No kids age cutoff?

I would hope that perhaps an age cut-off could be added. If invitees had children both above and below that age, they could choose not to include any of their children, just so there is no feeling of discriminately being left out by the younger ones. There also is the consideration of ultimate cost of the reception which maybe can include more guests if your parents are paying a relevant amount of the costs.

I think the younger kids would mainly just be interested in other young kids at the reception, not in the wedding itself. Hopefully people just invite those who would enjoy the ceremony.

If you want no children, I would stick with it. If I received an invite that basically said one child could come and another wouldn't, it wouldn't sit right with me and I'd likely just either forego completely or not have either child to be fair. We had kids at ours and they were well behaved during it all, the only time the younger kids were "crazy" was when people were lining up for the buffet and they were just dancing on the dance floor.

If you are paying for your wedding with no help from your parents, then stick to your original plan of no kids. However, if your parents are paying all or in part, then they do get a say. However, tell them exclusion will cause problems. Their plan which is to include all family, not just children of immediate family (nephews, nieces) actually means children of friends are not invited. This is more offensive than saying no kids are invited. I wouldn't bother excluding by age as most children are bored at weddings at any age.

If we invited everyone kids we would of had over 50 kids now im a teacher I love kids and I wanted some kids so…
So our invites read

Although we love your little ones are wedding is adult only event**this does not pertain to bridal party and immediate family**
I think it sounds okay that way no friends get offended but the end of the day as bride it’s our day if someone gets mad that’s on them

I honestly think having an age cutoff is worse. It makes it more difficult for parents with children both under and over the age cutoff. Since you are wanting a child free wedding that's what you should do.

I would either do no kids, or all kids. Setting arbitrary rules and limitations is only going to cause hurt feelings and issues you aren’t going to want to have to deal with.

If you don't want children to attend, or not all children to attend, don't put "and Family" on the invitations. That sends mixed messages. Why do your parents insist that you do this? You can put just the parents on the outer envelope, and list names of those invited on the invitation itself.

If you are going to allow children of immediate family I think that's perfectly fine, but you need to allow all children of immediate family, not only certain ages. We are including children of immediate family simply because we want them to be in photos with us and we know that most of our family with young children will call it an early night anyway so they won't really be around for the part of the reception that won't be appropriate for them. We worded it as such "We respectfully request that no children be in attendance except those of immediate family." We have also communicated these expectations with all guests who have children prior to the invites going out.

Who is paying for the wedding? If you are, then stick to your no kids rule. Parents can either host these relatives in their home at another time or they can start a tradition of a family reunion picnic that everyone contributes to at a local park, where there are no age cutoffs. This needs to be settled before invitations are mailed.


When you start making exceptions for one person, then the other guests get upset and believe that you are playing favorites because they were told to find childcare. So your well intentioned idea backfires, but no one ever tells the couple so the couple believes everyone is happy with it.