<p>Wow. S & DIL do not care if folks bring kids to their reception, though I think the youngest ones we’ll see are 9 yo. Casual plus-ones are a different issue, but they may be flexible on that one. Invitations are in process, so we’ll be chatting about that soon enough.</p>
<p>I would have been confused by this invite, too. As far as I understand, you only write “and family” if you mean the entire family living in the house-- and this practice should be avoided anyway. If you are excluding children you are supposed to write each adult invitee’s name on the invitation so that it is clear who is invited and who is not with no need to be crass and explicitly say “no kids allowed.” Also leaves no room for confusion.</p>
<p>We are not inviting children to our wedding, either. We are only going to be inviting 50-60 people total which is already more than I wanted by a longshot. We want a small, intimate, and FORMAL wedding, and most of our guests do not have children anyway. Those that do, if they decide not to come because of that, I understand and it’s not going to ruin my day. </p>
<p>Even if the wedding were larger, I’m not sure I’d feel differently. I love kids, but I don’t think one should feel entitled to bring their entire family with them to every party they’re invited to. Not everybody does the “big family wedding” thing that is so ingrained in some other families.</p>
<p>That’s interesting UCDA!</p>
<p>Fender, I’ve actually been to several weddings like that. Mine is going to be similar. It’s going to be laid back and on a beach. I’ve never been to a wedding where kids are excluded but I’ve never been to a lavish or extremely formal wedding either.</p>
<p>
And if it wasn’t “about family,” I would find it mighty strange (barring unusual circumstances)!</p>
<p>
Does this happen now? The response card has a number already on it? I thought that was supposed to be filled in by the invitee (not to add add’l attendees, but to specify if all invitees could not come)?</p>
<p>
Good one, Hunt! And I agree, it could very well happen. These will be the special snowflake children of two members of the special snowflake generation. This will in essence be just another “participation trophy” for them. (WE have darling delightful children, and of course everyone at a wedding reception will WANT to see just how cute and adorable they are. The rules? Oh, of course they don’t apply to US!)</p>
<p>
I don’t know…bring a gift AND a dish? I see lots of advice column comments on this sort of thing, and it’s generally frowned upon to expect guests to contribute part of the meal. Seems like it was a way to save some money for the b&g! (Abasket, your niece’s park wedding reception sounds wonderful, and I note that she provided all the food rather than expect guests to do that.)</p>
<p>Ha, ha, Hunt. I love the response. Yes, Garland, you have to report to us and let us know if your flabber was gastered. </p>
<p>We did not even think about kids at our wedding many years ago, and just sent out invitations to the adults. We did not know anyone well with children. One of MIL’s cousins did show up with all 4 of his kids The invite was addressed just to him and his wife, but they were all there with bells on. It was buffet light luncheon, and not an issue, but yes, people do assume at times. </p>
<p>Really, if there is even a smidgeon of doubt, the OP should call. So everyone is on the same page.</p>
<p>that is interesting, UCD.
For this example though, you’d have to pose the question:
If the wedding invite said “and family” but the reception invite said “adults only”, then for the reception, what if the children were 16, 19, and 21.
that would better represent the Op’s question here.</p>
<p>Actually, OP’s children will be 16, 21 and 24. 
So the only one ever in question was “16”. </p>
<p>And it didn’t say “adults only” it said “adult reception”. To me, there COULD be a difference.</p>
<p>Well, the exact question was:</p>
<p>On another, non wedding, board a confused poster has received an invitation addressed to “Mr and Mrs Smith and family”. However, the invitation itself says “Adult only reception”. They have three children;23,19, and 16. Only the 16 year old lives with them, the 19 year old is away at college, the 23 year old lives on their own.
Who do you think the bride and groom meant to invite.</p>
<p>The poll is now up to 26 thinks all 5, still only one says the parents and the 23 year old.</p>
<p>Not one of the wedding poster, and these are almost all brides planning their own wedding, pointed out the address was only to the wedding. They are of the mind that when you address a envelope, those people are invited to everything within the envelope. Though, these brides may be more up on etiquette than most mortals. They live and breath weddings like posters on this board live and breath colleges.</p>
<p>Cttc, it probably was a way to save money for the bride and groom. It was their second marriage and the groom was unemployed. But it was nice. I remember I baked brownies and it cost me maybe five bucks. </p>
<p>I am one of those people with a huge family and am pretty much close with almost everyone… Even my cousins kids.</p>
<p>I see most of my aunts, uncles and cousins quite often. I have a feeling my wedding will be huuuuuuge.</p>
<p>Sent from my DROID BIONIC using CC</p>
<p>Younghoss, I think everyone understands the question UCD posed as identical to the situation you describe. Thst is, the information about both wedding and the reception are included on one invitation, the outside envelope is addressed to the family, and the invitation says “Adult Reception.”. </p>
<p>Since it is considered rude to invite people to a ceremony only, if there were meant to be a distinction, the D should not have been invited in the first place. This was certainly not done “by any book.” It appears as if the whole family was invited, but the whole thing was confusing and poorly done.</p>
<p>It’s too bad it can’t be your DH calling, since it’s his family, but in this case he sounds just a bit too sensitive on this one situation, based on past dialogues with his sister, to conduct this next conversation with complete grace. So be it. Tag, you’re it. </p>
<p>Phoning the bride-to-be makes most sense to me, rather than her mother. If the bride is at all unsure how to answer her aunt, she’ll likely stammer and get back to you, which is fine. It means nothing more than she needs to ask someone else how to answer with complete politeness and respect to you and your H.</p>
<p>Or she might reassure you immediately as you’d hoped. Wouldn’t that be great?</p>
<p>I don’t assume my own family’s historic patterns of attendance at any earlier functions when considering each new wedding invitation. A wedding involves two families, bride’s and groom’s, plus these days often another cohort of agemate friends of the couple. When they penned “Adult Reception” on their one formal invitation, they had to address 3 groups all at once. I can see why you hope that their penning “and family” on your outer envelope supercedes the inside printed words, but it’s wise to check it out so your RSVP is sympatico. </p>
<p>The reason to call and clarify is that they might very much have hoped – and still hope-- that your youngest D attend. You wouldn’t want to introduce a new insult by acting without clearer information. </p>
<p>In our big-family-everyone-attends-everything, in recent years we’ve seen cutoffs being made due to costs and family size. Even those cut policies are not consistent between bride and groom families, for mysterious reasons. So if you attend and see some other 16-y.o. first cousin of the groom present, but not your D, that means nothing personal either. It could mean that if he were left home alone, he’d burn down the house. You never know.</p>
<p>I asked a friend what he would think the invitation meant. Just to introduce a new wrinkle, he said that in his opinion the invitation would include only the family who live at home: clearly include the 16 yr old living at home, possibly the college student since the parents’ home is still their primary residence, and probably NOT the 24 yr old, especially if the 24 yr old lives at some distance. He would expect the oldest to get his or her own invitation.</p>
<p>This whole story is an object lesson in how [not] to address invitations! :)</p>
<p>which invite are you referring to, Consol? The one for the wedding or the one for the recep? The Op said there were 2 invites…</p>
<p>The whole thing together. It did not occur to him that anyone might be invited to one and not the other.</p>
<p>The OP’s question:
My thought is that the marrying couple are in their early 30’s and that they have oodles of friends with very small children who they do not want present. Is that a decent assumption??? </p>
<p>Yes. I agree that probably all 5 are invited. I also think that it’s better to confirm for sure, I can’t imagine that anyone would be offended. On the other hand, I don’t see the point. The 16 year old has stated that she prefers not to go, so, “problem” solved. I didn’t read if there is substantial travel required. If so, the idea expressed that the 16 year old could make some babysitting $ during the reception is excellent. If she’s up for it, she’ll be helping out one or more families who would like to attend, but need sitters for young children.</p>
<p>Perhaps my experience dj’ing gives me a larger perspective, I have surely attended more receptions than the average.
I found it quite common for one to be invited to reception only.
In fact, my own wedding was that way, with only a half-dozen closest relatives at the wedding and a hundred or so- friends and family at the recep.</p>
<p>On the Op’s question, I don’t see ambiguity in the meaning of “adult repection” and a 16 yr old. However I certainly do see that what they said may not be what they meant. But- did they say what they really mean is a different question than- what does this mean?</p>
<p>Am I the only one who thinks it is wrong to invite someone to the wedding ceremony and not the reception? </p>
<p>Hopefully I have 2 weddings to help plan in a few years. I’m dreading it a little. It seemed so much simpler 33 years ago.</p>
<p>TrixieAnn–No, you’re not the only one. I think it’s sort of tacky to invite someone to the wedding and not the reception. I see it as “I want the gift” but you can’t come to the party. If, as many posters suggest, it’s that b&g don’t want small children present (I certainly understand that), then why would they want them at the ceremony, where it will be quiet and their disruption even more noticed?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>For clarification…my statement stating “It’s not about family unless the couple wants it to be” was in regards to their wedding being treated as a family reunion in which all family members must be invited, no matter the wishes of the couple, size of the venue, anything that was important to them. I think it should be what the couple wants, small and intimate with 25 people, or 300 with all their friends and huge extended family. Either is beautiful and appropriate as long as it’s what the couple wants.</p>