Etiquette

Kids or No Kids?

2

Re: Kids or No Kids?

  • @prettygirllost sorry - that comment wasn't directed toward @aurianna it was meant towards Addie's rude comment. Definitely a lot of valid points on the dog thing, most likely will not have her there, it was just a fleeting thought to try and solve the FG and RB issue.
  • DrillSergeantCatDrillSergeantCat Oklahoma City, OK
    2500 Comments 500 Love Its Fourth Anniversary First Answer
    member
    A FG and RB aren't required. Ask your BM and MOH to hold the rings if you don't have an awesome dress with pockets like I do.
    OurWildKingdomthisismynickname2InLoveInQueensSP29
  • Also, flower girls and ring bearers can be any age, if they're ok with it.  I was 14 when I was my aunt's flower girl, because she knew I'd be psyched about it.  I'd do it again now, if she gets remarried.  So if there's older kids or adults you and your FI are closer to, they can be asked too.
  • auriannaaurianna
    Eighth Anniversary 1000 Comments 500 Love Its 5 Answers
    member
    edited June 2016
    Also, flower girls and ring bearers can be any age, if they're ok with it.  I was 14 when I was my aunt's flower girl, because she knew I'd be psyched about it.  I'd do it again now, if she gets remarried.  So if there's older kids or adults you and your FI are closer to, they can be asked too.
    Be careful with any age.
    I still remember a wedding I went to with a "flower maiden". Grown ass woman having to process down the aisle, handing almost-dead flowers to random people sitting on the aisle.

    It was a kid-free wedding (in case we didn't get it, it was written on two different places in the invites, along with the registry info and a warning to bring cash for the bar since there wasn't an ATM). Not sure if she was there because sides had to be even or because bride thought there must be a flower person... but so awkward. The poor woman looked so uncomfortable.
    PrettyGirlLostInLoveInQueens
  • DrillSergeantCatDrillSergeantCat Oklahoma City, OK
    2500 Comments 500 Love Its Fourth Anniversary First Answer
    member
    aurianna said:
    Be careful with any age.
    I still remember a wedding I went to with a "flower maiden". Grown ass woman having to process down the aisle, handing almost-dead flowers to random people sitting on the aisle.

    It was a kid-free wedding (in case we didn't get it, it was written on two different places in the invites, along with the registry info and a warning to bring cash for the bar since there wasn't an ATM). Not sure if she was there because sides had to be even or because bride thought there must be a flower person... but so awkward. The poor woman looked so uncomfortable.

    PrettyGirlLost
  • OurWildKingdomOurWildKingdom in the 216
    2500 Comments 500 Love Its 5 Answers First Anniversary
    member
    aurianna said:
    Not gonna lie. My initial wedding vision was walking down the aisle with my 20 year old cat with flowers around her neck, instead of a bouquet.
    Sweet kitty passed on long before I was even engaged and wedding plans evolved. But totally considered it.
    Our cats hate being carried and would eat the flowers. The dog would start with the flowers and move on to eat anything not nailed down.
    ScottishSarah
  • bleve0821bleve0821 The Shire
    1000 Comments 500 Love Its Third Anniversary First Answer
    member
    edited June 2016
    aurianna said:
    Not gonna lie. My initial wedding vision was walking down the aisle with my 20 year old cat with flowers around her neck, instead of a bouquet.
    Sweet kitty passed on long before I was even engaged and wedding plans evolved. But totally considered it.
    Our cats hate being carried and would eat the flowers. The dog would start with the flowers and move on to eat anything not nailed down.
    My Toothless would have wanted all the pets and never have made it down the aisle, and Hiccup would have run away to chase the birds.  Assuming either of them even made it close enough to the ceremony space before the guests ran away in terror because they're both Doberman Pinschers.  Sweet dogs, but, ya know...

    I vote no dogs, no RB or FG, and an immediate talk with FI to make sure you guys wind up on the same page, ASAP. Family dynamics are tricky. Finding money for 20 kids meals is not a hill you want to die on.

    ETF words


    "And when they use our atoms to make new lives, they won’t just be able to take one, they’ll have to take two, one of you and one of me..."
    --Philip Pullman

    PrettyGirlLostOurWildKingdom
  • edited June 2016

    I need advice! My mother (who is paying for the entire wedding) has already made it clear to my FH and I that we will not be able to invite many kids to the wedding due to costs, which I am more than ok with. However, my FH is not happy. He has over 20 kids on his side of the family (all under the age of 10 btw), but they are all his second cousins. I have 4 kids on my side of the family, 2 of whom are my first cousins and 2 of whom are my second cousins. I have already explained to my family that my second cousins cannot come and my family is understanding of that.

    I thought it would be an easy way to not invite a bunch of kids by saying that we're limiting it to first cousins, but my FH seems hurt and thinks I'm excluding his family. I've explained to him that of course this is not the case and that I've already excluded some kids from my family, and we can't afford to pay for over 20 extra children. (Not to mention that I don't want a bunch of screaming kids running around all night).

    It's even more of a dilemma because we don't know what to do about the flower girl or ring bearer. The 2 children on my side of the family are both boys and are too old to play a role in the wedding. So we were thinking of inviting some kids (second cousins) from my FH's side of the family to fill those roles, but I'm concerned that this will cause everyone else to question why their kids weren't invited. We've also been toying with the idea of providing child care, but I'm not sure if that would work out financially either.  

    I guess my question is it inappropriate to limit kids to first cousins, but then invite some second cousins to fill the role of ring bearer and flower girl?

    You have a FI problem not an etiquette or "kids v. no kids" problem. Your FI is telling you something is important to him and you're trying to explain away why what he wants can't happen. You two need to work on a compromise, maybe some of his cousins children he's close to but not all, maybe just out of town ones that will have a harder time traveling without children, some compromise that makes him feel like his family is included. 

    Its gracious your your family is paying, and that does entitle them to some input, but it doesn't mean they should just dismiss your FI's concerns about who is invited and neither should you. 
    OurWildKingdomPrettyGirlLostInLoveInQueensSP29
  • MairePoppyMairePoppy Connecticut
    Moderator Eighth Anniversary 5000 Comments 500 Love Its
    mod
    edited June 2016
    Sloth in a sloop? @DrillSergeantCat
                
    DrillSergeantCat
  • OurWildKingdomOurWildKingdom in the 216
    2500 Comments 500 Love Its 5 Answers First Anniversary
    member
    Addie wasn't being rude. 

    Your mother is generously offering to host and pay for the wedding reception, including your fi's family members. He should be thanking her. It's rude to tell her that her allowance of guests isn't good enough. If it's important for him to invite children, he should offer to pay for those guests. Your mother might be okay with that since it's a budgetary issue.
    QFT
  • aurianna said:
    Also, flower girls and ring bearers can be any age, if they're ok with it.  I was 14 when I was my aunt's flower girl, because she knew I'd be psyched about it.  I'd do it again now, if she gets remarried.  So if there's older kids or adults you and your FI are closer to, they can be asked too.
    Be careful with any age.
    I still remember a wedding I went to with a "flower maiden". Grown ass woman having to process down the aisle, handing almost-dead flowers to random people sitting on the aisle.

    It was a kid-free wedding (in case we didn't get it, it was written on two different places in the invites, along with the registry info and a warning to bring cash for the bar since there wasn't an ATM). Not sure if she was there because sides had to be even or because bride thought there must be a flower person... but so awkward. The poor woman looked so uncomfortable.
    I agree it takes a certain type of person.  I'd be cautious about asking an adult if you don't know how they'd react or if they'd feel too pressured to say yes.  But I've seen/heard of adult flower girls(? bearers? maidens?) that had a blast with it.  I just see so many people here say, well I'm super close to so-and-so, and I'd love to ask them to be my flower girl, but they're *gasp* 10 years old!  
    OurWildKingdom
  • ILoveBeachMusicILoveBeachMusic Indiana
    2500 Comments 500 Love Its Third Anniversary 5 Answers
    member

    But the groom's family isn't being excluded. The MOB is giving them the same parameters that she is applying to her own family-first cousins' children may be invited. If the groom wants to include the second cousins' children, he should offer to cover the cost.

    The MOB is offering to host/pay for the wedding. She didn't offer a sum and give carte blanche,  which is her right. It's her money and her gift. If the groom doesn't like the terms, he should decline the offer and start saving for the wedding of his dreams.
    I believe OP said the issue is first cousins children (whom she was calling second cousins) not second cousins' children. Just for clarity.
    madamerwinMairePoppy
  • PrettyGirlLostPrettyGirlLost A Land Filled with Unicorns and Cat Hair
    5000 Comments Fifth Anniversary 500 Love Its First Answer
    member
    scribe95 said:
    I would in no way ask your mom to add more or refigure the budget. I think cutting it off as cousins' kids is respectful and fair to both sides.

    And frankly if your FI doesn't understand or like it maybe he can save up money and pay for part of his own damn wedding. 
    I think this may be a little much. Yes, her mother does not have to add more to the budget, but if this is something that is really important to the FI, why should he feel like his family/opinion is excluded, it is his wedding too. Money does come with strings but I can see his point about his family being excluded as well. Would we still a bride whose parents are paying its cool to not invite the grooms family just because they are paying?

    If its strictly a budget thing, can the two of you cover the children's meals (typically cheaper than an adult per person price)? Or are there other areas where you can cut to include some of the children your FI is close to? 

    Just bc the mother is paying doesn't mean the FI doesn't get a say in who attends. Now if he is requesting 20 kids in addition to a huge guest list that's a problem, but I don't think it's right for the OP to just decide things without input from the FI either. 
    It's not just meals though.  Adding people means adding tables, chairs, additional linens, place settings, centerpieces, favors, etc.

    Just pointing this out for the benefit of anyone lurking.  There are usually additional costs than just adding another meal.

    scribe95 said:
    I would in no way ask your mom to add more or refigure the budget. I think cutting it off as cousins' kids is respectful and fair to both sides.

    And frankly if your FI doesn't understand or like it maybe he can save up money and pay for part of his own damn wedding. 
     Money does come with strings but I can see his point about his family being excluded as well. Would we still a bride whose parents are paying its cool to not invite the grooms family just because they are paying?


     
    But the groom's family isn't being excluded. The MOB is giving them the same parameters that she is applying to her own family-first cousins  children may be invited. If the groom wants to include the 1st cousins children second cousins' children, he should offer to cover the cost.

    The MOB is offering to host/pay for the wedding. She didn't offer a sum and give carte blanche,  which is her right. It's her money and her gift. If the groom doesn't like the terms, he should decline the offer and start saving for the wedding of his dreams.
    There are no second cousins or their children involved.

    If I'm understanding this correctly, the groom wants to invite the 20 children of his 1st cousins. . . those are his 1st cousins once removed.

    The cutoff for both sides of the family is at the 1st cousins.  No children of cousins are invited at this point.


    "Love is the one thing we're capable of perceiving that transcends time and space."


    InLoveInQueensMairePoppy
  • edited June 2016
    The original post said they could afford to invite some, but not all children. The OP and mother decided that meant first cousins, which means none of the children the FI wants will be included. Yes that's her right, however I do think if some children are being invited then the FI should get some input. If the mother had said no kids and then FI insisted they invite kids I would agree that's wrong, but that's not the post. They can invite some, so why not a compromise? It's the unilateral decision making that is the problem. 

    And the the advice for him to decline the money and plan his own wedding? I think that's just as wrong. There are two people in a marriage. If someone else is involved with hosting/paying for the wedding the three of them should sit down and discuss the parameters and strings attached to the money. Leaving someone out of that discussion is what causes problems. 

    ETA: just wanted to clarify, it would be wrong for the FI to ask for the mother to pay more, I certainly wasn't trying to advocate that. 
    SP29
  • edited June 2016

    I agree with @scribe95. If you or your FI want to add more people (kids or otherwise) to the guest list, then offer to pay for it.

    If you invite some but not all kids, I think inviting in circles is the way to go. Or invite no kids at all. Either way.

    We had a kid-free wedding (no RB or FG either). The best man held the rings in his pocket until we needed them. If he hadn't, my H would have. NBD.

    *********************************************************************************

    image
    PrettyGirlLostMairePoppy
  • thisismynickname2thisismynickname2 City By The Lake
    5000 Comments Fifth Anniversary 500 Love Its First Answer
    member
    The original post said they could afford to invite some, but not all children. The OP and mother decided that meant first cousins, which means none of the children the FI wants will be included. Yes that's her right, however I do think if some children are being invited then the FI should get some input. If the mother had said no kids and then FI insisted they invite kids I would agree that's wrong, but that's not the post. They can invite some, so why not a compromise? It's the unilateral decision making that is the problem. 

    And the the advice for him to decline the money and plan his own wedding? I think that's just as wrong. There are two people in a marriage. If someone else is involved with hosting/paying for the wedding the three of them should sit down and discuss the parameters and strings attached to the money. Leaving someone out of that discussion is what causes problems. 

    ETA: just wanted to clarify, it would be wrong for the FI to ask for the mother to pay more, I certainly wasn't trying to advocate that. 
    Totally agree with this. I, too, was not suggesting anyone pay more, only that the budget be reconfigured perhaps. The way I'm comprehending the issue is that a line was drawn that excludes some kids on FI's side. I presume that if he's kicking up a fuss, maybe people that are excluded are important to him.

    I don't have a single first cousin. I have a bunch of second cousins and all those second cousins have multiple kids (who are roughly my age). Had someone told me that a line was drawn at first cousins for my wedding's guest list I'd have been upset because my second cousins and their kids are important to me.

    The lines drawn can't result in unfairness, even if technically logical.  

    And, anyone notice that every time there's a "kids / no kids" conundrum it always stems from some weird "need" to have a flower girl and/or ring bearer?  You can get married without children throwing flowers around or carrying rings. It's not rocket science. 
    ________________________________


    charlotte989875flantasticsparklepants41SP29
  • LtPowers said:
    scribe95 said:
    Yeah, his family isn't being excluded. Using that same cutoff for both sides. It just affects more people on his side is all. 
    That doesn't necessarily make it fair. (In fact, since it affects more people on his side, it potentially makes it unfair.) Simply applying the same rule to everyone doesn't take into account differing circumstances.


    Well, then he/his family can pony up and pay to make things as "fair" as they want. If their version of "fair" isn't circles, but # of people, then they can pay for half the guest list.

    I think the point here is that OP's mom is generously paying for the reception and put a cap on the guest list (which IS fair). OP's FH wants to add more people...which costs money. So offer to pay for it.

    *********************************************************************************

    image
    PrettyGirlLostsparklepants41eileenrobMairePoppy
  • PrettyGirlLostPrettyGirlLost A Land Filled with Unicorns and Cat Hair
    5000 Comments Fifth Anniversary 500 Love Its First Answer
    member
    The original post said they could afford to invite some, but not all children. The OP and mother decided that meant first cousins, which means none of the children the FI wants will be included. Yes that's her right, however I do think if some children are being invited then the FI should get some input. If the mother had said no kids and then FI insisted they invite kids I would agree that's wrong, but that's not the post. They can invite some, so why not a compromise? It's the unilateral decision making that is the problem.

    And the the advice for him to decline the money and plan his own wedding? I think that's just as wrong. There are two people in a marriage. If someone else is involved with hosting/paying for the wedding the three of them should sit down and discuss the parameters and strings attached to the money. Leaving someone out of that discussion is what causes problems. 

    ETA: just wanted to clarify, it would be wrong for the FI to ask for the mother to pay more, I certainly wasn't trying to advocate that. 
    But when it's your money you get to make unilateral decisions.

    We don't know all of the details of MOB's financial situation, but if her budget is X, then it's X, regardless of whether or not FI wants to add an additional 20 people. 

    OP, FI, and MOB have to discuss the situation and come to a compromise together.

    Some possible solutions are:
    1. OP and FI offer to pay for all associated costs with inviting 20 additional guests. 
    2. FI and OP offer to reduce superficial costs of the reception, such as flowers, centerpieces, linens,favors, scale back on her attire, the photographers, etc. to free up those funds so that FI's additional guests can be accommodated within MOB's budget.

    "Love is the one thing we're capable of perceiving that transcends time and space."


    OurWildKingdomMairePoppy
2
This discussion has been closed.
Choose Another Board
Search Boards