Infants at the wedding?

cherielisabeth · May 2013

We've been very clear from day one with friends and family that we didn't want children at our wedding. Nothing against them, but we are having a small wedding and would rather it be adults only. Not to mention $1000 extra deposit on the venue if anyone attends under 18 (it's a historic home full of antiques - think Downton Abbey) There are parents of 7 babies all under 1 year invited to the wedding. 5 of these babies will 4 months old or less on our wedding day. Almost all of the Mommies have mentioned they would not bringing the infants and been 'excited' for a night out. One of my FI friends is making a stink about it though. She thinks she should be able to bring her son because she is nursing (so are all of the other mothers). We've stood firm and felt fine with it until I saw on another post that nursing mothers should be allowed to bring infants. Is this true? Should I allow all 7 babies to attend since all are still nursing? There will be less than 75 attendees - having 10% of them being babies kinda scares me. I went to a wedding last year where a baby cried (more like screamed) throughout the ceremony and reception. We even heard him when they took him outside.

Kate61487 · May 2013

If a mom is exclusively breastfeeding not inviting her kid quite possibly means she can't come. depending on how close they live to the venue and the age of the baby they'd only be able to spend an hour at a time at your wedding and would have to be driving back and forth. For this reason people say that if you actually want to invite said mom and give her a legitimate opportunity to attend you should invite the baby.

That said - you do not have to invite the baby. It's your guest list. If you do decide to let her bring the baby I'd talk to the venue - I'd be seriously surprised if they actually charged you the deposit if those under 18 can't walk...

crunchymamaof2 · May 2013

As a mom with a nursing infant who takes my baby with me everywhere, I probably would opt not to attend if not allowed to bring my baby depending on baby's age. Now that he's 8 months I'm okay with leaving him for a few hours since he can be given solids to hold him over. If he was younger than 6 months I'd decline. But I wouldn't be upset with you. Its your wedding and your choice. I do think if you allow this one mom to bring her child you need to at least give the other moms the option. It sounds like most don't plan on bringing the baby anyway, but IMO allowing one to bring an "uninvited guest" when the others were told they couldn't is rude. At the end of the day you need to decide how badly you want this particular woman there. You're in the clear whatever you decide.

As for the venue, I'd be more nervous about wasted guests breaking the antiques more than some children!

AddieCake · May 2013

I think anyone with a nursing baby should have the option to bring the baby.

Peledreamsofrain · May 2013

Breastfeeding is the exception to the rule, and your venue should not charge you for a baby that can't even walk or crawl.

Also, breastfeeding isn't easy. In fact, it's freaking hard for a lot of women, consumes a lot of time, and pumping takes even longer (Think 20 minutes to half an hour, every hour and a half to two hours. For reals, wrap your brain around it, and you'll be a little more understanding). Worst part? Going without the infant sometimes will stop up a woman's breast, because the pump isn't a good substitute. That is painful as heeeeell to the lady (watched my sister go through it as she tried to travel without her infant).

To you, leaving baby behind is no big deal, or inconvenience. To the woman breastfeeding, it's potentially paired with crippling pain, and wastes a huuuuuge amount of her time as she tries to use the pump.

Seriously, just let her bring the baby. Infants just sleep all the time anyway when they aren't eating.

32daisies · May 2013

Fair or unfair, fwiw, I worked in museums for over a decade. Historic homes/museums/buildings do often have strict rules about facility rentals. Some of them may seem overly restrictive or illogical, but for each rule, I guarantee you, the curators can give you a horror story as to why it's in place. Babies don't run around, but they might spit up on an irreplaceable heirloom rug that can't be cleaned. Can adults cause damage too? Yes of course. At the root of it all, most historic venues would prefer, believe me, not to rent their facilities out, period. The economic pressure to do so, though, is overwhelming, so you do what you have to do, but you have guidelines, and if you start making exceptions, well, that's a slippery slope.

I'm not saying whether the OP should or shouldn't pay the deposit, or have their reception there, etc., just throwing this out there as a point of information. And it's always worth asking for specifics on the venue's policies.

AddieCake · May 2013

I guess I just wouldn't choose such a "delicate" venue if I thought I'd have to fret about anyone (be they adults or children) dropping something on the rug.

AddieCake · May 2013

NYUgirl100 said:

There is no requirement to invite babies just because mom breastfeeds. None. Yes, breastfeeding is not easy. That doesn't mean others have to make changes. It means mom does. And to invite one infant, and not allow the others is wrong.

Sometimes there's "etiquette" and "requirements," and sometimes there's just being a nice person, an understanding and accommodating person, instead of a hosebeast.

I agree it's wrong to only invite one, though.

NOLAbridealmost · May 2013

Well, it's your call OP if you want to make an exception, but if you make an exception for 1 you have to make it for all.

Personally, I would weigh two considerations: 1) the relationship w/ whatever mom might have to decline v. 2) the vision and vibe you want for your event. I personally would not want 10% of my guest list be infants unless the mom who was going to decline was an absolute VIP, must-invite guest like my sister or best friend.

Peledreamsofrain · May 2013

Post removed due to GBCK

MoxieMickie · May 2013

You do not have to make an exception for nursing infants. I think it would be rude only to allow the woman complained to bring her baby and not allow the women who accepted that the invitation is not for their children, so you do need to decide if you want 10% to be infants. (I would count on all attending, since you don't know who will decide against spending the money on a sitter.) I would not be surprised if the venue charged the extra $1000 "deposit" for any guest under 18 because they are allowed to set whatever rules they want.
You do have to accept graciously if guests decline. I generally advise against giving an explanation because that just allows the person to solve the problem of how you can let their kid attend. However, I might tell her it will cost you an extra $1000 for her infant to attend and you and FI decided against doing that when you chose the venue (or something to that extent.)
Infants sleep a lot. They also cry, spit up, and have no way to complain if their parents decide their poop is a magical substance that all the dinner table mates want to be exposed to during a table top diaper change. Some parents carry disruptive babies out, but others spend 10 minutes trying to quiet them or have different standards of "disruptive" than the people sitting next to them. In my experience, someone who is obnoxious (e.g., raising a stink as opposed to asking if you are allowing infants to attend) is the type of person who allows their child to disrupt others.

NOLAbridealmost · May 2013

MoxieMickie said:

However, I might tell her it will cost you an extra $1000 for her infant to attend and you and FI decided against doing that when you chose the venue (or something to that extent.)

I think that's a good point too. It's not just making an exception and possibly changing the vibe that you're going for by including babies....it's 1,000 bucks. That's not chump change.

32daisies · May 2013

Peledreamsofrain said:

32daisies said:

Fair or unfair, fwiw, I worked in museums for over a decade. Historic homes/museums/buildings do often have strict rules about facility rentals. Some of them may seem overly restrictive or illogical, but for each rule, I guarantee you, the curators can give you a horror story as to why it's in place. Babies don't run around, but they might spit up on an irreplaceable heirloom rug that can't be cleaned. Can adults cause damage too? Yes of course. At the root of it all, most historic venues would prefer, believe me, not to rent their facilities out, period. The economic pressure to do so, though, is overwhelming, so you do what you have to do, but you have guidelines, and if you start making exceptions, well, that's a slippery slope.

I'm not saying whether the OP should or shouldn't pay the deposit, or have their reception there, etc., just throwing this out there as a point of information. And it's always worth asking for specifics on the venue's policies.

I am honestly curious as to how a 4 month old infant can GET to a priceless museum piece to spit up on it. At that age, their biggest accomplishment is holding up their head.

Unless the mother is holding it out over a tapestry, it's not going to happen. Infants normally don't levitate.

You must not be familiar with this type of site. The whole concept behind maintaining a historic home is that when you're in it, you're in it. The artifacts aren't behind glass or ropes, they're there in the room -- as in, the guests may be walking on a vintage rug, or standing next to a silk-upholstered couch. Unless the adults plan on leaving their babies in a playpen in the foyer, they'll be right there too. Even an exhibit behind a rail is often just inches away, where splatters of drinks, or spit up, or knocked-over food, whether from adults or children, can reach.

I'm merely explaining that that's why many such sites, if they offer room rentals at all, have strict rules. Some historic sites won't hold events. Some do, and won't allow alcohol. Where I worked, we did not allow anything other than white wine, because of potential stains. Some don't allow children. Or may not allow strollers because they might bump into fragile furniture. So if the OP has to work within those rules, she has to work within those rules... or have her event elsewhere.

ridedatbike · May 2013

nicely put addie. its one of those situations where as a mom I would tell someone well put yourself in their shoes? if youre happy with the outcome then fine, if not, then dont put another person through it. But sometimes even then people dont fully understand. Everyone seems to think Oh im just going to do whatever i want whenever i want but then when it comes down to it...most people would prefer to just stay with their child because lets face it its probably better to anyway. You kind of just have to weigh your options and decide which out come youd be happiest with. I would also like to add to what pele said that even if you did pump and leave baby home you would still have to pump at all normal feeding times.

KDM323 · May 2013

My future SIL is due in August. Our wedding is in January. She has ALREADY asked her mother to fly in for the weekend so she can leave the baby at home. And, she is going to breastfeed. They make pumps & bottles...it is how women manage to work and sleep.

She is looking forward to a night out away from her infant. And I'm really very grateful because I didn't want a baby at my wedding/reception.

Nothing against babies...but at a reception with a DJ, food, drinks, etc? It just doesn't say "baby friendly event" to me, kwim?

jemmini6 · May 2013

It is typical to allow mothers with nursing infants to bring their babies, but you do not have to, so it's really up to you how you want to play this one. If she's not a VIP guest, I'd probably hold firm to your plan and leave the decision to attend or not up to her. If you do allow her to attend with the baby, you need to extend that courtesy to all the nursing mothers (though you can still voice your preference that they leave the baby at home if possible).

I do find it kind of selfish that this mother is making a big deal of it. Having kids is a major lifestyle adjustment and you have to accept that your children are not welcome everywhere. I get being disappointed that you might not be able to attend certain events, but that doesn't make it okay for you to try to force yourself and your kids on them anyways.

Kate61487 · May 2013

drexelkathy said:

My future SIL is due in August. Our wedding is in January. She has ALREADY asked her mother to fly in for the weekend so she can leave the baby at home. And, she is going to breastfeed. They make pumps & bottles...it is how women manage to work and sleep.

She is looking forward to a night out away from her infant. And I'm really very grateful because I didn't want a baby at my wedding/reception.

Nothing against babies...but at a reception with a DJ, food, drinks, etc? It just doesn't say "baby friendly event" to me, kwim?

I'm glad your situation with your FSIL is working out the way you'd like, but the bolded just sounds ignorant. Many take the meaning of 'exclusively breastfed' as they don't get a bottle of breast milk - it's the boob or nothing; (I know some interpret it as 100% breast milk regardless of how it's delivered) - point is, it's not the same for every mom. Just b/c it's your FSIL plan doesn't mean it will work for every, or even the average, breastfeeding mom. Even when pumping is the plan not all babies will take a bottle. Not to mention your FSIL hasn't actually had her baby yet; so she may find that it's no where near as simple as she'd like. Or maybe it will be, but there's no way to know

And the second bolded - I'd be very interested to see your definition of a "baby friendly" home where apparently baby is raised with no food, drinks, or music. Seriously?

MuppetFan · May 2013

I would vote for allowing breastfeeding mothers to have their infants. I would be ok with a deposit because I'm confident that these children aren't able to cause damage, but would also speak to the venue asking them to make the exception (without deposit) for the same reason.

With that said, if *your* preference is to have a baby-free/child-free/interruption-free wedding ceremony (DJ will muffled baby sounds during the reception and people can step out easier), then don't make any exceptions, but first consider that those people affected may not attend. So it becomes a value-judgement.

Do you value their attendance more than you value the sound of no tears for the 20 mins of your ceremony? That's what it boils down to. If your answer is no, that's not rude as long as you apply the rule to everyone.

monkeysip · May 2013

Kate61487 said:

drexelkathy said:

My future SIL is due in August. Our wedding is in January. She has ALREADY asked her mother to fly in for the weekend so she can leave the baby at home. And, she is going to breastfeed. They make pumps & bottles...it is how women manage to work and sleep.

She is looking forward to a night out away from her infant. And I'm really very grateful because I didn't want a baby at my wedding/reception.

Nothing against babies...but at a reception with a DJ, food, drinks, etc? It just doesn't say "baby friendly event" to me, kwim?

I'm glad your situation with your FSIL is working out the way you'd like, but the bolded just sounds ignorant. Many take the meaning of 'exclusively breastfed' as they don't get a bottle of breast milk - it's the boob or nothing; (I know some interpret it as 100% breast milk regardless of how it's delivered) - point is, it's not the same for every mom. Just b/c it's your FSIL plan doesn't mean it will work for every, or even the average, breastfeeding mom. Even when pumping is the plan not all babies will take a bottle. Not to mention your FSIL hasn't actually had her baby yet; so she may find that it's no where near as simple as she'd like. Or maybe it will be, but there's no way to know

And the second bolded - I'd be very interested to see your definition of a "baby friendly" home where apparently baby is raised with no food, drinks, or music. Seriously?

Yup, exactly. You definitely don't have to invite infants, but don't downplay the difficulties a mother may face with this issue. And don't make up bull-crap excuses for why weddings aren't children-friendly places.

It is every B&G's right to have a child-free event, but I also think my wedding, with music and alcohol, is going to be perfectly fine for the children attending. As long as we're not having gladiator tournaments or strippers at our wedding, I consider them generally family-friendly events.

KDM323 · May 2013

Kate61487 said:

drexelkathy said:

My future SIL is due in August. Our wedding is in January. She has ALREADY asked her mother to fly in for the weekend so she can leave the baby at home. And, she is going to breastfeed. They make pumps & bottles...it is how women manage to work and sleep.

She is looking forward to a night out away from her infant. And I'm really very grateful because I didn't want a baby at my wedding/reception.

Nothing against babies...but at a reception with a DJ, food, drinks, etc? It just doesn't say "baby friendly event" to me, kwim?

I'm glad your situation with your FSIL is working out the way you'd like, but the bolded just sounds ignorant. Many take the meaning of 'exclusively breastfed' as they don't get a bottle of breast milk - it's the boob or nothing; (I know some interpret it as 100% breast milk regardless of how it's delivered) - point is, it's not the same for every mom. Just b/c it's your FSIL plan doesn't mean it will work for every, or even the average, breastfeeding mom. Even when pumping is the plan not all babies will take a bottle. Not to mention your FSIL hasn't actually had her baby yet; so she may find that it's no where near as simple as she'd like. Or maybe it will be, but there's no way to know

And the second bolded - I'd be very interested to see your definition of a "baby friendly" home where apparently baby is raised with no food, drinks, or music. Seriously?

I don't know a single woman who "exclusively" breast feeds. My friends and family all work, go to school, etc...so pumping and bottle feeding is a must. I'm sure they wish they could 'exclusively' breast feed but it isn't reality for the circle of people that I know.

As for my definition of "baby friendly"...it wouldn't be somewhere that there is a DJ with a microphone announcing a wedding party, playing music, etc. I've seen weddings that are unfortunately too loud to be able to enjoy a conversation with people sitting at a table...I couldn't imagine subjecting an infant to that level of noise! It is one thing to be at home with the tv on, etc...something entirely different to subject a little baby to a potentially loud DJ and dance music. That's why I said weddings aren't "baby friendly". I've witnessed toddlers and little kids cupping their hands over their ears at weddings that have been too loud...babies don't even have that ability if they are very little.

Plus, there are dozens of people (if not 100+) that could pass on colds, germs, etc. because at some point in time during the night they are going to come up to little baby and go "oh my goodness, how cute" and touch the baby, etc after having just hugged, danced, touched the bathroom door, etc. The very thought of that just creeps me out...I am not looking forward to hugging 100+ people on our wedding day (bit of a germ-o-phobe) I couldn't imagine being a mom to a baby and having my child subjected to that!

One of my very good friends actually hired a Nanny for her wedding. She set the Nanny up with all of the children in an onsite hotel room. This allowed her VIP parents to attend the wedding (especially those from out of state) without having to worry about childcare. It may not be an option for such tiny infants...but it is definitely a good option for family members that have toddlers or little kids who might not otherwise be able to attend if they can't bring the kids with them.

monkeysip · May 2013

@ Drexel

That is all your opinion and experience. I DO know women that exclusively breastfeed... no bottle, no pump, nothing. And in my circle, babies at weddings are perfectly fine. And if mom thinks it's not okay for her baby, then mom can take baby out. But the point is, you can't make a universal statement that weddings with DJs and alcohol don't mix with babies.

Like I said, there's nothing wrong if you don't want to invite babies to your wedding or if you don't want to bring your baby to a wedding. But it's not because weddings aren't "baby friendly" or because mom's can just pump no big deal.

KDM323 · May 2013

I never made a universal statement in the first place - I said "to me" in my original post about the topic.

kaos16 · May 2013

MoxieMickie said:

You do not have to make an exception for nursing infants. I think it would be rude only to allow the woman complained to bring her baby and not allow the women who accepted that the invitation is not for their children, so you do need to decide if you want 10% to be infants. (I would count on all attending, since you don't know who will decide against spending the money on a sitter.) I would not be surprised if the venue charged the extra $1000 "deposit" for any guest under 18 because they are allowed to set whatever rules they want.
You do have to accept graciously if guests decline. I generally advise against giving an explanation because that just allows the person to solve the problem of how you can let their kid attend. However, I might tell her it will cost you an extra $1000 for her infant to attend and you and FI decided against doing that when you chose the venue (or something to that extent.)
Infants sleep a lot. They also cry, spit up, and have no way to complain if their parents decide their poop is a magical substance that all the dinner table mates want to be exposed to during a table top diaper change. Some parents carry disruptive babies out, but others spend 10 minutes trying to quiet them or have different standards of "disruptive" than the people sitting next to them. In my experience, someone who is obnoxious (e.g., raising a stink as opposed to asking if you are allowing infants to attend) is the type of person who allows their child to disrupt others.

I will never, for the life of me, understand why people feel that they should change their child on a table while people are eating food, or about to eat food. Aside from it being completely unsanitary, I find it to be a very rude thing for the parent to do.

Jen4948 · May 2013

I don't think you're required to invite any baby, nursing or not, but you do need to accept graciously any declined invitations to the parents of any uninvited baby.

KellyBensimon · May 2013

I agree with 32daisies and NYUgirl. I would not alter your plans.

tinambride · May 2013

I think you have a couple of options.

1) Allow your guests to bring infants. This will likely mean you will have to pay the $1000 deposit. (That's a significant amount of money to me, but everybody's situation is different).

2) Continue as planned. Some guests may not be able to attend, but all weddings involve compromises. Location, time, venue, etc dictate who can and can't come to your wedding. Don't feel bad for prioritizing what is important to you.

3) Higher a nanny or someone to watch the children. Some of the infants may be too young for this, but I don't know. I also don't know how much this would cost.

I personally don't know anybody who is exclusively breastfeeding (no pump or bottles). That's obviously a personal choice for people, but once they've made that decision I'm sure they have accepted the sacrifices that lifestyle requires. If this is your friend's situation, then I'm sure your wedding won't be the first activity she's had to miss.

southernbelle0915 · May 2013

It'd be very nice and accommodating if you wanted to make an exception, but it sounds like you don't want to - and that's fine too. If you make an exception for this family, you should extend it to all. If you decide not to, you're completely within your right to do so and she can accept or decline your invitation.

Infants at the wedding?

Re: Infants at the wedding?

Choose Another Board

Search Boards