No children at wedding

fuddle

They do. Life for those parents would be so much easier with a bit of discipline and children wouldn't get the disruptive label.

I understand. I get frustrated that my children are sat at a table in a restaurant, eating and chatting as expected for the good of everyone around them and I can't have that experience because children around us are being desruptive. I agree there is an issue but I am quite sad to read that my parenting style is to blame for the no children at weddings rule. I have 2 very different girls but both of them are a credit to DH and myself and beginning to be a credit to themselves.

Duchy honestly? I'm out. You may have the last word.

daivid

Last month we had 12 children, aged 2weeks through to 12years old (8 under the age of five), at our wedding. Our day was not harmed in the slightest. We had a clear 'rule' as to who we invited, including children; which was only people who we knew and were important to us. All children of cousins were invited and the children of our best friends with whom we spend a lot of time. Children of colleagues and less close friends were not invited. No one complained or queried and if they had I could have quite happily explained how we decided.

Admittedly we were lucky that we had no children on the guestlist that we expected to be troublesome and no parents we feared would be irresponsible. If someone has some cousins (or siblings) with angelic children and some with demonic then they will have very difficult decisions to make. Anyhow as the consensus of this thread is that the problem lies with the parents why don't people just cut them from the guest list, simples!

Jagraf

onlyroz wrote: »

You have really been to a number of weddings where children were so disruptive that the ceremony itself was affected? In my experience the bride, groom and registrar/vicar were so absorbed that the occasional noise from a child would go unnoticed. If there really were kids running up and down the aisles with no attempts by parents to stop them then I could see that would be disruptive, but I've never heard of any such thing ever happening.

At my first wedding (ive only had the two ) my neice screamed through my vows. My ex sister in law was sitting at the front as she was my ex's sister. She neither moved nor made any attempt to pacify my neice as her baby was more important than our wedding. During the speeches, my twin nieces (other side of the family) who were 4 years old ran to the table and accidentslly pulled the table cloth, knocking coffee down my dress. My own friends didn't have kids by then. I had no interest in kids at all - I was interested in marriage.

When I married for the second time we had all kids. I had my own and I was used to them. I walked down the aisle with lots of noise going on, and babies being jigged up and down to nursery rhymes. It didn't phase me, but it would have completely ruined someone else's wedding.

I've known parents of the bride have to look after the grandchildren from their other child and miss whole ceremonies because of people's selfish acts. My mum missed her God daughter's wedding to take out someone's screaming baby.

burnoutbabe

daivid wrote: »

Anyhow as the consensus of this thread is that the problem lies with the parents why don't people just cut them from the guest list, simples!

as then you would have to say to friends/family - well we did not invite your kids as you can't control them.

Which at least would solve the issue as they won't be friends anymore!

Far easier to just invite immediate family kids only etc and avoid the issue of picking some kids over others.

daivid

burnoutbabe wrote: »

as then you would have to say to friends/family - well we did not invite your kids as you can't control them.

Which at least would solve the issue as they won't be friends anymore!

Far easier to just invite immediate family kids only etc and avoid the issue of picking some kids over others.

The 'them' would be the parents of the disruptive children, then no need to make a decision on the children themselves. But also a shortcut to a reduced friendship group.

theoretica

What about an invite which says little Jack and Jill would be welcome so long as they are silent and still during the ceremony. Let the parents know without hints what behaviour you class as acceptable.

onlyroz

Jagraf wrote: »

At my first wedding (ive only had the two ) my neice screamed through my vows. My ex sister in law was sitting at the front as she was my ex's sister. She neither moved nor made any attempt to pacify my neice as her baby was more important than our wedding. During the speeches, my twin nieces (other side of the family) who were 4 years old ran to the table and accidentslly pulled the table cloth, knocking coffee down my dress. My own friends didn't have kids by then. I had no interest in kids at all - I was interested in marriage.

When I married for the second time we had all kids. I had my own and I was used to them. I walked down the aisle with lots of noise going on, and babies being jigged up and down to nursery rhymes. It didn't phase me, but it would have completely ruined someone else's wedding.

I've known parents of the bride have to look after the grandchildren from their other child and miss whole ceremonies because of people's selfish acts. My mum missed her God daughter's wedding to take out someone's screaming baby.

You can't have it both ways - either you have the babies in the church crying, or you have their parents/grandparents waiting outside with them until they calm down, thus missing parts of the ceremony. You don't seem to know which you'd have preferred.

Jagraf

onlyroz wrote: »

You can't have it both ways - either you have the babies in the church crying, or you have their parents/grandparents waiting outside with them until they calm down, thus missing parts of the ceremony. You don't seem to know which you'd have preferred.

I'm giving a perspective of disruptive children which you have never experienced at a wedding and also a different perspective on how they can, in fact, affect the bride and groom who still have ears whilst taking their vows.

duchy

That's the problem - Most people know which relatives or friends kids will be the ones with the halos and which come with pitchforks ...... and whether the parents are of the type to remove them or ignore them and let them disrupt regardless. Most parents wouldn't take well to getting told *their* kids aren't welcome -or that they needed to behave differently in how they parented to their "normal" especially when others they regard as their "social equal" in the pecking order do have their kids invited without any slur to their parenting skills or conditions set.

The repercussions of this can last for years in some families -so most do choose a no kids rule rather than set up what is a confrontational situation in many cases as no-one wants to be told their child or their parenting skills aren't good enough......and equally no-one wants to be the one to tell them. Hell hath no fury like a parent told they have poor parenting skills or that their darling child is a brat after all.

That's even assuming the bride and groom aren't subjected to family pressure "Oh you must (or absolutely mustn't) include X or Y child."

It's a minefield all around

silvercar

onlyroz wrote: »

You can't have it both ways - either you have the babies in the church crying, or you have their parents/grandparents waiting outside with them until they calm down, thus missing parts of the ceremony. You don't seem to know which you'd have preferred.

Or you have the cherubs left with a babysitter until the ceremony is over.