Baby at wedding

"Sara" wrote in message
...
XOR wrote:

Hi all, I am curious to see what sort of comments you all with more
experience have. This isn't my question, this is stolen from another
chat group for weddings. Thanks!


"so here is the story! we are having a married couple in our
wedding....a BM & GM ---we met at their wedding --I was a BM and my FI
was a GM..aww!

A black man and a gay man? A breast milk and a General Motors car?

(Mot that that has anything to do with your question.)

When I see BM I always think of bowel movement. Makes for some interesting
reading at mkb.

--
Joy

Rose 1-30-99
Iris 2-28-01
Spencer 3-12-03

Rosalie B. wrote:

I would expect the mom to have dealt with this what I presume is
separation anxiety by the time of the wedding. Actually, having a
child that was that demanding of my attention would have absolutely
driven me crazy and I would not have put up with it for a minute. How
does she get a shower?

Caterpillar (15 months) would be that demanding in an unfamiliar place
with unfamiliar people. Having a stranger babysit her under those
conditions would throw her into full-on tantrum mode. I've spent the
last 3 months sitting in the church nursery with her every week in hopes
that the nursery attendant will one day become an acceptable
mom-substitute for an hour or two.

At home or in a familiar environment, she's completely capable of
amusing herself with no more than the normal need for attention. Either
set of grandparents (who each spend 15-20 hours a week with her, because
we live with one set and work with the other) can take her without a bit
of fuss. (She does like to come in the shower with me, but that's
because she likes showers, not because she likes me.)

She's just really slow to warm up to new people and things, and has been
her whole life.

IMHO, if she could not stand to leave the baby outside the church door
or with a sitter regardless of how much he cried, for the short
duration of the ceremony, it would be rude of her to participate in
the wedding as a BM unless the bride specifically and without
prompting says that he is welcome. If not, she should regretfully bow
out of the wedding and either attend as a guest with child (if that is
an option that the bride allows) or let her dh be at the ceremony
without her.

I totally agree.

Phoebe

"Dave {Reply Address in.sig}" wrote:

In message , XOR wrote:

[snip]

The solution is for the parents to be sat near a convenient exit and if the
baby starts making noise and won't be quiet, one or both of the parents can
make a swift exit with minimal disturbance to the proceedings.

That's only a solution if they are NOT in the wedding party, and if
the bride allows or wishes to have children in the church.

I have met parents who think that their children are welcomed anywhere
they are and they are a PITA to deal with. (These were older children
- school age BTW, and not well-behaved.)

I have also heard to tell of bridezillas who insist that everything
about their wedding be absolutely perfect. Also a PITA to everyone
involved. Because I do not think that a perfect wedding will ever
happen. And since it won't the high expectations and maximum personal
investment in the perfection of the day make it highly likely that the
bride will be angry and disappointed and will not enjoy the day that
she's put so much time into arranging.

Anyway the OP said
the couple has a one yr old boy who cannot HARDLY STAND to be
away from his mother! snip
-if she drops him off at daycare at the gym to work out he cries until
he hypervenelates, etc. !!! when she came to my shower weekend and
brought him --he was a cryin the whole weekend.

The child does not NEED to be attached to his mom all the time unless
there is an underlying problem that we don't know about. It is not as
if he is an infant who needs to bf. I feel that if this was not the
mom's first child, and if she had to go to work, that the situation
would not arise at this time - she'd have already dealt with it.

Now it would be nice, since the bridal couple were introduced at this
couple's wedding, for them to be in the wedding party. But I don't
think they have the right to inflict a screaming child on the whole
ceremony.

Nor do I think the mom should ask to carry her child up the aisle with
her. That is BEYOND rude - it isn't just bringing the child where he
has not been invited (which people do all the time-rude or not). It
is having him participate in the ceremony because they can't handle
having him cry for his mom. No bride should be asked to make that
choice or have appear unfeeling by telling her BM that she doesn't
want her with her son.







grandma Rosalie

Rosalie B. wrote in message . ..
"Jamie Clark" wrote:

BM -- Bridesmaid
GM -- Groomsman

This was taken from a wedding chat group, remember?

OOps, sorry. THanks for clarifying


Since it isn't your question, I will answer from the perspective of
someone who isn't giving advice - just an opinion.

I would expect the mom to have dealt with this what I presume is
separation anxiety by the time of the wedding. Actually, having a
child that was that demanding of my attention would have absolutely
driven me crazy and I would not have put up with it for a minute. How
does she get a shower? It makes me mad to think of it even at this
distance.

Well, I agree with all that, but I wonder how many moms are in this
situation and *don't* deal with the separation anxiety? Especially
first time moms? Obviously you can't really force her to deal with it
right? I've known a few (thankfully only a few) people like that - it
makes it hard for them to maintain adult relationships after awhile...


IMHO, if she could not stand to leave the baby outside the church door
or with a sitter regardless of how much he cried, for the short
duration of the ceremony, it would be rude of her to participate in
the wedding as a BM unless the bride specifically and without
prompting says that he is welcome. If not, she should regretfully bow
out of the wedding and either attend as a guest with child (if that is
an option that the bride allows) or let her dh be at the ceremony
without her.



If the prospective BM says - I'm sorry I can't leave my child, then
she should say - I'm sorry too, I had hoped to have you participate in
my wedding, but I understand that you cannot do that at this time.

FWIW - I agree, and this was my advice. I got the impression, however,
that the bride (and the other responders) were insisting that the
'bowing out' option was just as rude as bringing the kid. As it's a
group of mostly youngish, childless women, it's nice to get some
experienced perspectives


Just FTR - at our own wedding not including kids wasn't an option (too
many in our immediate families), but we also weren't worried about
kids acting up, as there was only one under 3. He did fuss a bit (1 yr
old), but nothing problematic. We also didn't bother with the whole
bridesmaids thing anyway, so I'm a little biased

Thanks for the input!

"Bruce Bridgman and Jeanne Yang" wrote in message ...

I beginning to remember why we didn't have lots of attendants (just a matron
of honor and a best woman) and an outdoor wedding in a park with walking
trails and a playarea - who cares if the kids ran around and made noise?


hehe, I hear you .

"Rosalie B." wrote
I have met parents who think that their children are welcomed anywhere
they are and they are a PITA to deal with. (These were older children
- school age BTW, and not well-behaved.)

I have also heard to tell of bridezillas who insist that everything
about their wedding be absolutely perfect. Also a PITA to everyone
involved. Because I do not think that a perfect wedding will ever
happen. And since it won't the high expectations and maximum personal
investment in the perfection of the day make it highly likely that the
bride will be angry and disappointed and will not enjoy the day that
she's put so much time into arranging.

My opinion- if the kid can't be left with a sitter (and in this situation it
seems leaving the 1 year old with a stranger is a bad idea and will distress
the poor baby), then the bridesmaid should gracefully bow out of the
wedding. This will cause the groomsmen to have one too many...but it's all
up to the bride, bridezilla or not, it would be rude to ruin the wedding
with a screaming child and wrong, wrong, wrong to have a bridesmaid up there
holding child if the bride doesn't wish for that to be in the wedding
party.

No one is at fault here, it is not the mother or the child's fault. I just
think the bride is entitled to the wedding she is planned without
unnecessary interruptions etc.

I hate to go into another niece/brat story, but at my wedding, my niece was
5 and a half, and while the videographer was filming the reception including
the dance with my father AND my first and last dance with my husband
etc.....she was running at full speed around the room and making faces at
the camera. And the &#!&# camerman was actually taking the camera off of us
and the other adult wedding guests- mother of the groom and other
sentimental guests, and filming the bratmeister. Bridezilla I was not, but
****ed off I was, that no one made her sit her ass down and be quiet, or
took her outside to get her the hell away from the filming. I felt like I
had to have certain kids at my wedding. I would rather have had no kids,
just because of this. (This is the niece who went on to knock me down
accidentally while pregnant, yes..)..a PITA if I ever met one.

I would never let Rachel be a nuisance like that- I would remove her from
the situation. It is not a young childs fault that they act their age but
adults should be the ones who are responsible for the kid not being a
disturbance at an event like that. I wouldn't be offended if a friend
invited me to a wedding or party as "adults only"- I understand why!

If I were her, and wasn't willing to leave kiddo at home with the
sitter (which is much the best solution, since toddlers and weddings
don't go together, either for a solomn ceremony OR for the late night
reception) I would bring the sitter with me to the church, and have
her prepared to take kiddo out of the church if there is a single peep
out of the kid, and walk him up and down, or put him in the carriage
and cart him around the block to come back when the ceremony is over.
I would NOT take the kid to the reception - the parents are asking for
trouble.

The happy couple deserves a bridesmaid and groomsman whose attention
is on their duties, and more than that, the couple deserve a ceremony
and reception that is not disrupted with screaming.

I'm mom of three, and while I completely understand the angst over
leaving your first child with a sitter for a few hours, if you have
accepted an invitation to be in the wedding party, you have to make
some compromises - i.e. the ceremony should not be interrupted, and
neither should the reception - and the parents ducking out early is
not exactly kosher when they are BOTH part of the wedding party, so a
sitter is necessary.

It really is amazing when you've been through it - you discover that
kiddo will survive a couple of hours of separation just fine. If they
can't handle the idea of a sitter, one or both should have declined
the invitiation to be in the wedding party and just attended as guests
so they could look after the kid.

Like most people, I could tell you some zinger stories about weddings
that were really disrupted by little people who should have been at
home with sitters (i.e. it wasn't just that the grown ups were upset,
the little ones were pretty unhappy, overwrought, freaked out, over
tired etc. etc. as well).


Mary G.

"Mary Gordon" wrote in message
om...

It really is amazing when you've been through it - you discover that
kiddo will survive a couple of hours of separation just fine.

On the other hand, I have attempted to babysit a child who had separation
anxiety so badly that she literally, and I do mean literally, screamed the
entire time her mother was gone (on the line of 2 hours).

Of course the child "survived", but what a horrible thing to inflict on him.
To put yourself in the child's shoes, just imagine how you'd feel if
somebody you didn't know suddenly took you away from all the important
people in your life, including your children, and held you against your will
and unable to get to them, see them, or talk to them for a couple of hours,
and you didn't know why because you didn't speak their language? How upset
would you be? How traumatised? Why do we shrug this off and say "The kid
will survive"? Survival is not the only measure of success.

I must agree with whoever said "If she can't leave the child with a sitter
at this time, then she should bow out." And if her friends will not permit
her to bow out, then they are truly selfish, putting their own wishes above
the needs of a child.

--angela

"Chotii" wrote in message
...

"Mary Gordon" wrote in message
om...

It really is amazing when you've been through it - you discover that
kiddo will survive a couple of hours of separation just fine.

On the other hand, I have attempted to babysit a child who had separation
anxiety so badly that she literally, and I do mean literally, screamed the
entire time her mother was gone (on the line of 2 hours).

Of course the child "survived", but what a horrible thing to inflict on
him.
To put yourself in the child's shoes, just imagine how you'd feel if
somebody you didn't know suddenly took you away from all the important
people in your life, including your children, and held you against your
will
and unable to get to them, see them, or talk to them for a couple of
hours,
and you didn't know why because you didn't speak their language? How upset
would you be? How traumatised? Why do we shrug this off and say "The kid
will survive"? Survival is not the only measure of success.

I must agree with whoever said "If she can't leave the child with a sitter
at this time, then she should bow out." And if her friends will not permit
her to bow out, then they are truly selfish, putting their own wishes
above
the needs of a child.

--angela

The only child I ever cared for who did this was our choir director's
son-who had just been adopted from Korea. I assume with all the changes the
poor little guy had gone through, when he was away from mommy for any length
of time, he COULDN'T be sure she would come back. It took about 6 months
before he was comfortable being left with me-and I suspect that other
babysitters would have had the same problem. OTOH, he was an absolute angel
when mommy was with him-almost unnaturally calm and quiet.

One thing which did help quite a bit was making a recording of his parent's
voices, which really did seem to calm him quite a bit.

"Chotii" wrote in message
...

"Mary Gordon" wrote in message
om...

It really is amazing when you've been through it - you discover that
kiddo will survive a couple of hours of separation just fine.

On the other hand, I have attempted to babysit a child who had separation
anxiety so badly that she literally, and I do mean literally, screamed the
entire time her mother was gone (on the line of 2 hours).

Of course the child "survived", but what a horrible thing to inflict on
him.

Oh forget the child. The child won't remember the "horrible thing"
inflicted on him/her. The babysitter on the other hand will remember for
years afterwards.

I babysat my niece when she was a baby (about 7 months old) going through
separation anxiety and she too screamed for the ENTIRE time. Cried no matter
what I did. I put her in the stroller, and strolled. I sang. I bounced. I
laughed. I cried. This went on for three-four hours. It was horrible. The
worst thing was that as soon as her parents came home and her eyes fell on
them, she started laughing and gurgling.

Fifteen years later - does she remember this? NO! Do I remember? YES!

Jeanne