Children at weddings, Yes or No?

So agree with what you have said here we have had 2 daughters weddings children at both wonderful day children no trouble every one happy !! Lots of very happy memories .

My own DD has three young children, 6, 3 and 2 years old, and her brother-in-law and his partner are marrying this summer. They have said the same thing - no children, which is causing all sorts of problems with babysitting. My DD's MiL would normally stay over, but, as mother of the groom she will be at the wedding. I am unable to help because we are a long way away and, apart from the boat, have no personal transport and it would take forever and a day with public transport. The problem has been solved by a very good friend of my daughter who is having the children at her home for a sleepover with her own little ones. My DD feels disappointed that they cannot go as a family, but worse still is that her eldest child now feels that his beloved aunt and uncle do not want him! All three children had a wonderful time at their parent's wedding two years ago. They behaved impeccably - and were, of course, much younger then.

I have attended two weddings recently one the children were allowed and the other only the bride's niece I've got to say both were nice in their own way the wedding with children had a lovely family atmosphere but on the other hand the adults only affair was very sophisticated and relaxing for everyone including many parents who had arranged sitters and were having a whale of a time child free .

I just like children and they should be included in any social occasion.They make my day.I bet the bride and groom will soon change their minds when they have their own children.

Depends on the wedding - one thing I do know - someone is bound to take umbrage! It's the bride and groom's choice. My daughter and son in law chose not to have children at their wedding because they would have taken up places which they would rather their friends filled. Children are not particularly interested in weddings, but they did have the children who were bridesmaids and pageboys. They were vindicated, because the page boys rushed around and were a damned nuisance (I think the parents should have controlled them). Lots of young guests were relieved that they could have a night out together and not have to go back for or to their children. On the other hand, if it's a fairly informal do with lots of outdoors to be enjoyed, have a separate party for the children with a registered childminder or two to organise it. Or even a separate room would do.

I think it is probably ok to take older children around 8 years and older but I do think very young babies or small children should not go have been to quite a few weddings where the babies cry a lot and the little ones just run around the dance floor and can get knocked about a bit.When I was young some of my Aunts and Uncles that got married would not have young children so my older Sister looked after Me and my brother.Though I did find out our younger cousins went which really annoyed me. It's very difficult I know but it's the bride and grooms day and it's really down to them.

We are odd in excluding children from key family occasions. Marriage is after all about creating a family unit. Some weddings have become such perfomances, all show and no heart!

Whilst it is of course up the bride and groom to invite whoever they want I think it is a sad reflection of society that children of the family are not valued enough to be asked to participate in this family occasion.

Hello princesspamma-wonder what you find of interest on here then if you're neither a mother nor grandmother as it seems to be mostly family related? I do realise there are other threads too. . . ..

To add to my previous post my brother's wedding was in a barn at her parents farm, no seating or even music we all stood around eating finger buffet and were expected to leave by 7pm. The brides immediate family and a couple of her parents friends then retired to the house for dinner.
No wonder they didn't want children there.

I agree Penstemmon . I think that weddings are family affairs and the day is so much nicer if you have the whole family. They are sterile affairs if it is just all for show. However some people are more interested in the show and not the heart.
It is generally done by those who have no idea of the difficulties it causes for childcare.

As I recall, there was one 2 year old & a 4 week old baby at our wedding 35 years ago. The majority of guests were older relatives & friends of my parents & of my husband's mother. In my dad's view, he was paying & he'd ask who HE wanted!! How different when my own 2 children were married! Although we contributed to both weddings,( substantially in our daughter's case - very traditional!) we had very little say in the guest lists, which suited us fine, it was their day & I remembered the lack of friends at my own wedding. At both, there were plenty of small children, which was lovely. I must say, however, to me a wedding day is primarily about the bride & groom and if, for whatever reason, they prefer not to invite children, then that is their prerogative.

I know families who have fallen out permanently over this issue. Both my daughter invited all children in the family and all her friends children and it was a lovely occasion. It doesnt need to be expensive with playrooms, nannies, bouncy castles etc. they just put together a small bag of age appropriate toys for each child plus bubble mixture for all on tables at reception. The dancing was a Barn Dance and everyone joined in from 3 yr olds to 80 yr olds. There was a quiet room for babies and young children to sleep
In but hardly anyone used it.
My son didn't want a big do so they just invited parents and siblings with families (including children) - about 12 people in all. It was also a lovely occasion. We had an informal party for extended family the following week so everyone was happy.
I think to exclude children of near relatives causes a lot of upsets. Friends children are a different matter.

Reading all these posts make me quite pleased neither my DD or DS have got married, both have lovely partners and children but no weddings. We have some great extended family parties and it's all the generations together which we love

No from me Weddings are seldom in child friendly locations andare long drawn out affairs where kids can easily get bored and up to mischief Where to draw the line is difficult too invite one invite all in my book and that is both expensive and intrusive Sometimes a kid free day is good for everyone

Newquay she may be a step grandparent

DD1 is going to a wedding tomorrow- no kids. They will have to pay someone they trust to look after the children- but they totally respect the couple's wishes and say 'fair enough- their wedding - and if we don't want to spend the money on a sitter- then we could just turn down the invite.

It's wonderful to have children at weddings, very odd to say no children. They love dressing up and being part of a larger family and are almost always very well behaved in my experience. A wedding without children is like life without love.

Family weddings are always a strange mix of people aren't they- most are total strangers with little cliques emerging. I think children always lighten the mood, especially when you consider so many couples already have children of their own. Personally I find the long drawn out photos, meals etc a bit of a pain, three hours is enough for me, not a whole day and evening.

suzied: Seriously? Has nobody told the syster to get over herself?

I agree with most of these comments about having children at a wedding. It is wonderful to have the family at a wedding, including the children. It can be a very warm and wonderful experience. But, I can understand why some couples don't want children there, it is their wedding and their decision. I have been to weddings where children have been an awful distraction, especially during the service. They have screamed and cried and screamed again for the whole service. I really think that it is up to the parents or someone in the family to take the child outside and settle them down. I think the guests must respect the importance of someone's wedding day and make sure that their children behave or take them outside.

I think it is a pity if family children are excluded - to my mind a wedding is a family event and that is reflected in the different generations present, Children add to such an occasion. It often seems to be all about what the couple want to make the day 'perfect' and this often seems to include the idea of no 'interruptions' during the service / ceremony.
We are a 'churched' family and therefore relaxed about being in church services - churches often have a children's table at the back or side. I always went 'armed' with a little bag of things to do to keep mine happily occupied during any 'boring' bits of services. If it is a registry office, I would still take some 'quiet toys' for distraction purposes. At the reception, little touches like bubbles / colouring books go a long way. I would not see it as the bride and groom's responsibility to provide extras, but my DD had a reception in a marquee set in a large field and had the space to provide large games of jenga, snakes and ladders etc. which were well used.
If a child is upset to the point that they are disrupting, then parents should take them outside for a breather. In my experience, if children are talked to, included in sharing meals, given attention, rather than ignored, they are usually fine.

My husband says 'that is a question that should not be asked!' We were excluded from a very good friends wedding as up north and no baby sitters - did not even consider going to her second wedding esp as attitude was good, we have space for somebody else!' . Our grandsons of 11 months have already been to several weddings - their daddies usually part of the Cedilah band playing for friends.

I wouldn't like my son to marry a girl who didn't want children at their wedding.
You could say no babies or toddlers at the service, but these weddings sometimes last all day and children running about and having a good time makes for a lovely relaxed atmosphere.
It also gives children a chance to be involved in a big family party and dress up and see everybody else dressed up. Actually part of family life.

Of course it's upto the bride and groom, their choice. Personally I think weddings are more enjoyable without young children except perhaps the real closest family ones. Also, would any of us oldies relish going to a children's party, or indeed expect to be invited?

Hello NanSue, thanks for the great topic, albeit an upsetting one.

From a child's perspective, they are agonizingly disappointed if they are old enough to feel left out. And children have memories and can remember who these people are who choose to exclude. Also, there are the PHOTOS.

In the years to come those photos will cement the division which will always be felt that certain kids were at the wedding while others weren't.

I have always hated a framed photo of my parents at a wedding with my sister there as flower girl. I remember staying at home with a babysitter. I cried and felt like dying. A wedding should be inclusive and not about the costs. I have always felt inferior to the kids who went to that wedding.

If the costs are over the top then perhaps the parents or grandparents can help out. These days there is such a ridiculous show off kind of thing going on, about weddings that is stomach turning. Fine. If people are more concerned with the looks rather than how they make their guests feel (kids left at home) they will also justify keeping the kids out for any number of reasons, such as noise, naughty outbursts, etc. In this case they can hire a few babysitters and take the kids to a hotel room after the ceremony and dinner if they're too little.

I will never be close to those who included my sister but left me out. I wish all people who expect to exclude the kids should realize how cold and calculating this decision is, and how they should not ever EVER expect those same kids to want to have anything to do with them.