Just in case you were wondering, the debate over kid-free weddings — and whether they're logistically practical or totally inconsiderate — is alive and well. And it is definitely raging on in a discussion post on Mumsnet this week, which has all sides weighing in on what they'd do.
In the post, one mom explains that her brother recently invited her to his destination wedding in Croatia -- but not her daughter, who will be 2.
This isn't just a quick international trip, either. The poster's brother has festivities planned over a five-day period for various wedding-related events and gatherings. That would mean her husband's parents would have to watch her daughter for a five-day stretch (and cross their fingers that things would go well).
Although the anonymous mom says she would understand banning kids from a wedding that's close to home, leaving her toddler for five days in a row while she heads abroad seems like a lot to ask. Plus, he's not just banning kids from the wedding — he's banning them from the entire trip. Adding more salt in the wound is the fact that her daughter is the groom's only niece, so leaving her out just feels … well, a bit callous.
Comments quickly flooded in, and the gist of most were basically, "Oh HELL, no!"
"No, I wouldn’t go," wrote one user. "And when they have their own [child] in a few years I’d make sure it was mentioned. Often."
(Um, you BET I would bring that up in the future.)
"I wouldn't go," added another user, "that's very rude and thoughtless."
"He's being unreasonable to expect you to leave such a young child alone for that amount of time," wrote one commenter. "Maybe one day he'll have kids and realize how ridiculous his request is!"
Some suggested she try talking to her brother to see if there was any budging on the no-kid policy.
To which she replied saying that she had in fact briefly spoken to him, and that she told him it was all "a bit unfair."
He said his fiancée's nephews aren't going either and the parents have no problem with it," she added. "He said they don't want kids and can't make one rule for one and not the other."
Many were more hung up on how much she'd have to fork over to attend a five-day destination wedding in the first place.
Weddings are expensive enough — but destination weddings? Considering the price of flights, a hotel room, the gift, and … well, that's a whole lotta moolah to lay out. In fact, according to a recent survey, the average cost of attending a destination wedding is somewhere in the neighborhood of $1,422 a person. The cost balloons to $2,514 for weddings outside of the US.
Gulp.
Others jabbed back, reminding her that a wedding "is not about you," it's about the bride and groom and what they want.
One user (who sounds like a total peach) snapped:
"The wedding isn’t about you, or your child and you are being entirely unreasonable to expect the couple to change what they want from their special day to what suits you. You were told no kids, you were told other kids weren’t being invited. Stop it. Either go, or don’t. That’s okay but you don’t get to dictate anyone else’s wedding day. You’ve had your own."
(Oof, that one was a bit harsh, no?)
Ultimately, the anonymous poster decided to heed the advice of those who said she should speak to her brother again -- calmly and reasonably.
In all fairness, both sides do have a point. On the one hand, it's her brother's wedding, and he has the right to set the tone and the overall vibe that he wants, which includes who's on the invite list.
Then again, he can't expect guests with children — particularly young children, at that — just to drop everything and take off to Croatia for five days without having to seriously rejigger their lives. Likewise, he can't expect everyone to be in attendance if a trip abroad doesn't work out.
As one user wrote, "It's fine for people to have a wedding in the way they want so long as they happily accept some people, including those close to you, may not be there. No guilt trips."
Amen to that.
