A mum has spoken of her irritation after receiving two wedding invitations that both ban children.
The woman says not being able to bring her children along is both "inconvenient and expensive" - but the wording of one of the invitations has really irked her.
The woman says while she understands some people want to keep their weddings child-free, she is annoyed at the wording one of her friend's used.
Posting on Mumsnet, she said: "We have been invited to two child free weddings, both in June. We are going to attend both and are pulling in favours for childcare. However I can’t pretend that I’m not mildly irritated by the wording in one of the invites!
"One invite said “Unfortunately bearing in mind we have limited guest numbers we cannot accommodate everyone’s children however this is a golden opportunity for parents to enjoy a night of relaxation and uninhibited revelry!”
"The second simply said ‘ Whilst we love your children please note this is an adult only occasion’
"The first annoyed me as actually it’s not going to be relaxing for me in the slightest, it’s quite inconvenient and expensive to not be able to bring the children and I’m more likely to be hand expressing in the toilets than dancing on a table.
"It is absolutely the couple’s prerogative to have the wedding they want including making a decision to have no children- just own it and say so instead of dancing around it and pretending it’s a night off for me."
The woman said she was also annoyed at the first couple because they had included a 'money poem' in their invitation - requesting cash gifts from guests.
She added: "Happy to be told I’m unreasonable- first also contained a money poem which may be biasing me."
Fellow mums agreed that being invited to a wedding without your children is a nuisance".
One said: "I agree with you. I hate it when they try to pass it off as doing the guests a favour. It's a nuisance and an expense sorting childcare. I think the second wording is much better.
"I'm all for child free weddings, but as you say, just be frank about and don't dress it up as a favour."
Another agreed: "I know what you mean, I’ve felt the same about it being more hassle not to be able to take the kids, but I think wording these things can be difficult and they were probably trying to put a positive spin on it. I think the second one sounds a bit stern! I wouldn’t really give it any headspace!"
Another added: "Not unreasonable at all, and yes the appropriate response is ‘irritated’.
"They are trying to put a positive spin on their decision, but it comes across as patronising. It’s also the babysitter that is allowing you to be child free for a night, not the wedding.
"However, it sounds as though it is well meant and they just haven’t had the opportunity to know what they are talking about."
Another said: "Agree with you. For us, we like to spend weekends with our children, have no local childcare and I would pass on the “golden opportunity” to pay £80 for childcare to attend someone’s wedding. I am from a country where I have never heard of or been to a childfree wedding. Children are accepted as part of life and families."
But not everyone thought child-free weddings were a bad idea.
One mum said: "Have to say I disagree and wouldn’t be offended by either. I’m also completely on board with child-free weddings."
Another said: 'I have 3 children but love a child free wedding and wouldn't bother me at all."
Another mum simply added: "You’re Being ridiculous."
Don't miss the latest news from around Scotland and beyond - Sign up to our daily newsletter here.
