...at least 10 will be minded by a parent who has to miss the wedding... as opposed to those same 10 parents popping out for about an hour between 6 and 9 anyway.
Between 6 & 9 is usual downtime for guests to mill about before band kicks in proper! There will be plenty of people to be talking too and its not as if all your guests will be having your undivided attention at the same time too.

I can understand if its costs for the food but kids meals should be cheap enough too if a platter is done up.

Weddings are social family occasions, whats wrong with children , theyre part of the family too!

This no kids at weddings is a recent thing. I think really the b&g will have enough to be doing on the day to even notice.

Let the children play, then the adults can take turns minding then when theyre in bed. Its usually the OH youre nout as friendly with that ends up minding them.

okiss

Why does this woman want to have her children aged 4 and 1 year and 9 months at your wedding? I have relatives that would have children around this age or children that were at this age a number of years ago.
When these couples got wedding invitations they were glad to have a child free day and night.
I would stick to your guns about not having them there. In fact I would have discreet chat with her husband. Tell him that you have decided as a couple not to have children at your wedding but that his wife is kicking up as she wants her children there.
He could be looking forward to a child free day and night so he will have words with her.
I have to be honest the children won't want to be there and your other guest don't want to be minding children this young at a wedding.

Seb_bixby

Armelodie wrote: »

dont know what the big deal is tbh! If you think about it.. are those 41 going to be minded by other people at home ? chances are ...at least 10 will be minded by a parent who has to miss the wedding... as opposed to those same 10 parents popping out for about an hour between 6 and 9 anyway.
Between 6 & 9 is usual downtime for guests to mill about before band kicks in proper! There will be plenty of people to be talking too and its not as if all your guests will be having your undivided attention at the same time too.

I can understand if its costs for the food but kids meals should be cheap enough too if a platter is done up.

Weddings are social family occasions, whats wrong with children , theyre part of the family too!

This no kids at weddings is a recent thing. I think really the b&g will have enough to be doing on the day to even notice.

Let the children play, then the adults can take turns minding then when theyre in bed. Its usually the OH youre nout as friendly with that ends up minding them.

I'm afraid for us there are only 10 rooms in the venue so the kids would not be able to stay in the hotel so the parents would actually have to leave with them or at least one parent would. Also, we are having numbers of 120 at the wedding if we were to invite the younger members then there would be forty children to 80 adults. The cost is a factor too, i'm afraid, not all the younger members would be under 12 so we would have to pay near full price for them.

Both parents will be able to make it to the wedding as there is no babies and unlikely to be any by the time the wedding rolls around! We have thought about that and there will be people that can look after the children while their parents are at the wedding. They have done it for holidays and other functions before so with lots of notice this should be ok.

I'm sure the OP has thought about all these things aswell and it most definately is not an easy decision. I just can't understand why people start saying things like "they are being unreasonable" for making a decision about a day which is one of the most important days of the bride and grooms life.

Nekarsulm

We were invited to my cousins wedding last year. A no children rule was in operation. Fair enough, our child was 5 at the time, and as the wedding reception venue was 70 miles away (very nice castle in the west!) it really would mean having a sitter or someone for the most of 2 days.
This was a bit impractical, so we didn't go.
Its your wedding, you make the rules and let the guests adjust their lifestyle for one day. Or decline the invitation.

Dozen Wicked Words

Going against current concensus in the thread, I'd probably be disappointed if my sister got married and invited me but not my children, she is their aunt, and a big part of their lives. But it'd be her day and that would be her choice.

amdublin

It's a personal choice op.

Me personally I don't like children at weddings and I've no idea why parents or b&gs want them there.
It's a long old boring day for children and it shows - you see children crying with boredom and tiredness or else you see children going hyper on sugary drinks and dragging out of the adults. At one wedding i was at two of the kids were dragging out of the bride :eek: so much they managed to rip her dress.

Horses for courses and for me weddings are not the place for children.

Peregrinus

In principle, a wedding is a celebration of the connection between the couple and their families and the wider community, so the norm has been that children do indeed go to weddings, take part in the celebration and participate to the degree appropriate to their age and maturity. They are affected by and involved with the couple’s marriage just as much as everybody else, and they have as much reason to celebrate it.

As we move towards the conception that a wedding is a celebration by the couple of their relationship with one another, the norm becomes that attendance at a wedding is connected with your degree of involvement with the couple, and/or with the couples own desire’s about the way they wish to celebrate.

It’s you wedding, you’re paying for it and you should give yourself the wedding you want. If you want a child-free wedding, go for it. But don’t be too surprised if you experience some degree of pushback from people whose conceptions of weddings are more traditional than yours.

My wife and I did not have children at our wedding. Apart from one slightly peeved goddaughter who felt she ought to be a flower girl, if anybody was bothered by that they kept their bother to themselves.

Dozen Wicked Words

Kids are a great excuse to leave weddings early. If my kids were tired I'd be skipping out of the place with them.

Gatica

I've never seen kids misbehaving at weddings, and they've usually been a ball to have around. When you have many kids there's often a room organised with movies etc..
However, with just a 4 year old there, what is she going to do, who is she going to play with? It makes no sense to have them there for the day at all. Whatever about the mother's feelings, she is being stupid wrt her own kids, who'll be bored after the first 20 mins...
OP, it's your wedding, your call. If you want it child free, then have it child free. Stick to your guns for sure, or you'll be forever a walkover with her. I find it ridiculous that people would say you won't even notice the kids are there. If these are your nieces and nephews, you'll certainly know they're there. Also at their age, they're far more likely to be generally loud, so you'll probably hear them too.
I can see how someone would assume that a niece would be flower girl, or that there would exceptions for immediate family, because that happens often enough. Fair enough, an assumption, and a mistake. That does not give them licence though to override your wishes.

fits

Id rather have the nieces and nephews (niblings) there than some of the adults...

Tarzana

Peregrinus wrote: »

In principle, a wedding is a celebration of the connection between the couple and their families and the wider community

No, a wedding is the connection of two people, viewed by witnesses, of which there need not be more than two.

NewMrs2b

Me and H2B have a child who will be 5 getting married so a no kids wedding was out the window, originally it was the nieces & nephews but some family travelling that we wanted there and they would have smallies to so we have booked Irish Wedding Sitters for the afternoon so kids will be well and truly catered for! I couldn’t leave our child out of the celebrations nor could I expect her to spend the day content in a room full of adults.

I think to each their own, I generally wouldn’t bring the her to a wedding as I know she would be bored etc unless it was a family one were her cousins were there! I certainly wouldn’t be put out getting invited to a no kids wedding I would be skipping out the door!!

?Cee?view

Tarzana wrote: »

No, a wedding is the connection of two people, viewed by witnesses, of which there need not be more than two.

That's actually pretty sad...

Armelodie

Armelodie wrote: »

Weddings are social family occasions, whats wrong with children , theyre part of the family too!

This no kids at weddings is a recent thing. I think really the b&g will have enough to be doing on the day to even notice.

.

This really annoys me - Some people just don't like children (Shock horror) - I for one cannot abide them, I had none at my wedding 7 years ago and I don't regret it for one minute. If people were put out, tough - they didn't have to attend. I saved and went without for years to pay for my wedding, there was no way i was having kids at it. I go out of my way to avoid places with kids on an everyday basis - why should I have them at my wedding?


No OP, you are not being unreasonable - Stick to your guns, she'll get over it

Peregrinus

Tarzana wrote: »

No, a wedding is the connection of two people, viewed by witnesses, of which there need not be more than two.

The witnesses represent the community, though. That's why they're essential.

And the wedding is about the couple and the community. The couple can celebrate their own connection however they want, completely in private if they wish. But when they marry they are asking their family and their community to accept, celebrate, recognise, support and give effect to their connection, socially and legally. The fact of the couple getting married changes other people's inheritance rights, it changes the couples tax status, it changes their tenancy rights and so affects their landlords, it has consequences for their immigration status, etc, etc. You can relate to your romantic partner however you wish and however you agree, but the whole point of getting married is to change your relationship with the wider community; to have the wider community treat you as a couple.

Humour Me

I was 5 when I was flower girl at my aunt's wedding. The only part of the day I remember clearly is crying in the evening because I wanted to go to bed and people were dragging me onto the dance floor and trying to get me to cheer up. I eventually fell asleep on my dad's lap, so he was stuck to me for the rest of the night.

OP have you ask her what she plans to do with the kids for the evening? Does your venue have a babysitter that can stay in the room with the kids? Is it really worth upsetting the one year old's routine for a day? She might realise herself that it's a non runner

lazygal

?Cee?view wrote: »

That's actually pretty sad...

No its not. We got married with our parents only as witnesses. Our mums signed the register. We had a meal afterwards, just the six of us. We're not any less married than those who invited every cousin they know of or every child relative.

We chose to have a humanist 'big day' a week later but having had the simple civil ceremony with no trimmings made me realize couples can cut out 99.99% of the optional extras and still have a fantastic marriage.

December2012

?Cee?view wrote: »

That's actually pretty sad...

I disagree - a marriage between two people who don't have children is just about them.

That's the bond. That's who matters.

Anybody else is just a cherry on top.

Peregrinus

December2012 wrote: »

I disagree - a marriage between two people who don't have children is just about them.

No, really, it's not.

If it were, there'd be no injustice in denying gay people the right to marry. If it's just about the couple, they can arrange matters between themselves however they like, without anybody else's approval, or even knowledge. The signficance of marriage is that it engages everyone else in recognising and supporting their relationship, socially and legally, which is why it really does affect a couple if they are unable to marry.

stargazer 68

OP as you can see by the posts there are varying opinions. It is entirely up to you though. If the children were older I would understand her point of view that they are the only grandchildren however at 4 and not even 2 years old I really don't understand what they will bring to the proceedings or get from it!!

LynnGrace

Dovies wrote: »

OP as you can see by the posts there are varying opinions. It is entirely up to you though. If the children were older I would understand her point of view that they are the only grandchildren however at 4 and not even 2 years old I really don't understand what they will bring to the proceedings or get from it!!

Exactly what I was about to post.
I don't feel strongly for or against the attendance of children at weddings. Have attended both types of weddings.
I genuinely think that the children, especially as they are so young, would be much happier, off being treated for the day, with family who probably love having a chance to do that. I've minded nephews and nieces, in the past, to let the parents go off and have a child free day, and I loved doing it. Great memories of going to town with them, and buying a toy or a book, having a treat in a restaurant, etc.
If they have plenty of options for childcare for the day, I wouldn't worry too much, and would go with what you have planned.
Be prepared for the bit of emotional blackmail, 'if they aren't asked we won't attend'.
Have a great day, and don't let this become too much of a focus.

rainbow kirby

No kids at our wedding. None ourselves and there is only one niece, who will be 10 months old by the time the wedding rolls around, and she's being minded back in Dublin for the weekend. I have quite a few relatively young cousins (none older, I'm from a relatively young family) and by limiting things there I leave more room for my friends. We want the adults there to be able to relax and enjoy themselves and not be worrying about kids around the place.

Broken Strings

We are having kids at ours as myself and H2B have a few nieces and a goddaughter all around similar ages. We'd like the 4 of them to be flower girls as we don't want to pick one over the other.

For the sit down meal they'll probably be the only small kids there, we'll invite older kids and teens to the afters with aunts and uncles if they'd like to come between 7.30 and 9.30 so that way no one will be put out about kids not being able to join at some stage. I also have some cousins who are in their early teens who i'd like to come to the full thing.

There'll be childcare in the hotel but our choice of venue is also very centrally based in the city and is near to most peoples homes so I'd imagine some of my older cousins with cars who i'm not very close to will collect any of the kids around 9.30 so my Aunts and Uncles can stay and enjoy the rest of the night.

H2B's in-laws won't mind taking care of the younger kids as they've been with them at a few weddings.

Personally (and this is just my personal choice), I can't imagine having our wedding without them being there to help us celebrate. We've watched those kids (nieces) grow from birth and we've been to their milestones so far and have a bond with them. It's important for us that they get to celebrate with us. They're at the age where they love dress up, so i'd imagine that there will be a fair amount of excitement from their end about their little dresses and shoes. We've also been to family gatherings where the day has been pretty long (christenings, birthday parties etc.) and they've all been as good as gold and full of energy.

If I thought that the parents would have an issue looking after them then I might reconsider or try to come up with an alternative, but I know that they have plenty of other opportunities where they've had child free date nights and they aren't going to feel put out about watching their own kids at the wedding.

My cousin is 29 now and there is a home video of him at a wedding singing at the mic with a little top hat when he was only 6 years old. We've watched it a few times and it's given us a giggle and his aunt (who's wedding it was) always said it was one of those funny little things which made the day memorable. Kids can make a wedding if you're family orientated and enjoy being around them, but different strokes for different folks and if you want an all adult day then go for it.

Magicmatilda

Has she said why she wants them there?

I can't understand why she would.

Anyway you are not asking IF you should have kids or not, you are asking if your decision should be respected and I think it should.

December2012

Peregrinus wrote: »

No, really, it's not.

If it were, there'd be no injustice in denying gay people the right to marry. If it's just about the couple, they can arrange matters between themselves however they like, without anybody else's approval, or even knowledge. The signficance of marriage is that it engages everyone else in recognising and supporting their relationship, socially and legally, which is why it really does affect a couple if they are unable to marry.

You've lost me.

We are not talking about couples not being allowed to marry.

My point is that the only people that a marriage must affect is the parties to the marriage.

This has nothing to do with having the marriage recognised by law.

Milly33

I was just going to say jes that's way to deep for what was mentioned. Course the only people really that matter on the day is the couple themselves all others and anything else is a bonus but really it is about the couple..

Electric Sheep

Peregrinus wrote: »

You can relate to your romantic partner however you wish and however you agree, but the whole point of getting married is to change your relationship with the wider community; to have the wider community treat you as a couple.

That might have been your point in getting married, it was not mine.

You don't get to decide what marriage means to other people.

messrs

Spicy123 wrote: »

My fiance and I have no children and from day one made clear nobody under the age of 18 would be invited to our wedding. My fiance has a neice and nephew who will be 4 and 1yr 9mths by the time we are getting married. My fiances sister (the childrens mother) assumed her kids would be invited regardless and we have had to tell her they are not. Shes not impressed and is kicking up a huge fuss and telling us they are the only grandchildren of the family etc. We really do love those kids but all we wanted was an adult only wedding. Is this a rare thing for people to want? Is it the norm to have children at your wedding if related to them? Are we being unreasonable?

My cousin got married a few years ago and didn't have any children at her wedding, both her and the groom had young nieces/nephews but they made the decision they didn't want children there. It was their wedding so their choice, same goes for you OP, if you don't want kids there, then don't have them there, simple, you don't have to make allowances for anyone.

Tarzana

?Cee?view wrote: »

That's actually pretty sad...

Why? I'd rather that than asking scores of indifferent people to my wedding.

Milly33

too true.. I am not getting this whole thing about getting married to be more socially accepted. Jes I hope ye don't tell yer better halfs that

Gatica

I think my OH and I have been treated as a couple for a long time. Whether we got married or not didn't affect any of them, and Revenue was the only place we needed to notify of marriage.
I can understand that traditionally marriages would have involved the community, especially when girls were used to forge ties with rival kingdoms, tribes, as well as economic ties, etc... and traditional Ireland, up until the last few decades probably also involved the whole community where a Church wedding would've involved the whole parish and 200-300 guest was normal because the whole town or street was invited.

Nowadays, it's certainly not quite the same. We're not part of any local community where we are because we're renting. We invited people that were important to us, this included some children. To some people it's not important to invite children, for whatever reason (not necessarily because those children aren't important to them), and it is their right to decide that without being subjected to being questioned as to whether their marriage is legit because it didn't involve the "wider community".

Tarzana

Peregrinus wrote: »

And the wedding is about the couple and the community.

And the community can be two people.

Tarzana

Peregrinus wrote: »

No, really, it's not.

Yes, it is. To me and others. Stop pushing your own view of what a marriage is onto others.

eviltwin

My oh and myself were living in a house we bought with our child long before we got married, my community already accepted us as a couple because we already were a couple, we were already a family. Marriage didn't change that.

Milly33

OMG you were living in sin, only messing.. I agree with ye all must say all you need is LOVE!!

?Cee?view

Tarzana wrote: »

Yes, it is. To me and others. Stop pushing your own view of what a marriage is onto others.

You're pushing your view, by stating that it is a matter simply between two people.

Why do you think the recent controversy arose with regard to civil ceremonies having to be held in places open to the public? Could it be the requirement that marriages are held in public? By arguing that it's simply between two people you're ignoring the legal and contractual basis of marriage. You're also (less importantly I'd argue as things change), ignoring the historical element; consider the "banns".

I think that perhaps the focus of some on marriage as being solely between the individuals concerned reflects a sad selfishness of modern society. It's the same attitude that sees old people fecked into homes as the easy option. The wider family and the happiness and fulfillment which can arise from being less self centred are now virtually completely discounted.

Now back on topic. OP - I think you'd be best served by some sort of compromise. Maybe involve the kids in the ceremonial side but have them gone for later. Do consider though that if parents of children are travelling to the wedding, it can be hard for them to arrange overnight care.