Etiquette Question - wedding invites

"Anne Rogers" wrote in message
I suppose it depends on what you do with your time, I don't know what
would have happened if a close friends had not liked children, because I
haven't had to cross that bridge.

I've kept several friends from high school and early working jobs. Some of
them don't have children and don't want any, but that doesn't mean that they
didn't like my kids. We've managed to stay friends for 11 years and have
weathered many differences, but we still remain close. Granted while I was
in the middle of having babies, I didn't see them much, but did keep in
contact.

But as a SAHM I haven't had chance to meet anyone who doesn't have
children! If I worked, then I could definitely imagine having friends who
weren't into children, as I presume my husband does, but myself I have
limited opportunities to meet people, other than those who also have
children.

I was the same too. Being a SAHM can be isolating, but like I said, I have
kept friends from when I was younger. And I do have more friends that are
parents than those who don't. I just found your statement of if they didn't
have children then I can't be friends with them kind of narrow minded. I
just don't like this prevailing attitude that once you become a mom, the
rest of your life has to stop.
--
Sue (mom to three girls)

"Cheri Stryker" wrote in message
...

The ironic thing is, breastfed babies (provided mom's wardrobe is
cooperative) tend to be quieter/more easy to soothe (well, infants,
anyway) than bottlefed. At least that's been my experience comparing
mine to other babes.

Hmmm... I would have gone nutso comparing my oldest, breastfed to other
babies in terms of temperament. She was one of the fussiest, screamiest,
noisiest, unhappiest little things. I've gone on to have three more, and I
breastfed them all. IMO, it's more about personality than how I fed my
baby. Each of them have been different in terms of how to sooth. None of
them have been quieter than the bottle fed babies. Except for my last one.
#4 is the mellowest, smiliest, happiest, quietest little baby I've ever
seen, but I don't take any credit. LOL Well, I guess I do meet his needs,
but it's just so easy. People STILL remember #1, so it wasn't just my
perception.

Joy

"Sue" wrote in message
news:6qOdnZJe0teVGCLZnZ2dnUVZ_sSdnZ2d@wideopenwest .com...
"Cheri Stryker" wrote in message
The ironic thing is, breastfed babies (provided mom's wardrobe is
cooperative) tend to be quieter/more easy to soothe (well, infants,
anyway) than bottlefed. At least that's been my experience comparing
mine to other babes.

?? hmm, I've never known the difference and is usually because of the
temperment of the child. And definitely not so in my family.

And ya know, it doesn't really matter.

It's a formal wedding, which probably means the couple is paying a per-head
premium for the hall/church/locale and that there's only so much space
anyways.

It's also the couples' wedding day, and they've decided they don't want
children there. I'm sure they didn't roll out of bed one morning and go "oh,
look, let's invite a breastfeeding mother and exlude her child and see how
much that ****es her off." They just don't want children at their wedding
and there's *nothing inherently wrong* with that.

If it's genuinenly not at all practical for whatever reason to leave the
peanut with a sitter for four hours, then a simple one line response to the
invitation is all that's warranted; something along the lines of "It is with
sincerest regret that I am unable to attend your wedding celebration" and
make sure to follow up with a card or a gift card/present from off their
registry.

That's it. Don't go into long, extended explanations that might or might not
be read by the maid/matron of honor and might or might not cause hard
feelings.

Just a one line response gracefully declining the invite, and if one's
specifically asked later, then gracefully answer "I couldn't make
arrangements for my newborn for that period of time" and leave it there.

There's no reason to turn this into a major "they're deliberately excluding
my family and I'm a breastfeeding mother and how dare they" type of debate.

Jess

Sue wrote:
I've kept several friends from high school and early working jobs. Some of
them don't have children and don't want any, but that doesn't mean that
they
didn't like my kids. We've managed to stay friends for 11 years and have
weathered many differences, but we still remain close. Granted while I was
in the middle of having babies, I didn't see them much, but did keep in
contact.

I'm not really in touch with school friends, shame in someways, but in
others fine, I'm just turned out like my parents in that I've not kept in
touch with school friends but are in very close contact with university
friends, none of whom have children.

But as a SAHM I haven't had chance to meet anyone who doesn't have
children! If I worked, then I could definitely imagine having friends who
weren't into children, as I presume my husband does, but myself I have
limited opportunities to meet people, other than those who also have
children.

I was the same too. Being a SAHM can be isolating, but like I said, I have
kept friends from when I was younger. And I do have more friends that are
parents than those who don't. I just found your statement of if they
didn't
have children then I can't be friends with them kind of narrow minded. I
just don't like this prevailing attitude that once you become a mom, the
rest of your life has to stop.

and it doesn't, but it often does temporarily, I'm in quite a different
place in motherhood to you, with children 1 and 3, this term I have gone to
an evening class which was great, I went to the pub with them, but it was
only a term of classes, we are not on wedding invite terms yet and with us
moving we never will be! So I can imagine making new friends who have no
interest in children. I just haven't had to test out friendships from before
children, those that I've drifted away from, I can trace back the drifting
away to well before we had children.

I think there are different styles of who you invite to a wedding, I've been
to weddings that have varied from about 50 people to 200+ because some
people only ask close friends and others ask everyone they've ever known!
Coming from closer to the 50 end (I think we had 80), when I think about the
type of friendship I have with those people then this issue would not have
occured, there would be no question that they invited the children, whereas
had we received invites from people who had very large weddings I can
imagine it cropping up.

Anne

If it's genuinenly not at all practical for whatever reason to leave the
peanut with a sitter for four hours, then a simple one line response to
the invitation is all that's warranted; something along the lines of "It
is with sincerest regret that I am unable to attend your wedding
celebration" and make sure to follow up with a card or a gift card/present
from off their registry.

is that etiquette in the US? I don't think it is here, at least not for
friends, family maybe, the usual thing is for them to send a card for the
best man to read out during the speeches and again that would be only a
small number of people, I think we had 4.

Anne

"Anne Rogers" wrote in message
...
is that etiquette in the US? I don't think it is here, at least not for
friends, family maybe, the usual thing is for them to send a card for the
best man to read out during the speeches and again that would be only a
small number of people, I think we had 4.

It depends on what the friendship is like. It's certainly considered
appropriate to send a card.

Jess

Anne Rogers wrote:
If it's genuinenly not at all practical for whatever reason to leave the
peanut with a sitter for four hours, then a simple one line response to
the invitation is all that's warranted; something along the lines of "It
is with sincerest regret that I am unable to attend your wedding
celebration" and make sure to follow up with a card or a gift card/present
from off their registry.

is that etiquette in the US? I don't think it is here, at least not for
friends, family maybe, the usual thing is for them to send a card for the
best man to read out during the speeches and again that would be only a
small number of people, I think we had 4.

Our friends in the UK all sent us gifts, even though they couldn't
attend our wedding. A gift is never required, esp if invitees do not
attend, but I do think it's common practice, even in the UK ('from the
registry is certainly *not* official etiquette).

Sue wrote:
"Anne Rogers" wrote in message
I suppose it depends on what you do with your time, I don't know what
would have happened if a close friends had not liked children, because I
haven't had to cross that bridge.

I've kept several friends from high school and early working jobs. Some of
them don't have children and don't want any, but that doesn't mean that they
didn't like my kids. We've managed to stay friends for 11 years and have
weathered many differences, but we still remain close. Granted while I was
in the middle of having babies, I didn't see them much, but did keep in
contact.

But as a SAHM I haven't had chance to meet anyone who doesn't have
children! If I worked, then I could definitely imagine having friends who
weren't into children, as I presume my husband does, but myself I have
limited opportunities to meet people, other than those who also have
children.

I was the same too. Being a SAHM can be isolating, but like I said, I have
kept friends from when I was younger. And I do have more friends that are
parents than those who don't. I just found your statement of if they didn't
have children then I can't be friends with them kind of narrow minded. I
just don't like this prevailing attitude that once you become a mom, the
rest of your life has to stop.
--

Though our lives for the past 17 days have stopped as they've revolved
around our new little one, most of our local friends do not have
children, and I am certain they will not disappear now that we do. In
fact, they've been as excited as we have about our daughter. Life will
change, but it won't stop. I can't imagine ending friendships because
they don't have kids, nor did we skip out on our single friends when we
got married.

Since I had to pay for my own wedding, I had to put "adult-only
reception" on the invitation because I couldn't afford to feed
everyone's kids. It wasn't that I did not want them, and a ton of
people brought them anyway. (I even had one relative with seven kids
write on the RSVP 'Just count the kids as three since the baby won't
eat anything and the other six can share'") I thought - sheesh thanks.
If it were me, I would not mind a baby coming, but I don't know the
specifics of why they say adult-only reception in your case - adult
entertainment maybe? space limitations? kwim? I would find out why
through the grapevine if you could and if it is an issue of them being
able to afford the extra expense involved in feeding the kids, then I
wouldn't even hesitate to take the baby since he won't count. Heck, I
don't think I would hesitate for a baby for any reason since the baby
is so young. It isn't like he is going to take up much room or remember
any crazy behavior he may witness. lol. Really though, I would have
never expected my out-of-state guests to not bring their kids - that is
an unreasonable expectation really.
KD wrote:
Greetings folks:

Just wanting to get some opinions from out there. We've been invited to
a wedding, which it will cost a fair bit for us to go to; car rental,
gas, clothing for me, wedding gift, etc.

Anyhow, we just learned that our five month old isn't welcome at the
reception, not even for just the dinner portion. The baby is
exclusively breastfed, not like I could just leave him with someone.
Even if he weren't, everyone I know in the area will be at the wedding,
there's no one to leave him with.

Question is, is this the norm for weddings? When I got married this
didn't even cross my mind, and I confess it didn't even occur to me
that DS wouldn't be welcome when we got the invite. I always thought
that weddings were a family celebration, and families do include
children. I can't see us spending all this cash to go, when the most
important member of my family isn't welcome.

What do you all think?

KD & G

wrote in message
oups.com...
I would find out why
through the grapevine if you could and if it is an issue of them being
able to afford the extra expense involved in feeding the kids, then I
wouldn't even hesitate to take the baby since he won't count.

Wow. That's just incredibly rude. Those invites are issued for a *reason*
and you'd go so far as to tell the couple "oh, I decided it didn't matter
since he's so small, he's not eating tablefood and won't take up a seat, so
it's not like it's going to cost you"?

Wow.

Jess