'Sister wants newborn at my child-free wedding so everyone can meet him'
Weddings are notorious for family fall-outs - what is supposed to be a wonderful celebration of love can often end up causing damaging arguments and long-term rifts. Guest lists can be tricky territory and they often have to be restricted due to finances and venue limitations, with lots of couples opting to have a child-free day as a way to manage numbers and so guests can really let their hair down.
One bride-to-be and her fiance made this choice for their big day, which was made easier by the fact neither had children in their family and their venue only allowed a maximum of five kids to be in attendance. However when the sister of the bride fell pregnant, it threw a spanner in the works and caused a huge drama.
Taking to Reddit to share her story, the bride explained that over a year into planning their nuptials, her sister announced she was pregnant and the baby would be born two months before the wedding. "She jokingly asked if her baby was allowed," she wrote in her post. "We said we would think about it, but ideally not. She's also standing in the wedding."
A couple of months before the baby was born, the sister called the bride-to-be up and asked if they had made a decision on whether the newborn would be allowed to attend. She continued: "We said we didn't make a decision yet. We tried offering a few solutions, such as, getting a babysitter or her boyfriends parents watch him for the night as her and her boyfriend will probably want the night off. Or that the baby can be there for family pictures, or tucked away during the ceremony in another room. She really wants him there because she wants everyone to meet the baby, and she doesn't feel comfortable leaving the baby with a sitter."
The woman told her sister that it wasn’t ideal if the baby was there in case he started crying during the ceremony and she didn’t feel like it was the right place to introduce him to people anyway. She said she wanted everyone to enjoy themselves and was also a bit concerned her sister would give the baby to their mum to look after, which would stop her enjoying the day so much.
Baby boy has spent his life in hospital as doctors are 'scared' to discharge him
As a result the mum-to-be messaged and said she wouldn’t be going to the wedding party. The bride said she understood but wanted to check she would still be at the wedding - her sister didn’t reply and pulled out of the hen party too.
She wrote: "I then asked her if that meant that she wasn't coming to the wedding at all? It’s been over a week and I got no reply. I also explained that all I was requesting of her is to stand during the ceremony. Show up 20 minutes before the ceremony and that’s fine. She then proceeded to not come to my bachelorette party that same week, claiming we were doing activities she couldn't do. We went for a walk on the beach with coffee, out for lunch, and a painting class."
The bride asked others on the site if she was overreacting and said she found it hard to see things from her sister’s point of view because she doesn't have kids and doesn’t want them. The response online was pretty mixed, with some understanding the bride’s desire for a child free wedding and others thinking she should allow a newborn there.
One thought the sister was in the wrong: "I think sister is mad she can’t hijack the wedding by bringing the baby." While another supported the sister’s decision: "Why are people delusional. It’s incredibly difficult to be away from a newborn for hours at a time, especially if breastfeeding. And honestly, getting a sitter sucks. She’s also probably a little sad that OP is choosing not to include nephew. Not everyone makes decisions solely to p*** off the other side. Jesus."
Others pointed out a wedding isn’t a great place for a new baby anyway: "A newborn baby doesn't really need to be at a wedding - a lot of exposure to nasty stuff (ie colds, rsv, etc)," said one. "Exactly there are new moms who won’t allow relatives in their homes with a newborn without them being vaccinated. Along with no kissing rules. Taking a newborn to a crowded reception hall doesn’t make sense," agreed another.
But there were readers who understood both points of view: "NAH. You are within your right to have a child free wedding. But it is also reasonable for your sister to not want to be separated from her newborn infant for several hours. I agree that introducing a new baby at your wedding would draw attention away from the wedding celebration, but remember that while your wedding is huge for you, it is perfectly normal for a pregnant woman to not be up for socialising, and her pregnancy and newborn child is every bit as huge for her. Your wedding doesn’t trump her child and her child doesn’t trump your wedding."
Another remarked: "OP is absolutely within her rights to say no kids, including infants, at her wedding. But if a parent says they are unable to attend as a result of that, OP needs to graciously accept. Not say 'well I just need you there for the ceremony' or 'what if you do this or that instead'."
Do you agree? Let us know in the comments below.
Read more similar news:
Comments:
comments powered by Disqus
