It’s in someplace called ‘Cascade, MD’ near Hagerstown, I think.
All I gotta say is, I appreciate the quandary this may put parents in, but I can’t stand children at formal events, and it’s not like the kids get anything out of it either, so why is it such a bad thing to exclude them? Weddings are horrendously expensive and very stressful to begin with; why go to all that trouble just to have the whole ceremony blighted by a screaming toddler? (And I swear the kids know what’s up; they’re like, “Wow. Now would be a GREAT time to scream my lungs out!”)
Not that your 4yo would be screaming, Jonathan, but if you want to exclude some children, you have to exclude all of 'em.
I do have to note, however, that at every wedding I’ve ever heard of, even if children aren’t invited–or explicitly excluded–somebody still brings theirs. It never fails.
Personally, if I just drove 6 hours with a 3 year old I would be all for handing her off to anyone.
My wedding was a no kids at the reception. 13 and up. This was the tradition in my wife’s family and I had never heard of such a thing. Of course I never had been to a wedding reception with a full catered meal and an open bar either. So we did that. Only one person complained and that was my brother. He really made a huge ass of himself over it and walked about threating to take his daughter to the reception and to make them throw her out. We had hired a couple of sitters for all the kids so they had their own party with cake and punch and games and all that kind of stuff.
But we personally called any of the invitees and explained how the reception would work.
My brother would not back down and just made a huge jerk of himself and really pissed off a lot of people who were supposed to be having the best day of their fucking lives and his daughter had a much better time at the kid party playing with her cousins that she never got to see and any fucking time I look at my wedding photos I get pissed off at how much of a jerk he was.
So think about your response to this carefully.
On the other hand, if I had invited my friend from Ohio to come to my wedding, I wouldn’t be expecting him to leave behind his 4 year old. Since I’m his friend, I presumably know that there aren’t any handy grandparents. I would not expect them to hunt down a babysitter in an unfamiliar town. I’d think that the considerate thing to do would be to either have a young, dependable relative lined up to babysit for them during the wedding ceremony & reception, or to graciously make an exception in my friend’s case and invite them to bring their toddler along.
After all, in general you’d be expected to arrange hotel accomodations for out-of-town guests who would be unfamiliar with the area–why would this be any different? Seems a little unreasonable to expect them to what?–ditch the kid back in Ohio with neighbors? or to have to hire the hotel pool boy to babysit?
YTou’re missing the point; formal etiquette is all about making people look like chumps or cads. I hate it.
Unless you’re the Marquis of Frumptonshire-On-The Wold and your guests are all similarly-titled toffs, it is a good idea to communicate in a language and format that can best be expected to be fully understood (which in this case, IMO, would include a little 'We regret that it will not be appropriate to bring young children" or similar, or even better ‘creche facilities will be provided’ - why not?). I absolutely do not understand this whole fucking pretentious and purposefully impenetrable ‘formal etiquette’ thing.
I’ve been to far too many formal events that have been ruined by noisy children. By the time they’re old enough to behave at a ceremony, they’re old enough to be bored to tears going to an event for two people that they couldn’t care less about. By the time they’re old enough to appreciate a wedding ceremony, they’re adults.
Sorry Jonny, I’m with the Bride and Groom on this one.
This isn’t about kids at weddings, this is about effective communication.
Well, heck. We’re more or less within shouting distance of Hagerstown. Were it not for the fact that we’re going to be in Texas on the 15th, I’d suggest that you drop Kate off here and she and Aaron can hang out.
Seriously, though. Just go. It’s a couple days out of your life and it’ll make your friend happy.
Robin
Never been married, don’t have kids, but I gotta horn in on this one.
Friend of Chance must surely have known that the Chances have a young child and no relatives living closeby that they could leave that child with. So, besides the expenses associated with what will probably be at least an overnight trip, they have to either find (and probably pay for) someone to take care of the kid for a couple of days, or be faced with the prospect of finding child care in a unfamiliar city. I can respect the fact that they don’t want small children at the wedding, but I think it’s unreasonable to invite friends who have children to an event that will essentially be a weekender for them and expect them to leave the kids home. If a family has what will probably be a few grand for a wedding, surely they can come up with an extra hundred or two to provide care for the children of out of town guests. I mean, this is not a camping trip, this is a close friend’s wedding, and weddngs are very emotionally charged. “sorry, can’t come, couldn’t arrange child care” in such a situation can become a rejection in the eyes of the groom. If he really cared about having Jonathan and Lady Chance at the wedding, he, or a family member, should be willing to help with child care arrangements.
Sorry I’ve got to disagree with this assumption as well. No way would I ever expect my single, live-in-a-different-city friends to "help with child care arrangements: in any shape or form. First of all, hosts finding someone locally would never be ok with Mom and Dad, because it would be strangers, and of unknown quality. It wouldn’t be ok for MY kid… I wouldn’t leave my kid with anyone arranged at a distant city, and someone unknown to me personally, in a million years. Secondly, it’s would be a bit of a leap for hosts in remote city to take on that responsibility, as Mom and Dad would be in a far, far better position to make suitable arrangements.
I’m sorry but simply because both sets of grandparents don’t live nearby doesn’t mean there aren’t other options. I think the OP’s reaction was the wrong one here, the marrying couple did nothing wrong. If it’s such a huge deal, politely beg off, but don’t get all huffy at your friends, they did nothing wrong.
I’ve got to chime in on the side of the bride and groom here. You send the invitation to the people you want to invite and include the phrase and family if family is invited. If the recipient of an invitation doesn’t understand standard etiquette, then it is his/her responsibility to ask if there will be facilities available for children. Conversely, anybody planning an adult-only wedding is expected to understand that families with small children who live a distance away will quite likely be unable to attend, and if they are resentful of this fact, then they should rethink the adult-only restriction. The rules of etiquette are not designed to be stuffy or to make people feel uncomfortable; they are designed so that everybody has a common understanding of what an invitation means. It is because people no longer adhere to accepted standards of etiquette that situations like this occur.
I thought basic etiquette rules were commonly known. Only those mentioned specifically on the invitation are invited. One should not have to stipulate “no children”. If children are invited to any event, their names would be included on the invitation, or it will say “and family”, simple. In my experience it is rare for children to be invited to weddings.
I can sympathise with your predicament. I guess you have to decide if it’s all worth it. Are there no close friends you can leave Kate with for the weekend? Don’t most hotels provide baby-sitting services?
But the groom didn’t get huffy until he feared that the Chances would politely beg off. What should they reasonably be expected to do? Leave their child in another state–and who are they going to get to watch her? The neighbors? That’s not exactly something that most parents are really comfortable with. Try to arrange child care in an unfamiliar town where they don’t know anyone? How would they accomplish that feat? I’ve been at weddings where the family had arranged for a young cousin to babysit nearby–that way the person was of a familiar background and the kids were close enough that the parents could check up on them.
If that’s not possible, fine, but don’t act surprised or put out when your friends can’t come.
Weddings with no children? How sad. I’d never heard of that before. A wedding is a celebration of life. A celebration of family.
At the weddings I’ve attended, the kids have been great (with inevitable exceptions, of course). They get a chance to experience a formal event – which helps teach them how to behave well in public – and they’re just a blast at the reception. Sometimes the littler ones have their own area or room, which is lots of fun.
Plus, kids make a great excuse for ducking out early. And hey, if it’s a young couple who plan to have a family, they ought to get a good dose of what they’re in for. “Honey, this is our wedding reception, why are you on the cell phone?” “I’m making you an appointment with the urologist!” 
In my experience, “weddings and kids have always gone hand in hand.” I also want to state that I completely agree that a couple can choose to have any kind of wedding they want. It is their day. But I’ve never understood how a “child free” wedding can justify having a Flower Girl and/or Ring Bearer participate. Because unless you lock the little darlings in the vestry or have them snatched away by men in suits and dark glasses, you have just bollocked your own arguments against kids attending.
jastu: I thought basic etiquette rules were commonly known. Only those mentioned specifically on the invitation are invited. One should not have to stipulate “no children”. If children are invited to any event, their names would be included on the invitation, or it will say “and family”, simple.
Very true, and even etiquette-bashers like Mangetout would do well to learn these basic rules just to spare themselves and friends and family a lot of unnecessary hassle. However, since as Mangetout says, the communication has to be not only correct but also effective, how about a compromise?
Namely: It’s true that specifying “no kids” doesn’t belong on a wedding invitation itself, in any way, shape or form. That would be using an invitation simultaneously to disinvite someone, and that’s rude.
However, there are so many things these days that get mailed out in the invitation envelope besides the invitation itself; maps, hotel suggestions, mention of pre- and after-parties, etc. I say we petition Miss Manners to sanction the inclusion of the kid-related policies on one of these info sheets, just so everybody knows where they stand.
This also provides child-excluding inviters with the opportunity to hand out a few tips about childcare options for guests with children. E.g., “We’re sorry we can’t extend invitations to the ceremony or reception to any children under twelve years, but the Hotel NNN where we have booked a block of rooms for our guests has good childcare facilities”, or something like that.
My personal take on the absolute best way to handle this issue? It’s totally up to the hosts to decide whether or not to include children, but if children are not included then it’s a good idea and very gracious to provide group childcare. (The kids should still not be mentioned on the invitation, though, because they’re still not being invited to the actual wedding.) If kids are excluded from the reception as well as the ceremony (and remember, the average wedding reception is over 3 hours, which is a long time for many young children to be quiet and well-behaved), it’s best to have a separate “kids party” with a little back-and-forth flow between that and the grown-ups’ reception.
That way, parents can freely check on how the kids are holding up, kids who want to run around squealing can have a place to do it without annoying adults, and children who are up for a spell of comparative sedateness can be brought in to the grownups’ reception for a dance standing on Daddy’s shoes and a little fussing over by great-aunts and so forth.
Also, while “not mentioned=not invited” might be the standard practice, there’s always going to be some marriage which is done differently, because THEY didn’t know, or thought people would understand. I’m sure I remember the opposite of this happening, where the parents assumed the kid wasn’t invited and the bride said “Of course she is!”
The point being that the invitation really does need to say, even though it shouldn’t 
I’m 100% pro-kids at weddings, and some of my best childhood memories are of playing with my cousins at family weddings. But if the bride and groom don’t want kids there, they don’t want them there.
Often, there are economical considerations. Most people have to struggle to get their guest list down to what they can afford (we did!). Kids take up room and count as heads on the catering order. And the couple can’t invite just one child without the risk of offending all their friends and cousins who have children.
I’d never thought about it before since it’ll be at least a couple of years before I have to worry about wedding plans, but a kid-free wedding sounds wonderful to me.
By the way, someone mentioned the name Jaden and celebrities a while back. Andre Agassi and Steffi Graf named their son Jaden, and then they gave their daughter the middle name Jade. Apparently, Steffi really has a thing for jade. Anyway, I know someone (age 20) with the middle name Jade, and I think it works for her.