No children at wedding drama [READ POST #1 FIRST - MOD]

Malari

esforum wrote: »

but the OP is having 2 kids (one a non relative) at the wedding. Lets get this straight, this wedding is not a no-kids wedding. Its a selective-kids wedding

So what if it is? We had a selective kids wedding. Everyone has a selective adults wedding so why would you give all the kids you know or none an invite?

One eyed Jack

esforum wrote: »

but the OP is having 2 kids (one a non relative) at the wedding. Lets get this straight, this wedding is not a no-kids wedding. Its a selective-kids wedding

It's none of her future brother-in-laws business how many children the OP and her future husband have at their wedding. They could have a small orphanage there and it would still be none of his business. He should be grateful he's even still being invited to attend their wedding at all tbh. If he were my brother in law I'd be letting him go swing.

TG1

esforum wrote: »

but the OP is having 2 kids (one a non relative) at the wedding. Lets get this straight, this wedding is not a no-kids wedding. Its a selective-kids wedding

The op is having her husband to be's daughter and a plus one at the wedding. It's not like its two random kids!

I don't really see the kids at the wedding thing as the issue in all this though, it's the behaviour of the op's future brother in law that I would see as a problem. He is creating needles drama and lashing out as his brothers fiance while drunk. That is the not ok bit of all this!

glen25

One eyed Jack wrote: »

It's none of her future brother-in-laws business how many children the OP and her future husband have at their wedding. They could have a small orphanage there and it would still be none of his business. He should be grateful he's even still being invited to attend their wedding at all tbh. If he were my brother in law I'd be letting him go swing.

Totally agree with this poster. It's THEIR day & they can invite whoever they want regardless of age or connection

We are getting married next year and have decided no under 18's. There are a lots of neices, nephews & cousins on both sides that fall into this category so we're doing a clean sweep and it's adults only. Nobody gets hard by (relative to others!) and we get to have adults only at the wedding. It's our decision at the end of the day.

Atomic Pineapple

esforum wrote: »

from the nieces point of view, theres a random stranger being invited to a wedding thats shes not and the reason she is not allowed is her age despite being the same age as the random stranger (random stranger being the daughters friend).

Her age isn't the reason she is not being invited, she's not being invited because the bride and groom are limiting invitations to children to cut down on numbers and save money, pretty reasonable reason.

esforum wrote: »

That leads me to point nnumber 2, why invite a friend to entertain your partners daughter when she could have had cousins her own age in attendance?

Friendship is far more valuable than family because you can choose your friends. Saying a cousin should be the daughters plus one (or cousins are a suitable replacement) doesn't make sense to me.

esforum

esforum wrote: »

but the OP is having 2 kids (one a non relative) at the wedding. Lets get this straight, this wedding is not a no-kids wedding. Its a selective-kids wedding

So bloody what?? If she is paying for it she has every right to be selective. She has decided to have a no 'other' kids wedding with the exception of her stepdaughter and her stepdaughters friend

If that annoys sensitive mummies than thats not her problem

Shop40

Personally I can understand why the brother was miffed (although I don't agree with his expression of it).
I got married back in 08, didn't have much money and worried about the numbers, but our nieces and nephews were invited as it was an important family occasion. They really didn't cost much extra, a few chicken & chips dinners!
Nevermind friends' kids, I don't think anyone can expect them to be invited…but excluding your siblings' children I think is a little petty.

Atomic Pineapple

Shop40 wrote: »

t excluding your siblings' children I think is a little petty.

It's no more petty than siblings expecting their children to be invited against the bride and grooms wishes.

It's like saying most of the people going will believe in god so even though you don't believe in god you should have a religious ceremony because that will keep everyone happier at the expense of your own happiness. Crazy logic, just crazy.

c montgomery

Atomic Pineapple wrote: »

It's no more petty than siblings expecting their children to be invited against the bride and grooms wishes.

It's like saying most of the people going will believe in god so even though you don't believe in god you should have a religious ceremony because that will keep everyone happier at the expense of your own happiness. Crazy logic, just crazy.

No it's just nice to include the family on an occasion when your are welcoming someone new into the family.
Each to their own.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

martingriff

When we were kids and my parents got an invitation it had there 2 names so only they went they never once thought they have invited the kids do. It the did it would say & family

c montgomery

Patww79 wrote: »

All families are different.

Exactly, each to their own.

Atomic Pineapple

c montgomery wrote: »

Each to their own.

Indeed and I think it's important the desires of the couple getting married are the highest priority and respected by all, it will be one of the biggest days in their life.

esforum

eviltwin wrote: »

She's the groom's daughter, if that doesn't give her a pass what does?

and the mate? Are we selectively ignoring the complete non relative thats been invited?

TG1

esforum wrote: »

and the mate? Are we selectively ignoring the complete non relative thats been invited?

Its a plus one on a wedding invite, if she was bringing a boyfriend would it be an issue?

retro:electro

esforum wrote: »

and the mate? Are we selectively ignoring the complete non relative thats been invited?

I'm sure there will be a lot of plus ones attending that the bride and groom may not know. Why single out the child's friend? Apart from the bride and groom, I'd say his daughter is the next best important person there on that day.

esforum

Deleted User wrote: »

So bloody what?? If she is paying for it she has every right to be selective. She has decided to have a no 'other' kids wedding with the exception of her stepdaughter and her stepdaughters friend

If that annoys sensitive mummies than thats not her problem

Its not mummies, its her soon to be niece FFS!

and if thats how you feel for future relatives, god help christmas when you invite everyone over but tell nieces and nephews to **** off.

I said at the start they can invite who they want but ya know, theres things called being nice, being civil, having regards for your family and yes, nieces and nephews are family (unlike the teenagers friend).

The niece if correctly in my opinion, offended and as the father of said child, he is backing his daughter in this family row.

Its their right to invite who they want

Its the brothers right to tell them to shove it

esforum

TG1 wrote: »

Its a plus one on a wedding invite, if she was bringing a boyfriend would it be an issue?

Its not though so theres no point in throwing that in.

anna080 wrote: »

I'm sure there will be a lot of plus ones attending that the bride and groom may not know. Why single out the child's friend? Apart from the bride and groom, I'd say his daughter is the next best important person there on that day.

You havent grasped the whole purpose of this thread. Its about kids invites, not strangers.

TG1

esforum wrote: »

Its not though so theres no point in throwing that in.

But its the same thing, it's the grooms daughter being invited, which to be fair would be pretty poor form for her not to be, and getting a plus one of her choice, as most of the invited guests will get.

A niece being invited is a different matter altogether and the brother in law should not have tried to suggest that as his brothers daughter was invited to her dad's wedding his own daughter should be. The plus one is irrelevant.

retro:electro

esforum wrote: »

Its not though so theres no point in throwing that in.



You havent grasped the whole purpose of this thread. Its about kids invites, not strangers.

Am yes I have actually. And I was responding to your post about the kid's friend. So you're kind of contradicting yourself there.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

esforum

anna080 wrote: »

Am yes I have actually. And I was responding to your post about the kid's friend. So you're kind of contradicting yourself there.

No, you really havent. Even TG1 agrees its a pointless comment.

haveringchick

Irish weddings bring out the best, and the worst in us. How come people don't expect their kids to be invited to cousin Colettes surprise 50th birthday party which will also be a massive piss up with a meal and a band, but they get into an almighty huff when Colettes son and bride don't want the same kids either at their wedding?
I mean what is the difference? Both are family occasions?

TG1

esforum wrote: »

No, you really havent. Even TG1 agrees its a pointless comment.

I think you've slightly misinterpreted my comments, I'm saying who the plus one is is irrelevant, as in the grooms daughter is entitled to a plus one regardless of who it is, be it a friend or a boyfriend or a cousin, if the bride and groom invite her plus one. The fact that the plus one is being invited at the expense of a family member is totally normal and run of the mill, plus ones of those the bride and groom want there get invited at the expense of family members that are not as close. She can bring who she likes and it's not up to the brother in law to dictate who she brings or doesn't, or to say she shouldn't be treated like every other guest and get a plus one.

esforum

TG1 wrote: »

I think you've slightly misinterpreted my comments, I'm saying who the plus one is is irrelevant, as in the grooms daughter is entitled to a plus one regardless of who it is, be it a friend or a boyfriend or a cousin, if the bride and groom invite her plus one. The fact that the plus one is being invited at the expense of a family member is totally normal and run of the mill, plus ones of those the bride and groom want there get invited at the expense of family members that are not as close. She can bring who she likes and it's not up to the brother in law to dictate who she brings or doesn't, or to say she shouldn't be treated like every other guest and get a plus one.

dont think its at the expense of. Its just a case of the OP saying "No kids" then having 2 at the wedding.

I can see your point about the plus one being allowed, valid point but is the brother not entitled to not attend the wedding in support of his offended child?

and actually after going back again, I missed 2 points the OP said about numbers and the niece and daughter not getting along but I still think that if the OP were too look at the wedding list, theres people on it that are far more removed than a 16 year old niece.

I also still think the brother has every right to not attend in support of his child, she is his child. No one more important

haveringchick

esforum wrote: »

dont think its at the expense of. Its just a case of the OP saying "No kids" then having 2 at the wedding.

I can see your point about the plus one being allowed, valid point but is the brother not entitled to not attend the wedding in support of his offended child?

and actually after going back again, I missed 2 points the OP said about numbers and the niece and daughter not getting along but I still think that if the OP were too look at the wedding list, theres people on it that are far more removed than a 16 year old niece.

I also still think the brother has every right to not attend in support of his child, she is his child. No one more important

He's entitled to decline the invitation.
He's entitled to explain why
Just not in the obnoxious manner he chose to explain

groovyg

esforum wrote: »

dont think its at the expense of. Its just a case of the OP saying "No kids" then having 2 at the wedding.

I can see your point about the plus one being allowed, valid point but is the brother not entitled to not attend the wedding in support of his offended child?

and actually after going back again, I missed 2 points the OP said about numbers and the niece and daughter not getting along but I still think that if the OP were too look at the wedding list, theres people on it that are far more removed than a 16 year old niece.

I also still think the brother has every right to not attend in support of his child, she is his child. No one more important

One of the so called 'kid's invited is the grooms daughter, what is he supposed to do? Tell her she can't come because they have a no kids rule and it will upset the brother in law.
I really wonder if the niece actually wants to go to the actual wedding! there's going to be no other cousins her own age except the grooms daughter and her plus one whom she doesn't get on with.
So if she was invited, she would be hanging out with her parents for the day, one of whom can't control his temper with drink on him.
What teenager wants to hang out with their parents and watch them getting hammered. You would have to wonder if the brother and law and his wife are just picking a fight just cause weddings seem to bring out the worst in people.

Calhoun

esforum wrote: »

I shall chip in a little on this.

On the one hand its your party and its your decision who goes and who doesnt however you have basically said "We value our own child but not yours" when stating a 16 year old cannot attend even though another 2 already are. Or put it another way, from the nieces point of view, theres a random stranger being invited to a wedding thats shes not and the reason she is not allowed is her age despite being the same age as the random stranger (random stranger being the daughters friend).

That leads me to point nnumber 2, why invite a friend to entertain your partners daughter when she could have had cousins her own age in attendance?

Now point number three, the brother may be that, your partners brother but his daughter is his daughter. children will always win in a test of loyalty.

As for every other comment about babysitters, drinking or not, are these adults being invited to the wedding or monkeys? I am an adult and I am fully capable of deciding if A, I want to get a babysitter and get **** faced or B, Bring my children and not be a drunken fool.

Thats disregarding the fact that babysitters will need to be organised as a result of the no kids part. I assume all responsible adults will be at the wedding? So who does your brother in law get to babysit overnight? Not everyone has an assortment of options in that regards.

If someone has an adults only wedding, thats their choice but you need to accept a certain amount of people will not attend as a result. Then inviting some kids and not others? No sorry, thats being insulting (and 16 aint exactly a child either). A friend is invited but a niece not? Cmon, how can that not be insulting? Imagine it in any other context, we only invited kids to a kids party, no adults. Except granny, and grannies friend to amuse granny

As long as we are going on the emotional view point from the BIL perspective let me turn that analysis on its head. Could it be that the BIL is the older dominant brother used to getting his way in the relationship.

When the shoe was on the other foot we already know he did the exact same thing and excluded the OP's step daughter, im sure his brother at the time was dissapointed but probably had the good grace to let it go.

Now that the younger brother and his partner are making decisions that don't fit in with what he wants hes throwing his toys out of the pram. What sort of message would this say to the OP if they went and just invited the neice without even an apology from the BIL.

Had he a little bit more tact he might have got a different result or at least talked about it rationally. He now has three options available to him, get a baby sitter, leave her on her own as shes 16, or dont go.

Toots

The OP also pointed out that the niece has 2 younger siblings, so if she invited the 16 year old niece, the BIL would probably be giving out that the other two younger kids weren't invited. Then if she invited all his kids, it would be unfair on all the other nieces and nephews. But even if that wasn't the case, the bride and groom decide who gets invited to the wedding - it's their day, they call the shots.

People have no right to expect that their kids will be automatically invited to a wedding (and I say this as a parent myself) I remember one particular thread on here where a woman was so incensed that her kids weren't invited to a wedding with a similar set-up as this (no kids, apart from the B&G's own children) that she sent a horrible text to the bride about it. I get that it can be disappointing if your kids aren't invited, but to complain about it to the B&G is unbelievably rude.

OP, you're a better woman than I am; if my husband's brother had verbally abused me to the point that I had to ask him to get out the car (drunk or not) I would have told my hubby that his brother would need to offer a sincere apology, or else he wouldn't be coming to the wedding. In fact, seeing as he already said he and his wife aren't coming, I'd be tempted to get your OH to say something like "It's a pity you and 'wife' aren't coming, but we understand if you don't want to go without 'daughter'." the next time he sees him. Then when he most likely backtracks and starts saying he didn't mean it, your OH could say something like "Oh, right. Well we'd be delighted to have you there, but you really need to apologise to theoldbreed for the way you spoke to her, it was unacceptable."

Somebody further up in the thread suggested having somebody on standby to keep an eye on the BIL (if he comes to the wedding) in case he starts getting drunk and making a scene - this would be something to consider. On my hubby's side, there is a relative who gets very messy when he has drink on him, and often makes a nuisance of himself, so we had a couple of people who said they'd keep an eye on him, and if he started getting too drunk, they'd quietly bring him up to bed. Luckily at our wedding, he was very well behaved, however at other weddings we were at after that the same 'spotter' technique was used and he did end up having to be brought out at one or two, but nobody really noticed.

esforum

esforum wrote: »

Its not mummies, its her soon to be niece FFS!

You misunderstood what i meant - its the sensitive mummies on this thread that seem to take offence that the op wants "no Kids" except the ones she invited. It seems to bother some people that 2 people under the age of 18 are invited while the rest are not. And as for "what about family?" - not everyone are like the Waltons, if you are paying for a wedding you have the absolute right to invite who you want, family or not.

The OP was accused of being "selective" - like that's a bad thing

I apologise for being sexist - i should have said sensitive parents, especially given the reaction of the OP's brother in law.

Newsflash: Just because you are a parent this does not mean that everyone will automatically like your kid/s

amdublin

Well it mightn't actually mean they don't like your children. It might mean they don't want to spend their wedding day and night with your children.

Op, I was thinking about it some more. Tbh if you were inviting your own ten children and no one else's then so be it. As it stands one daughter (and a driend) is coming. It's fairly straightforward.

I imagine that it is not actually as big an issue for the bil as he said on the night - drink talking. I hope you are feeling better about it all and are moving on to thinking about nicer things coming up - your hen! And your wedding

pwurple

Oh guest lists can be such a drama. I remember ours being a little painful. My parents got married at a time when the bride's father hosted the party and invited who they wanted. So when we were paying for our own wedding, and deciding our own guest list, many strops were thrown that the local politicians and a pile of their friends (who neither myself or fiance had ever met) were not invited.

We had people under the age of 18 at our wedding. We considered nieces and nephews to be family, so they were invited. Children of friends and more distant relatives were not included. Cousins we didn't include. My husbands niece (1) and nephew (16) were there. The one year old was picked up after the photos by her auntie from the other side of the family. The 16 year old stayed. It worked out fine. I wouldn't consider a 16 year old to be a child capable of running crayons all over the walls. They are a grown up at that stage. 20 additional children is an ask alright though, so I can see where you are coming from there.


But OP, to be honest, you've got bigger fish to fry than this wedding... you sound like don't get along with your future husband's family, and it might be seen that you make no efforts to build a relationship with them. That's probably where the BIL's animosity is coming from. I'd think about solutions to that. A lifetime related to these people is quite some time.

theoldbreed

pwurple wrote: »

Oh guest lists can be such a drama. I remember ours being a little painful. My parents got married at a time when the bride's father hosted the party and invited who they wanted. So when we were paying for our own wedding, and deciding our own guest list, many strops were thrown that the local politicians and a pile of their friends (who neither myself or fiance had ever met) were not invited.

We had people under the age of 18 at our wedding. We considered nieces and nephews to be family, so they were invited. Children of friends and more distant relatives were not included. Cousins we didn't include. My husbands niece (1) and nephew (16) were there. The one year old was picked up after the photos by her auntie from the other side of the family. The 16 year old stayed. It worked out fine. I wouldn't consider a 16 year old to be a child capable of running crayons all over the walls. They are a grown up at that stage. 20 additional children is an ask alright though, so I can see where you are coming from there.


But OP, to be honest, you've got bigger fish to fry than this wedding... you sound like don't get along with your future husband's family, and it might be seen that you make no efforts to build a relationship with them. That's probably where the BIL's animosity is coming from. I'd think about solutions to that. A lifetime related to these people is quite some time.

Hi all,
Thanks again for replies. I'll try answer what I can.
I am getting pretty tired having to justify my stepdaughter 's presence. I don't care if she were two or twelve she is entitled to be there and is entitled to a plus one who happens to be a teenager. So what. I find it bizarre people can't see the difference.
Secondly all family dynamics are different. It's not that I don't get along with them, I'm just not close to them. They are of no support to me or u as a couple apart from his parents. I don't feel bad or guilty about this in the slightest. Last time I had seen bill was last March and have never had a proper conversation with him. He is not a part of my life. My fiancé and he get along fine. I don't need a relationship with him nor do I want one now. I don't need any solutions, I don't have a problem.
Whatever issue he has is his problem. The more I think about it the more I think he has a bloody nerve and acted like a self entitled prat. I have no room for that in my life. I won't let him ruin this special time, I won't give him that power, we have so much love and positivity around us I am focusing on that.
If he comes fine, if not fine.

sinny65

I think you are coming across as not very considerate. You state that your oh gets on well with his brother but you don't seem to make any effort to get to know him surely it would make your oh happy if you made the effort. You also mentioned that you haven't invited sis in law to hen, so it seems like you are distancing yourself from your hubby's family. I think absolutely a 16 yr old niece or nephew should be included in a family wedding and could not comprehend leaving them out. I get why your bro in law is annoyed and wonder how all of this makes your oh feel? Surely it would be good for him if you made an effort to know his family

Toots

Sinny65 you appear to be adding 2+2 and getting 5. The OP simply said she wasn't close to her fiance's family, not that they don't get on or that she avoids them.

She also said that it was a joint decision between her and her OH not to invite any kids bar his daughter - there are nieces and nephews on both sides of the family that aren't getting invited, not just this particular niece.

ronjo

theoldbreed wrote: »

Hi all,
Thanks again for replies. I'll try answer what I can.
I am getting pretty tired having to justify my stepdaughter 's presence.
.

What makes you say this? Its not as if you are getting rafts of answers saying she shouldnt be there.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

groovyg

sinny65 wrote: »

I think you are coming across as not very considerate. You state that your oh gets on well with his brother but you don't seem to make any effort to get to know him surely it would make your oh happy if you made the effort. You also mentioned that you haven't invited sis in law to hen, so it seems like you are distancing yourself from your hubby's family. I think absolutely a 16 yr old niece or nephew should be included in a family wedding and could not comprehend leaving them out. I get why your bro in law is annoyed and wonder how all of this makes your oh feel? Surely it would be good for him if you made an effort to know his family

I'm not sure if you read the whole thread but if you had, you would have seen this post

When the brother in law was getting married the grooms daughter, the OPs step daughter i.e brother in laws niece wasn't invited but other nephews and nieces were and now brother in law is acting like a spoilt child because his own daughter isn't invited to his brothers wedding.

It sounds like brother in law doesn't want to go to the wedding and is picking fights and finding excuses in order to justify why he is not going. Honestly this forum is eye opener for the sh1t people put up with from family and in-laws, if friends pulled those stunts you'd be well rid.

Walter H Price

We're getting married November 17 2017 and have made the decision to have no kids at the wedding , it's not a miserly thing as we have plenty of budget and i have quite a small extended Family (3 Aunts and 4 Cousins). Already members of my Fiances family have started to complain that all of my cousins will be going as all 4 will be over 18 by the time we get married but about 30% of hers wont. The reason we don't want kids there is that neither of us are comfortable with kids being around drunken adults , i just don't see a wedding as a place for kids.

I'm no fan of the unhealthy relationship many Irish people have with alcohol , i don't at all personally , but the reality is if its either no kids or no alcohol at the wedding i no which would cause a bigger fuss.

Totally agree with the OP here , her partners child and her friend are not unreasonable exceptions to a no under 18's rule.

ronjo

Patww79 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Just one person as far as I can see and they have been shot down by everyone else.

jungleman

Been following this thread for a couple of days now! OP you are dead right. You don't have to justify your guest list to anyone, it's YOUR wedding. You could send an invite out to Larry Murphy or Barney the dinosaur if you wanted, you're paying and you have already told people you don't want gifts etc. That's pretty sound of you, and no-one should be hassling you about it.

One of my housemates is engaged, and about two weeks later the MIL presented her with a list of 120 of her own friends and neighbours who "had" to be invited. No discussion, they "had" to be invited and that was it. people lose the run of themselves over weddings and invites. It's so laughable. It's utterly insane, actually.

So carry on, from the sounds of it you have reacted really well considering the circumstances. Don't let the BIL get you down. I hope he apologises, and even if he doesn't, I hope you have a great wedding day.

jungleman

apologies, all of my posts are double posts for some reason ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

kunst nugget

jungleman wrote: »

apologies, all of my posts are double posts for some reason ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Don't use the quick reply. That's what's causing it.

jungleman

kunst nugget wrote: »

Don't use the quick reply. That's what's causing it.

Ahhhhh. Duly noted, cheers.

Penny Dreadful

Arrgghh OP I feel your pain.

Its your wedding. If you decide to only have fair haired people there then you can do that. It would be a touch extreme but you can do that.

When we got married I hated the thoughts of having a big wedding. It mattered to my husband that certain people were invited and so we had what I think was a big wedding (120ish) and what he thinks was a wedding on the small side.
The only kids who came were my nieces and nephews -I have 6 of them and really only cared if 3 of them were there but got on with having 6 of them. The oldest niece was in a snot because I didn't ask her to be bridesmaid (she had insisted on being one for ages) but I didn't want any more than just one bridesmaid - my younger sister and stuck to my guns on that in spite of the grief from my sister and my mum.
My husband's family put so much pressure on him to allow his cousins bring their kids, to invite all of the relations and great aunts and their minders (there are 5 of them and some of them require minders/carers).
The venue we picked was thankfully too small to have them and the additional numbers my in laws wanted (at one stage they wanted me to ask the venue to build an extension for them!) and still they pressed the point despite the fact that there was no way we could move on it.

It was annoying as anything for him and I hated how it upset him.
People have no respect or cop on. You're invited to an event - if you want to go accept, if you don't want to go then decline. Simple as.

Penny Dreadful

theoldbreed wrote: »

Hi all,
Thanks again for replies. I'll try answer what I can.
I am getting pretty tired having to justify my stepdaughter 's presence. I don't care if she were two or twelve she is entitled to be there and is entitled to a plus one who happens to be a teenager. So what. I find it bizarre people can't see the difference.
Secondly all family dynamics are different. It's not that I don't get along with them, I'm just not close to them. They are of no support to me or u as a couple apart from his parents. I don't feel bad or guilty about this in the slightest. Last time I had seen bill was last March and have never had a proper conversation with him. He is not a part of my life. My fiancé and he get along fine. I don't need a relationship with him nor do I want one now. I don't need any solutions, I don't have a problem.
Whatever issue he has is his problem. The more I think about it the more I think he has a bloody nerve and acted like a self entitled prat. I have no room for that in my life. I won't let him ruin this special time, I won't give him that power, we have so much love and positivity around us I am focusing on that.
If he comes fine, if not fine.

I think you're dead right.

Atomic Pineapple

jungleman wrote: »

One of my housemates is engaged, and about two weeks later the MIL presented her with a list of 120 of her own friends and neighbours who "had" to be invited. No discussion, they "had" to be invited and that was it. people lose the run of themselves over weddings and invites. It's so laughable. It's utterly insane, actually.

Symptomatic of the "What will the neighbours say" attitude a certain generation of Irish people suffer from and have unfortunately still passed it down the generations. It overrides all other decision making no matter how illogical or selfish it is!

Chimichangas

dowhatyoulove wrote:

I think your well within your rights to not have any kids at the wedding.

fits wrote:

For our wedding, we see our nieces and nephews as an important part of the family so they were all invited but no other children were asked along. They made the party tbh. But they're a great age.

Tell me how wrote:

Well, it's yours and your fiancee's wedding you are entitled to invite who you want. However, you can't say that no kids are invited as there will be at least 2 there. I can understand how others are a but miffed by this as traditionally at least the children of near relatives would be invited, they wouldn't all come usually.

All correct. You have to think about the costs. And so often it comes down to money.
Stick to your guns now, surprised it's a shock to you. When all those cousins,nephews and nieces grow up you will be laughing at it. Coz u won't be able to talk about it. Memories.

jungleman

Atomic Pineapple wrote: »

Symptomatic of the "What will the neighbours say" attitude a certain generation of Irish people suffer from and have unfortunately still passed it down the generations. It overrides all other decision making no matter how illogical or selfish it is!

So true. If any in-law tries pulling that shít on me in the future I'd have no problem telling them to feck off. Even if they offer to pay for the guests I'd still refuse. Who wants a bunch of randomers turning up at their wedding for a piss up?

The decision on guests begins and ends with the bride & groom. That should be a kind of sacred thing that no-one meddles with.

sillysmiles

jungleman wrote: »

The decision on guests begins and ends with the bride & groom.

If the bride and groom are paying.

But (and I don't think this happens anymore) ifone or other parents are paying then it is something you are going to have to discuss.

OP, enjoy your day.

Everyone's family is different and what would be important for me, may not be important for you.

I think it's your fiance's job to speak to/sort stuff out with his brother.