News: IT'S THE 2ND ANNUAL GUATEMALA LIBRARY PROJECT BOOK DRIVE!    LOOKING FOR DONATIONS OF SCIENCE BOOKS THIS YEAR.    Check it out in the "Extending the Hand of Kindness" folder or here: http://www.etiquettehell.com/smf/index.php?topic=139832.msg3372084#msg3372084   

  • November 23, 2017, 11:25:08 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: no kids - except for.....  (Read 7580 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Winterlight

  • On the internet, no one can tell you're a dog- arf.
  • Member
  • Posts: 10101
Re: no kids - except for.....
« Reply #15 on: August 28, 2017, 06:45:16 PM »
Like most things, this can be done rudely or politely. Cutting it at "children in the wedding party only" seems reasonable to me.
If wisdom’s ways you wisely seek,
Five things observe with care,
To whom you speak,
Of whom you speak,
And how, and when, and where.
Caroline Lake Ingalls

gellchom

  • Member
  • Posts: 3722
Re: no kids - except for.....
« Reply #16 on: August 29, 2017, 12:14:52 AM »
I think one of those he things that throws fuel on this fire is thinking of it in terms of whether this in an acceptable exception to a "rule" or "cutoff" the HC made.  But this is a wedding, not a swimming pool! 

No one would think of complaining that they should have been invited because some other 35-year-olds were.

I agree that it is wise and kind to go ahead and invite all of a group if you are inviting most.  But the person in the OP who felt that everyone's children (or anyway hers) were entitled to invitations because there were some children in the wedding party was being ridiculous -- but she didn't realize it because she was thinking of it as a "rule."  I wonder whether, if her children had been invited, she would have complained that it wasn't fair for some but not all of the children to be in the wedding party. 

mime

  • Member
  • Posts: 1824
Re: no kids - except for.....
« Reply #17 on: August 29, 2017, 11:20:16 AM »
Yes. I think that this is more common than people realize.

If your kids aren't invited, that's just the way life is sometimes. If it means you won't attend, that's unfortunate. I know a person getting married this fall who is inviting all cousins, aunts, uncles, etc of the couple, but only some of the cousins' children are invited. It's a space consideration. They both have enormous families and they have booked the only hall in their town. They have 500 people invited to the supper and that's entirely family. In other words, none of their university friends made the cut. Any cousin that decides it's unfair that their kid isn't invited, will have to think about why they are more worthy than any of the others that aren't in attendance.

I would never question a couple's guest list. Sure, there are always "consequences" to these decisions. But, they are tough decisions. And, if you're going to make it harder for the bride and groom, then I think you're an easy cut from the list.

All of this.

I had a small-ish wedding, and 4 kids were invited. Several others weren't. The 4 who were invited were all of our nieces and nephews, who we knew (and still know) well. The ones who weren't were kids of friends, kids of neighbors, kids of cousins, etc. Most of these kids we didn't even know. In fact, *I* didn't even know the parents of any of those kids. It was such an easy line to draw!

That didn't stop uninvited kids from showing up anyway.

Do you ever have those odd little conversations where people discuss "if I could plan my wedding over again..."? You wanna guess who doesn't get re-invited to mine?


gellchom

  • Member
  • Posts: 3722
Re: no kids - except for.....
« Reply #18 on: August 29, 2017, 11:58:16 AM »
I guess this happens where people are used to guests being invited by whole family, so they think that everyone is invited over the age of some cutoff point and get upset if their 8 year old isn't invited (or assume that s/he is) if another 8 year old is invited. 

But I think that's an unsafe assumption.  In my community, it's very common to have children of relatives included but not children of friends, unless there is a particular connection (like the kids the bride or groom babysits or where the relationship is whole-family-to-whole-family).  It's also very common to see wedding that are basically adults only but include a very few children - very closely related and/or in the wedding party.  If some friend or distant relative felt that their child was entitled to be invited because the HC's own children or nieblings were, I'd think that was ridiculous. 

I understand that relatives might be disappointed, because although of course the wedding of the HC is the focus, it's also a family event and a rare chance to see each other and celebrate together, especially when they live far apart.  In my experience, even when the wedding or reception are adults-only, the rest of the children in the family attend all the other events of the weekend (we tend to have several!), so that satisfies that issue.

Outdoor Girl

  • Member
  • Posts: 16414
Re: no kids - except for.....
« Reply #19 on: August 29, 2017, 12:34:52 PM »
The wedding party exception is a perfectly valid line to draw when deciding no kids for your wedding.  So is an age cutoff.  I have one friend with two kids.  The older one?  I could handle having her at my wedding.  The younger one?  Would drive me mad.  And his parents wouldn't reign him in enough, as far as I'm concerned.  The last thing I want to be on my wedding day is annoyed because this kid is driving me 'round the bend.
After cleaning out my Dad's house, I have this advice:  If you haven't used it in a year, throw it out!!!!.
Ontario

Hmmmmm

  • Member
  • Posts: 8883
Re: no kids - except for.....
« Reply #20 on: August 29, 2017, 01:08:53 PM »
To clarify, the kids in the wedding are family, and so are the ones not invited.   I could perfectly understand that my child is not invited if I am just a friend, but not if we are family and other family (of the same relationship), is invited.

Just because the kids are family, still doesn't mean they would be included. I do think that the same groups within a family should be included. For example if the groom has a sister with 2 kids who will be flower girls, but he also has a brother with 1 child who will not be part of the wedding. I would still expect the brother's child to be included.

But if the niece of the groom will be a flower girl, I don't think his cousin's children should automatically be included because a child is there.

goldilocks

  • Member
  • Posts: 845
Re: no kids - except for.....
« Reply #21 on: August 29, 2017, 02:08:13 PM »
Some clarification.   

The problem with no kids is that means the parents, who were invited, have to do something about the kids.   I can't get Grandma to babysit because she's also at the wedding, and babysitters cost an arm and leg these days.   I agree -not HC's problem.

However - when I'm invited to a wedding that is in another state and will require travel and hotels, what am I supposed to do with my kids?    So, of course, I either come up with a plan or decline the invitation.   And so why did you invite me in the first place if you knew I wouldn't be able to come?

I think the problem stems from the HC loudly announcing that they wanted NO kids at the wedding and reception.   Which I understand, an adults only party is their right.  But you can't have it both ways.   This was not a case of your kids aren't invited because I barely know them, it was - I want NO children ruining my wedding.   

Once stated this way- I think it causes issues to invite some kids but not others.  Why do I have to pay $200 (just guessing, I have no idea how much babysitters cost) for a babysitter, when there were other kids there? 

TurtleDove

  • Member
  • Posts: 7254
Re: no kids - except for.....
« Reply #22 on: August 29, 2017, 02:21:21 PM »
Why do I have to pay $200 (just guessing, I have no idea how much babysitters cost) for a babysitter, when there were other kids there?

I think $200 is rather high, but the answer is that your kids were not invited (general you). That's why. If you want to attend the wedding, then you will need to decide what to do to ensure your children are cared for.

Kids are wonderful, but they do cause their parents to do or not do certain things. Here the parents simply need to make a choice whether to attend without their kids or decline the invitation.

bah12

  • Member
  • Posts: 6863
Re: no kids - except for.....
« Reply #23 on: August 29, 2017, 02:42:48 PM »
Some clarification.   

The problem with no kids is that means the parents, who were invited, have to do something about the kids.   I can't get Grandma to babysit because she's also at the wedding, and babysitters cost an arm and leg these days.   I agree -not HC's problem.

However - when I'm invited to a wedding that is in another state and will require travel and hotels, what am I supposed to do with my kids?    So, of course, I either come up with a plan or decline the invitation.   And so why did you invite me in the first place if you knew I wouldn't be able to come?

I think the problem stems from the HC loudly announcing that they wanted NO kids at the wedding and reception.   Which I understand, an adults only party is their right.  But you can't have it both ways.   This was not a case of your kids aren't invited because I barely know them, it was - I want NO children ruining my wedding.   

Once stated this way- I think it causes issues to invite some kids but not others.  Why do I have to pay $200 (just guessing, I have no idea how much babysitters cost) for a babysitter, when there were other kids there?

I get that this is upsetting, but the reason you have to pay for a babysitter, is because your kids are not invited.  It's not the HC's responsibility to go through all the logistical challenges for you and make sure they are mitigated so you can attend their wedding.  And I don't think that the HC is required to open their wedding up to all kids (or even all 'family') or forgo having flower girls/ring bearers so that they don't offend other family members.  People are allowed to have different relationships with different people and different members of their family.  And whether or not the closeness of your children to the HC is based solely on geography, it is what it is.  It makes perfect sense for them to allow children in the wedding the party but not want other children there.  Even if the kids are of the same relational level (i.e.  all nieces/nephews). 

But, while this is not an etiquette problem, I do understand that it is a relationship one.  If your kids are the only kids not invited, I might think that the HC should go ahead and include them for the sake of family harmony.  But, my advice to you (or the person who is coming to you) is to let it go.  I get that it seems hurtful on the surface, but this is not about you/your kids and is more about what they want for their wedding.  If they are close enough that you would consider hiring a babysitter and making travel plans to be there on their wedding day, then they should be close enough for you to grant them their very reasonable request without making it all about how it causes problems for you logistically.  If this really is a personal slight (as proven by your past relationship or the fact that your kids are the only family kids left out), then it's totally understandable that your future relationship will be affected. 

MagnesiumOxide

  • Member
  • Posts: 29
Re: no kids - except for.....
« Reply #24 on: August 29, 2017, 02:45:41 PM »
Some clarification.   

The problem with no kids is that means the parents, who were invited, have to do something about the kids.   I can't get Grandma to babysit because she's also at the wedding, and babysitters cost an arm and leg these days.   I agree -not HC's problem.

However - when I'm invited to a wedding that is in another state and will require travel and hotels, what am I supposed to do with my kids?    So, of course, I either come up with a plan or decline the invitation.   And so why did you invite me in the first place if you knew I wouldn't be able to come?

I think the problem stems from the HC loudly announcing that they wanted NO kids at the wedding and reception.   Which I understand, an adults only party is their right.  But you can't have it both ways.   This was not a case of your kids aren't invited because I barely know them, it was - I want NO children ruining my wedding.   

Once stated this way- I think it causes issues to invite some kids but not others.  Why do I have to pay $200 (just guessing, I have no idea how much babysitters cost) for a babysitter, when there were other kids there?

I think the first bolded is a terrible attitude to take.   Why would the HC KNOW you couldn't make it?  And, really, if they had not sent an invitation at all, that would have gone over better?

Second bolded:  the kids who are "invited" are doing a job and performing a service. 

Wedding invitations and attendance are hardly an entitlement!

lmyrs

  • Member
  • Posts: 1766
Re: no kids - except for.....
« Reply #25 on: August 29, 2017, 03:22:24 PM »
Some clarification.   

The problem with no kids is that means the parents, who were invited, have to do something about the kids.   I can't get Grandma to babysit because she's also at the wedding, and babysitters cost an arm and leg these days.   I agree -not HC's problem.

However - when I'm invited to a wedding that is in another state and will require travel and hotels, what am I supposed to do with my kids?    So, of course, I either come up with a plan or decline the invitation.   And so why did you invite me in the first place if you knew I wouldn't be able to come?

I think the problem stems from the HC loudly announcing that they wanted NO kids at the wedding and reception.   Which I understand, an adults only party is their right.  But you can't have it both ways.   This was not a case of your kids aren't invited because I barely know them, it was - I want NO children ruining my wedding.   

Once stated this way- I think it causes issues to invite some kids but not others. Why do I have to pay $200 (just guessing, I have no idea how much babysitters cost) for a babysitter, when there were other kids there?

Because they are your kids, that you made and it is your job to take care of them. Unless the HC somehow forced you to have your children then how are they responsible for ensuring they are cared for? You might as well ask why it's your responsibility to find care for your children while you're at work.

I understand that you (or your friend) is upset at the inconvenience this causes you. But, that doesn't make the HC rude. How many times have you seen someone say on here that just because someone is mad at you, it doesn't mean that you did anything wrong. That applies here too. They're not rude. The person that is insisting that they are somehow wrong for making perfectly reasonable guest list decisions is rude if they start bad-mouthing the HC.
« Last Edit: August 29, 2017, 03:25:44 PM by lmyrs »

HannahGrace

  • Member
  • Posts: 1282
Re: no kids - except for.....
« Reply #26 on: August 29, 2017, 03:28:05 PM »
Some clarification.   

The problem with no kids is that means the parents, who were invited, have to do something about the kids.   I can't get Grandma to babysit because she's also at the wedding, and babysitters cost an arm and leg these days.   I agree -not HC's problem.

However - when I'm invited to a wedding that is in another state and will require travel and hotels, what am I supposed to do with my kids?    So, of course, I either come up with a plan or decline the invitation.   And so why did you invite me in the first place if you knew I wouldn't be able to come?

I think the problem stems from the HC loudly announcing that they wanted NO kids at the wedding and reception.   Which I understand, an adults only party is their right.  But you can't have it both ways.   This was not a case of your kids aren't invited because I barely know them, it was - I want NO children ruining my wedding.   

Once stated this way- I think it causes issues to invite some kids but not others. Why do I have to pay $200 (just guessing, I have no idea how much babysitters cost) for a babysitter, when there were other kids there?

Because they are your kids, that you made and it is your job to take care of them. Unless the HC somehow forced you to have your children then how are they responsible for ensuring they are cared for? You might as well ask why it's your responsibility to find care for your children while you're at work.

I understand that you (or your friend) is upset at the inconvenience this causes you. But, that doesn't make the HC rude. How many times have you seen someone say on here that just because someone is mad at you, it doesn't mean that you did anything wrong. That applies here too. They're not rude. The person that is insisting that they are somehow wrong for making perfectly reasonable guest list decisions is rude if they start bad-mouthing the HC.

Agreed. This is a terrible attitude. Should no one invite adults to any event without their children? It's not someone else's job to troubleshoot your childcare.

LadyL

  • Member
  • Posts: 3429
Re: no kids - except for.....
« Reply #27 on: August 29, 2017, 03:29:59 PM »
So, of course, I either come up with a plan or decline the invitation.   And so why did you invite me in the first place if you knew I wouldn't be able to come?

This was not a case of your kids aren't invited because I barely know them, it was - I want NO children ruining my wedding.   

Once stated this way- I think it causes issues to invite some kids but not others.  Why do I have to pay $200 (just guessing, I have no idea how much babysitters cost) for a babysitter, when there were other kids there?


I didn't know the childcare resources of the ~20 parents I invited to my wedding without inviting their kids. I also invited some infirm relatives I knew would never travel, because it was a gesture of inclusion. An invitation is not a summons. If it inconveniences you too much, you are free to decline.

I would certainly keep the above complaints to yourself, they are presumptive and ungracious.

Margo

  • Member
  • Posts: 2153
Re: no kids - except for.....
« Reply #28 on: August 29, 2017, 04:23:08 PM »
Some clarification.   

The problem with no kids is that means the parents, who were invited, have to do something about the kids.   I can't get Grandma to babysit because she's also at the wedding, and babysitters cost an arm and leg these days.   I agree -not HC's problem.

However - when I'm invited to a wedding that is in another state and will require travel and hotels, what am I supposed to do with my kids?    So, of course, I either come up with a plan or decline the invitation.   And so why did you invite me in the first place if you knew I wouldn't be able to come?[/b]

I think the problem stems from the HC loudly announcing that they wanted NO kids at the wedding and reception.   Which I understand, an adults only party is their right.  But you can't have it both ways.   This was not a case of your kids aren't invited because I barely know them, it was - I want NO children ruining my wedding.   

Once stated this way- I think it causes issues to invite some kids but not others. Why do I have to pay $200 (just guessing, I have no idea how much babysitters cost) for a babysitter, when there were other kids there?

Bolded the bits which stood out to me.

- They invite you because they see you are a friend/member of the family and they would like you to be there. They are not making assumptions about whether or not you can come.  For all they know, you have close friends, or relatives from the other side of the family,who you could leave the children with, or you might chose to ask local family members for a babysitting recommendation, or indeed you and your spouse might decide that one of you would attend the wedding and the other would care for the children. 

- "I want no children ruining my wedding" is a personal choice of the bride and groom, and I think that having 2 or 3 children who are close to the couple, who have specific tasks to do is very different to having large numbers of children present. Quite apart from anything else, if you have 3 children and 100 adult guests there is a totally different vibe to when you have 15 children and 85 adults. And anyway, if it isn't your wedding it's not your choice.

- Why do you have to pay whatever the babysitting costs? Because you have made a choice to have children. Whether someone else is paying for childcare is irrelevant. You (and your spouse) get to choose whether you want to attend the wedding if you have to pay for / organise  child care as well as everything else, and if you don't, or if it is not in your budget, then you send polite regrets. Different guests are always going to have costs, the fact that it costs a different guest less to attend the wedding is nothing to do with you. It's a bit like arguing that it isn't fair you had to use up paid time off and your retired aunt didn't; it isn't unfair to anyone, it just reflects the fact that not everyone's personal circumstances are the same.

No one is entitled to an invitation, but anyone how is not happy with the terms of the invitation they have been given is free to (politely) decline.

chigger

  • Member
  • Posts: 798
Re: no kids - except for.....
« Reply #29 on: August 29, 2017, 04:37:57 PM »
I had a no children except for out of town family wedding. The one local woman, that said anything about it, had the absolute worst behaved son. He was the reason I did not invite children. He was completely uncontrollable. She said to me at the wedding. Oh, I thought there were no kids,and I just told her these are family out of town, no sitters. She didn't like it, but oh, well.