No, I don't want him to be here. ***Update pg 5***

[KB]

Why does the OP need to make a sacrifice to accommodate her friend's child - especially since that is going to cause her additional hardship? Why is it a bad thing that the people who chose to have this child need to make the sacrifices for him? Why should the OP's DH have to do the setup alone so that OP can babysit a child that isn't hers?

I don't understand your post at all.

Why does the friend have to make a sacrifice of not having her child nearby to help out the OP when she is doing the OP a favour by coming over to help set out the OP's party? Why can't the OP make the sacrifice of having the child in another room for the time that the friend is there helping the OP with her big event?

And I'm not saying the OP should babysit the child (not sure where in my post gave you that idea) but that, if setting up the party with the friend is a problem, OP's DH could take friend's place instead. Thanks to those who did get that.

As for the sacrifices, since you clearly didn't understand that part of my post either, yes, of course couples make sacrifices because they have chosen to, but the sacrifices should be about the child, not about someone thinking 'well, you're already not used to getting what you want because of Junior, so I'm sure you'll have no problem getting what you want because of me.'

[Aeris]

I think it's important to determine here what it is you want most of all.

Is your number one, above all else, no matter what priority that the child not be in your house at all? Even if that means your friend doesn't come to your party at all? If so, then you're on the right course. But if you will be upset if she can't come to your party at all, then you may want to rethink. You can't take a hardline stance about the kid and then harbor any complaints if she respects them - but stays home.

There's really nothing *wrong* with either stance. Neither are rude, and neither are patently inappropriate in friendships. You just have to decide where your feelings are.

I know that I've been in analogous circumstances before where I thought one thing was The Most Important Thing to me, but then I realized that if people respected that thing, and in so doing, declined my event, I'd actually be upset. And that meant I had to rethink how accommodating I wanted to be. I had to ask myself 'just how important is it that this person come?'

[Fallon]

I told my friend that I'd really prefer to not have him there because I don't want to maneuver wine glasses, candles, food, etc around a toddler. I suggested that her DH and son could stay at home while she came over early, and then her DH could wait until her parents got him and then join us, but their second car is in the shop. So then I said she didn't have to come over early and help, and they could arrive a little later to the party. She didn't want to do that because she says they only have a limited time at the party because they want to go to church in the morning. So her reasoning is to spend as much time as possible with DH and me.

It doesn't sound like OP expects her friend to help with this party. It sounds like her friend WANTS to help set up for the party (but also wants to spend as much time with her DH as she can).

So yes - it's the friend that needs to figure out what she's going to sacrifice; helping with the party or hanging out with her DH.

OP - You're not being unreasonable. Unreasonable would be demanding that your friend come help you set up the party and throwing a hissy fit when she can't do that without her child. You gave her options - either come early withOUT the child, or come a bit late withOUT the child.

For what it's worth; I don't allow children in my house for any reason full stop. People that know me and have reason to come over know better to even ask, the ones that don't are politely but firmly told it's not possible.

[auntmeegs]

I told my friend that I'd really prefer to not have him there because I don't want to maneuver wine glasses, candles, food, etc around a toddler. I suggested that her DH and son could stay at home while she came over early, and then her DH could wait until her parents got him and then join us, but their second car is in the shop. So then I said she didn't have to come over early and help, and they could arrive a little later to the party. She didn't want to do that because she says they only have a limited time at the party because they want to go to church in the morning. So her reasoning is to spend as much time as possible with DH and me.

It doesn't sound like OP expects her friend to help with this party. It sounds like her friend WANTS to help set up for the party (but also wants to spend as much time with her DH as she can).

So yes - it's the friend that needs to figure out what she's going to sacrifice; helping with the party or hanging out with her DH.

OP - You're not being unreasonable. Unreasonable would be demanding that your friend come help you set up the party and throwing a hissy fit when she can't do that without her child. You gave her options - either come early withOUT the child, or come a bit late withOUT the child.

For what it's worth; I don't allow children in my house for any reason full stop. People that know me and have reason to come over know better to even ask, the ones that don't are politely but firmly told it's not possible.

I think she meant the Op and the OP's DH, not the friend's own DH.  Regarding your stance on children in your house, that's not really relevent here since if the OP had the same policy, presumably her best friend would be aware of it.

[Venus193]

If the child in question is permitted to grab anything he wants and he would then be in a house that isn't child-proofed and will have lots of tempting things around (like stemware and grown-up hors d'oeurvres) the OP is entirely within her rights to object to his presence.  It doesn't sound like the child's father controls him any more than the mother does.

Sorry I have no solution to your dilemma, though.

[sweetonsno]

It isn't wrong for you to not want to have a kid underfoot, but I think it's important to realize that your friend is doing you a favor by setting up, even if you two have fun doing it. You have limited bargaining power when someone is helping you out free of charge and without obligation. If she can't make it to help you set up, so be it.

I suspect that part of the problem is that she probably thinks you expect her to be there even though she doesn't have childcare. Did you let you know that she was off the hook?

[Emmy]

I told my friend that I'd really prefer to not have him there because I don't want to maneuver wine glasses, candles, food, etc around a toddler. I suggested that her DH and son could stay at home while she came over early, and then her DH could wait until her parents got him and then join us, but their second car is in the shop. So then I said she didn't have to come over early and help, and they could arrive a little later to the party. She didn't want to do that because she says they only have a limited time at the party because they want to go to church in the morning. So her reasoning is to spend as much time as possible with DH and me.

It doesn't sound like OP expects her friend to help with this party. It sounds like her friend WANTS to help set up for the party (but also wants to spend as much time with her DH as she can).

So yes - it's the friend that needs to figure out what she's going to sacrifice; helping with the party or hanging out with her DH.

OP - You're not being unreasonable. Unreasonable would be demanding that your friend come help you set up the party and throwing a hissy fit when she can't do that without her child. You gave her options - either come early withOUT the child, or come a bit late withOUT the child.

For what it's worth; I don't allow children in my house for any reason full stop. People that know me and have reason to come over know better to even ask, the ones that don't are politely but firmly told it's not possible.

I agree with this.  From the OP, it doesn't sound as if the OP recruited her friend for party set-up or they are co-hosting the party.  It seems friend wanted to spend extra time with the OP and bringing her child early to help set up was the most convenient way they could go to the party and leave early like she wished.  The OP even suggested that her friend and DH can come to the party a little late after the child's grandparents arrive and not have to set up at all or DH could come later himself, but friend seemed to want to come over with the child because that worked best for her.  Although her DH agreed to watch the child, different people have different versions of 'watching' a child.  OP would want the child quiet and contained in another room, while another person may feel simply making sure the child didn't hurt himself is sufficient.  Not having the child there at all would avoid any stress on the OP's part about things going wrong (which easily could happen).  Even if friend's DH did a great job entertaining the child and keeping him contained, 2 year olds are unpredictable and he could cry for his mother and be a distraction.  Of course things could also go great, but I can see why OP wouldn't want to take a chance.

I am a parent of a toddler and while I appreciate child friendly environments, I won't try to insist my child come to a childfree environment.  If I decide it is important enough to me to go, I will arrange for a sitter, if not then I won't go.

[buvezdevin]

OP, you were not rude.

To those posting about how the OP needs to be accommodating when seeking her friend's favor of pre-party assistance, please note (as Fallon pointed out) the OP told her friend that friend could come help early, without child, or her friend could skip helping pre-party and just come to the party as a couple of adult guests, again without child.

It isn't that OP is trying to dictate terms of a favor she is seeking, the OP is simply telling her friend that the friend can help before or simply come as a party guest - the only requirement is that friend's toddler does not come at all.  So the friend has choices, but none the OP is agreeable to involve bringing friend's child to OP's house - which seems completely reasonable to me.

The *friend* is the one trying to dictate something other than what the party host has planned, or wants to do.

[Aeris]

I told my friend that I'd really prefer to not have him there because I don't want to maneuver wine glasses, candles, food, etc around a toddler. I suggested that her DH and son could stay at home while she came over early, and then her DH could wait until her parents got him and then join us, but their second car is in the shop. So then I said she didn't have to come over early and help, and they could arrive a little later to the party. She didn't want to do that because she says they only have a limited time at the party because they want to go to church in the morning. So her reasoning is to spend as much time as possible with DH and me.

It doesn't sound like OP expects her friend to help with this party. It sounds like her friend WANTS to help set up for the party (but also wants to spend as much time with her DH as she can).

So yes - it's the friend that needs to figure out what she's going to sacrifice; helping with the party or hanging out with her DH.

OP - You're not being unreasonable. Unreasonable would be demanding that your friend come help you set up the party and throwing a hissy fit when she can't do that without her child. You gave her options - either come early withOUT the child, or come a bit late withOUT the child.

For what it's worth; I don't allow children in my house for any reason full stop. People that know me and have reason to come over know better to even ask, the ones that don't are politely but firmly told it's not possible.

I'm pretty sure the friend wants to maximize hanging out with the OP and the OP's DH; not with the OP and her *own* DH. The friend isn't trying to get a bunch of things she wants here - she's trying to figure out how to maximize her time with the OP. That doesn't mean that anything and everything she does is perfectly acceptable, but it's probably a good idea for us to stop acting like she's some sort of entitlemommy who's trying to gain something here.

She's trying to figure out how to spend time with her friend, the OP. There's nothing *inherently* messed up about that. Even if the practical details make it unworkable this time.

It sounds to me like her concerns about coming to the party late were:
1) That that seriously reduces the amount of time the OP and the friend get to spend together and *possibly*
2) That if they have to both leave early AND come late - at some point that might mean that it's just not practical to attend the party at all.

These are reasonable concerns. It doesn't mean the OP is wrong, and it doesn't mean the OP is required to change her stance. But these concerns of the friend are reasonable. And the first one is a reflection of the fact that spending time with the OP is important to the friend - which ought to be an admirable trait in a friend. Instead some posters are acting as though she's trying to get something for free.

[auntmeegs]

OP, you were not rude.

To those posting about how the OP needs to be accommodating when seeking her friend's favor of pre-party assistance, please note (as Fallon pointed out) the OP told her friend that friend could come help early, without child, or her friend could skip helping pre-party and just come to the party as a couple of adult guests, again without child.

It isn't that OP is trying to dictate terms of a favor she is seeking, the OP is simply telling her friend that the friend can help before or simply come as a party guest - the only requirement is that friend's toddler does not come at all.  So the friend has choices, but none the OP is agreeable to involve bringing friend's child to OP's house - which seems completely reasonable to me.

The *friend* is the one trying to dictate something other than what the party host has planned, or wants to do.

I don't think the OP needs to be more accommodating.  But I personally would be for the sake of my best friend and getting more time with her.  The OP said herself that she has some guilt about it so maybe part of her feels that way too.

[Aeris]

OP, you were not rude.

To those posting about how the OP needs to be accommodating when seeking her friend's favor of pre-party assistance, please note (as Fallon pointed out) the OP told her friend that friend could come help early, without child, or her friend could skip helping pre-party and just come to the party as a couple of adult guests, again without child.

It isn't that OP is trying to dictate terms of a favor she is seeking, the OP is simply telling her friend that the friend can help before or simply come as a party guest - the only requirement is that friend's toddler does not come at all.  So the friend has choices, but none the OP is agreeable to involve bringing friend's child to OP's house - which seems completely reasonable to me.

The *friend* is the one trying to dictate something other than what the party host has planned, or wants to do.

While I agree that the OP isn't trying to dictate the terms of a favor, and I also agree that the OP does not have to change to accommodate her friend's childcare issues, I also don't see the friend "trying to dictate" anything. The friend has put forward options that work best for her; the OP has responded that those options don't work best for *her*.

It would be awesome if we could stop acting like people were automatically horrible people for having conflicting desires. Unless and until the friend comes back with an attitude about how the OP ought to be accommodating her exactly how she wants or she's a terrible person, I will not understand this insistence on casting the friend as some sort of mooch, dictator, or otherwise bad friend.

[buvezdevin]

OP, you were not rude.

To those posting about how the OP needs to be accommodating when seeking her friend's favor of pre-party assistance, please note (as Fallon pointed out) the OP told her friend that friend could come help early, without child, or her friend could skip helping pre-party and just come to the party as a couple of adult guests, again without child.

It isn't that OP is trying to dictate terms of a favor she is seeking, the OP is simply telling her friend that the friend can help before or simply come as a party guest - the only requirement is that friend's toddler does not come at all.  So the friend has choices, but none the OP is agreeable to involve bringing friend's child to OP's house - which seems completely reasonable to me.

The *friend* is the one trying to dictate something other than what the party host has planned, or wants to do.

While I agree that the OP isn't trying to dictate the terms of a favor, and I also agree that the OP does not have to change to accommodate her friend's childcare issues, I also don't see the friend "trying to dictate" anything. The friend has put forward options that work best for her; the OP has responded that those options don't work best for *her*.

It would be awesome if we could stop acting like people were automatically horrible people for having conflicting desires. Unless and until the friend comes back with an attitude about how the OP ought to be accommodating her exactly how she wants or she's a terrible person, I will not understand this insistence on casting the friend as some sort of mooch, dictator, or otherwise bad friend.

I read the last sentence of the OP stating that friend was less than thrilled with OP's reply, and seemed to expect OP to let toddler be there as, well, friend showing some attitude, which may or may not be the case.

As I did not characterize any party in the OP as horrible people, nor a mooch or bad friend - I would appreciate your not mischaracterizing my post, or assuming I meant anything more than I stated.

I do think that explaining why one would want a host/friend to have an unexpected unplanned for toddler for any part of party prep or actual party makes sense when asking to bring a toddler.  I also think it's definitely not good form to react poorly if the request to bring a toddler is declined by the host, nor do I think the host/friend needs give any reason for declining - though in this case, the OP seems to have a few considered reasons.

[snowdragon]

I think the child is a bit of a red herring. She's asking to bring two uninvited people to another person's house. That's not cool. And the age doesn't matter. 

[auntmeegs]

I think the child is a bit of a red herring. She's asking to bring two uninvited people to another person's house. That's not cool. And the age doesn't matter.

I disagree.  The age and who it is matter very much here and to me this is not a red herring situation at all.

Et - who is the second uninvited person?

[snowdragon]

I think the child is a bit of a red herring. She's asking to bring two uninvited people to another person's house. That's not cool. And the age doesn't matter.

I disagree.  The age and who it is matter very much here and to me this is not a red herring situation at all.

Et - who is the second uninvited person?

The friend's DH who would be coming to the set up to watch the child.  So the OP would have two uninvited people at her house for the set up.  It sounds to me that the OP can handle the set up with her DH and the friend would be better off not coming until her parents get home to watch the toddler, but it seems that is not acceptable to the friend.