family obligation

willebeth

we are getting married next summer and we are talking about who is going to be in our wedding party. I have 2 sisters of who I have never really done the sisterly activities with and one of them I have a hard time being around because of how she is (it is a long story). I said something to my mom about using my younger sister but not the other one. She said if I use one I need to use the other one to be fair. Do I really have to be "Fair" with this? It is my wedding, and right now she stinks so bad because she doesn't have any personal hygiene and that is just the start. If I could get by with it I wouldn't even invite her. Please help.

cmmosley81

Honestly I dont see a reason that you have to have her in the wedding if you dont really want her to be. I think that maybe you can take sometime within the few months to try adn get closer to her and talk to her about her problems. Don't put her in the wedding to make your mom happy. I am sure she ould love to see you and both your sisters up there but you dont have to.

mkrupar

If you want the fact that you only had one sister in your WP brought up at all future christmases, thanksgivings, and other holidays, then no, you don't have to be "fair" by having both of them in the WP. It sound like not only would your sister be upset about this, but your mother as well. In the long run it might just be worth it to have her in the WP to avoid family drama. She doesn't have to help you plan anything. All she has to do is buy the dress and show up at the wedding.

You have a lot of time to choose your wedding party. If you're not really close to either sister, then maybe you should just have friends stand up with you. Your mom said if you use one, you have to use the other, does that mean she'd be opposed to you having neither of them?

Another way to work this would be for you to just have and MOH, your best friend. That way no one feels slighted. GL

gottahavashorti

If it would cause any family drama, have her in the WP.  Not having a sibling in a WP where doing so is the norm can cause problems for years, not just until the wedding.

But I do agree with your mom that it's all or none in terms of sisters in the WP.

LD1970

This isn't a wedding issue, it's a family issue.  How important is your one day that you're willing to cause a war in the family?

AutumnFair

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_wedding-party_family-obligation?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:37Discussion:e1c0f17a-bd1f-4ca9-989c-da932a9f1346Post:22c5a90b-fac5-4272-878c-525427777cf0">family obligation</a>:
[QUOTE]we are getting married next summer and we are talking about who is going to be in our wedding party. I have 2 sisters of who I have never really done the sisterly activities with and one of them I have a hard time being around because of how she is (it is a long story). I said something to my mom about using my younger sister but not the other one. She said if I use one I need to use the other one to be fair. Do I really have to be "Fair" with this? It is my wedding, and right now she stinks so bad because she doesn't have any personal hygiene and that is just the start. If I could get by with it I wouldn't even invite her. Please help.
Posted by willebeth[/QUOTE]

<div>If the biggest issue you have with her is her personal hygiene then that is pretty sorry excuse for not having her. Personally when it comes to siblings, specially two sisters, to have one and not the other is a huge slap in the face. I agree, if this is going to start family drama I would have both or none like your mom said.</div>

aerinpegadrak

Take the long view with regards to family drama.  I think it's a very, very rare occasion where excluding a sibling is the option that decreases pain, tensions, and drama.  It's usually quite the opposite.  I have aunts and uncles I've never met because of some stupid drama that happened at a wedding 60 years ago.  Just something to keep in mind.

tldh

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_wedding-party_family-obligation?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding BoardsForum:37Discussion:e1c0f17a-bd1f-4ca9-989c-da932a9f1346Post:da83dfd1-7b56-462c-ace8-9206fda40887">Re: family obligation</a>:
[QUOTE]<strong>If you want the fact that you only had one sister in your WP brought up at all future christmases, thanksgivings, and other holidays, then no, you don't have to be "fair" by having both of them in the WP.</strong>It sound like not only would your sister be upset about this, but your mother as well. In the long run it might just be worth it to have her in the WP to avoid family drama. She doesn't have to help you plan anything. All she has to do is buy the dress and show up at the wedding. You have a lot of time to choose your wedding party. If you're not really close to either sister, then maybe you should just have friends stand up with you. Your mom said if you use one, you have to use the other, does that mean she'd be opposed to you having neither of them? Another way to work this would be for you to just have and MOH, your best friend. That way no one feels slighted. GL
Posted by mkrupar[/QUOTE]

This!!

A set of my cousins consists of three sisters.  Two who really borderline hate eachother got married the same year, much to the consternation of the one who announced her date first.  The level of animosity is great enough that sister 1 told sister 2's FI to go eff himself when he was trying to make peace between the girls.   Guess what.  They were still BMs in eachother's weddings.

mbcdefg

You're not required to have anyone in your wedding, blood relative or not.

That being said, it's a one-day role, and including a sister could potentially spare you years of drama with the sister and your parents.

You're entitled to have the bridesmaids that YOU want, but I would personally think long and hard about whether this is a battle you want to fight with your family.

I'll say this: I know my parents would've been extremely upset if my brother and sister weren't included in my wedding party. I would be upset if I was not asked to be in their wedding parties in the future. And if I wind up having multiple children, I would be very upset if my children didn't include each other in their weddings.

I'm of the mindset that siblings ought to be included unless there's a VERY good reason not to (not only to prevent hurt feelings within the family, but I also come from a family/social circle where a left-out sibling would be a giant social statement and guests would talk about it), but not everyone feels that way. And I come from a family where we all get along, so I'm admittedly biased ... maybe I'd feel differently if there was really a justifiable rift between the siblings.

If the problem with the sister that you don't want to include is just the hygene thing, or if she's young and bratty, or if she's just a smartmouth or something, I'd be inclined to overlook that in the name of family harmony. If the problem deals with drugs or alcohol, theft, abuse, or another serious problem, then you may have a point.

JennaV26

Put her in the wedding if you want to avoid drama. But um, make her shower before the ceremony and maybe plan to do fun "sisterly primping" the week before the wedding. That might help with the hygiene problem.

JadziaDax

First things first, you need to help your sister out with her personal hygiene. There are bigger issues going on here than picking out your wedding party.
To answer your question though, I would have both sisters in the wedding party to avoid family drama.

RebeccaB88

I am not so sure that 'use them' is the best term here. 

If you want them, have them. If you don't, don't. 

marinabreeze

If your sister has a personal hygiene issue, hasn't your mom mentioned it to her?  Moms will often tell you the truth even when it hurts.  Or is there something else going on here, like mental illness, drugs, or something along those lines (of which poor hygiene may be one sign)?   It's hard to know where to go with this since information in terms of exacly why you don't want your sister included is missing.  Just saying something to the effect of "she stinks and gets on my nerves" seem like crappy reasons to exclude her, to be honest.

Here's the thing...in general, while you can include and exclude whoever you want from your WP, it's a bad idea in general to include one sibling and not the other if you want drama-free holidays and family relations after your wedding day.  And also, it's possible (can't guarantee it, but possible) that including her might help improve your relationship with her.  My younger sister and I weren't super close either and hardly ever talked (if we did, I would always be the one to have to call and hunt her down unless she wanted something)...we are just very different people.  And then I decided to make her my MOH, and I think it meant a lot to her.  And now we talk more often (and not just about wedding related stuff either), and our relationship is closer than it was before.  I can't say that'll happen with your sister, but if nothing else, including her will placate your mom, and your family and social circle won't give you the collective side-eye.

Rabbit79

sisters are an all or nothing package unless there is some drastic reason otherwise

bablingbrooke

I kind of think that same-sex siblings should be "all or nothing" unless you have a good reason not to include one person.  It's expected in a lot of families; it definitely was in mine.  I had my sister as the obligatory WP member and it wasn't any sort of big deal or source of regret (and believe me, she was no piece of cake at or before the wedding).

MyWedding13

I would put them both in and have enough people to balance them out. I have two MOHs now because my family wanted my sister (who has borderline personality disorder and is sooo difficult to be around) as my MOH. I wanted my best friend, so I compromised and have both to avoid conflict.

C*Mia

In my fam it would be handled very simply... who is paying for the wedding? ok they get the final say. I also agree that it should be all or nothing.