A bride has sparked controversy after requesting her sister not to bring her three-month-old baby to her wedding.
Childfree weddings are not a new concept, with many couples opting for an adults-only celebration. However, exceptions are usually made, particularly for newborns.
A new mum expressed her frustration after her sister asked her to leave her baby at home for the upcoming nuptials. She took to Reddit’s popular Am I The A**hole forum to ask if she would be wrong to skip her sister’s wedding. The 34-year-old was excited about her younger sister’s wedding, scheduled to take place in a few months, and was supportive of it being a childfree event.
However, she assumed there would be “some flexibility for immediate family, especially newborns who can’t be left alone”. As she is still breastfeeding, she asked if she could bring her baby to the ceremony, as she wouldn’t “feel comfortable leaving them with someone for an entire day”.
She and her partner have to “fly into the town where she is getting married” and “don’t know anyone there”, so they would either have to “would have to leave the baby with a stranger” or “leave back home with someone [they] know for a long period of time”.
She explained: “I am quite anxious about being away from our newborn for too long, which my sister knows. To my surprise, my sister was adamant that no children, including our baby, would be allowed at the wedding.
“She said it wouldn’t be fair to make an exception for us when other guests are also not allowed to bring their kids. I asked if we could at least bring the baby for the ceremony and leave afterward, but she said no, explaining she wants a strict no-kids atmosphere the entire day.”
When the new mum realised her baby was not welcome at the wedding, she told her sister this might mean both she and her husband would have to skip the event. She thought about having just her husband attend, but that “seemed a bit strange too”.
She’s also reluctant to “just leave the baby” with her partner and go alone. Her “sister got very upset” when she heard this.
Now the mother stands firm on not leaving her baby behind and wishes her sister would be more “understanding” of her predicament. This led to a standoff between the siblings, with neither willing to compromise.
Opinions poured in on Reddit as users doled out their advice and verdicts in the comments thread. One user noted: “Why can’t you and your husband go to the town that the wedding is in, he stays close by in a hotel with baby while you attend the ceremony, and then you can step out to go back to baby after the ceremony?”
Another respondent advised: “NAH. Your sister can have her childless wedding, and you don’t have to go. Simple as that. RSVP and decline.”
Yet another participant commented: “Clear NTA at this point: ‘My sister got very upset with me, saying it’s her special day, and she feels like I’m putting our baby above her wedding’. Of course you are. That’s absolutely the right order of things. Baby comes before sisters and weddings always. Silly sister.”
A different voice added: “Ummm. Yea you ARE putting your baby ahead of the party… ahem wedding. Which is how it should be. She is being selfish to think you should do anything otherwise.”