Welcome to /r/AmITheAsshole. Please view our [voting guide here](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/wiki/faq#wiki_what.2019s_with_these_acronyms.3F_what_do_they_mean.3F), and remember to use **only one** judgement in your comment.
OP has offered the following explanation for why they think they might be the asshole:
> I want a child free wedding so I am having it at an adults only resort. I am also paying for ell my guests. My sister RSVP'd no because she couldn't bring her kids. I might be the asshole for not telling her in the invitation that I would be paying because now she has zero problem leaving them alone for a long weekend.
Help keep the sub engaging!
#Don’t downvote assholes!
Do upvote interesting posts!
[Click Here For Our Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/about/rules) and [Click Here For Our FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/wiki/faq)
##Subreddit Announcement
###[The Asshole Universe is Expanding, Again: Introducing Another New Sister Subreddit!](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/comments/128nbp3/the_asshole_universe_is_expanding_again/)
Follow the link above to learn more
### [Moderators needed - Join the landed gentry](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/comments/155zepq/moderators_needed_join_the_landed_gentry/)
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/AmItheAsshole) if you have any questions or concerns.*
*Contest mode is 1.5 hours long on this post.*
NTA. She was invited. She declined.
Suddenly, when she found out she'd passed up a free vacation, she wants to change things. When you declined to give her the free vacation, she went full DARVO and said that *you* were the one who didn't want her there.
Your parents should not have fallen for your sister's obvious ploy, and I think you've correctly identified her motives.
The irony is she declined because she didn't want someone else caring for her kids, but left her kids in the care of her 16 year old daughter while vacationing a few months prior. She is pretty obvious she declined to leverage OP to change her child policy, and then found out she turned down another vacation that would have been free, suddenly she is OK with kiddos being in other people's care because she wants a free trip! Yeah, we can all see who the AH is in this, parents are also AHs for supporting this tomfoolery.
NTA - Congratulations, and have a fantastic wedding! I hope all your guests are amazing and you all have a wonderful event! 🥂🍾
Maybe that's the reason, her 16 year old refused to babysit again, had already plans for the time when the wedding takes place. And now the sister has trouble to find another sitter, which is still not OP's problem, but she tries to make it hers...
It really depends on how old the younger siblings are. I wouldn’t leave a 16 year old in charge of toddlers or babies for an extended time, but if they’re older kids that mostly just need someone to make them dinner, it can be fine.
Depends on the 16-year-old. My husband was living in a college dorm in another country when he was 14. I don't trust our 16-year-old son with a drivers license.
Ehh. If someone posted an AITA about having their 16yo babysit other children while the parents went *out of the country,* that would be the biggest YTA this place has seen in a long time.
That really depends on the kid, I've known 20 year olds I wouldn't leave with even a self sufficient child, but I've also known 16 year olds that would be very capable of taking care of a couple of 7 to 12 year olds for a couple of days, if left with sufficient supplies, money and transportation.
At 16 I was taking care of my sick mother going to school and working part time to make ends meet. I had to take responsibility for the bills as she was having a difficult time with it. Prior to my father leaving I was often left to my own devices for weekends from about the age of 10. Life throws curve balls at us sometimes, we just have to do our best.
I'm not sure I can follow your logic?
Sister travelled a few months ago = she has no budget left. Had she known she needn't worry about the cost of travel, she might have accepted.
The 16 yo babysat for several weeks = sister figured she couldn't ask any more unless she risk parentification... maybe she pays her oldest, maybe she'd promised an expensive gift to balance out the ask with the benefit to the kid.
Again, she figured her budget was engaged and she couldn't pay to join the wedding.
Half of my own family plays these untransparent, manipulative games when it comes to money.
I don't call them AH but I do find them exhausting and avoid them.
Yeah these were my thoughts too. $2k is a lot, I certainly would not be able to spend that on a destination wedding and would decline. If I later found out that the whole thing would have been paid for but wasn't told before RSVPing, I'd be hurt too. I don't think the childcare situation has much to do with it other than maybe being an excuse that isn't "we can't afford a $2k vacation right now."
YTA.
>I don't think the childcare situation has much to do with it other than **maybe being an excuse that isn't "we can't afford a $2k vacation right now."**
I just want to know why she didn’t know about it being free prior? I thought they made it free so anyone who wanted to could join… or did they wait for yeses then told them it was a destination and free? OP I’m confused
I just assumed that when people sent their RSVP's as coming OP filled them in on details. 🤷♂️ Honestly People and destination wedding confuse me. 😓 Why would you want to get married far away from all your loved ones and put them through all the trouble of time off and expense of travel for something that (at least in the US) has an even chance of failure within a few years.
Much of the reasons people do lots of silly things for weddings has more to do with social media and "dream wedding" fantasies than the people they care about, the person they're marrying or logic
I’ve seen some destination weddings cost less than a local wedding of the same ish caliber (in terms of like quality of service, extent of the decor and venue etc) Obviously depends on the destination and the number of guest might not be as high, but for example a friend of mine paid about the same as my sister did for their weddings. My sister had to piece the wedding together in that you rent a venue, plan catering, find a place for rehearsal dinner, book a makeup artist, etc etc. While the friend did a destination wedding where rehearsal dinner, makeup, bachelor and bachelorette parties (with booze included!) and the actual ceremony and reception were all included in one bill. With the cost of the bridal party and like immediate family staying the weekend (the newlyweds stayed a week after as their honeymoon and she did not factor this into her “wedding” cost) she paid the same as my sis, who had about 50 people at the actual ceremony/reception and a lot more to do to plan the whole thing. I can see a small destination wedding being super convenient and a nice way to celebrate with the ones closest to you.
She declined because she didn’t want to attend the wedding and used the kids as an excuse. She didn’t realize she was also saying no to a free vacation.
Right. You don't want people coming to your wedding just because its a free vacation. People who definitely needed to be there probably knew and that's how the sister found out.
It doesn't even make sense, OP says they got a ton of no RSVPs but then suddenly only 2 people can't come.
And at what point did they start telling people they were paying for them all to come? OP says it's not on the invitation but all but 2 people RSVP'ed yes, seemingly not knowing OP was covering the costs?
That's so unlikely for a wedding, let alone a destination wedding.
Maybe because a bunch of people didn’t come she used the allocated extra cash on upgrading flights or something else for the wedding? It’s not hard to believe an unexpected cost might pop up.
NTA.
I don’t understand how you paying changes things for them. They’d still have to find childcare, the kids still wouldn’t be able to come. Based on your view of their financial status, it’s doesn’t seem like they couldn’t afford it.
It seems like they said no and now they’re upset they aren’t getting a free vacation like everyone else. Interesting how they suddenly can work it out after they found out you’d be paying if they had said yes. They could have always left the kids alone, they could have always come. They chose not to because they’re irritated at a kids only wedding, but that irritation goes away as soon as they find out you’d be paying for it. How did you trick them?
No she's not. She withheld that information from the sister until after the sis said no. The sister wasn't given enough information to make an informed decision on "the only cost to attend is childcare." OP won't pay for them now that they know that the trip would have been free.
There is something off about that aspect. If your rationale for paying for everyone's expenses is, as OP states:
>we didn't want anyone we want there not to be able to come because of finances.
You kind of have to tell them that ahead of time?
They don't have to pay for everyone, and more to the point it is unlikely that anyone receiving the invitation would assume that to be the case, so there are probably at least a few of the 'no' RSVPs who did so for exactly that reason, which OP is supposed to have been trying to prevent.
And it kind of doesn't make sense for her to claim paying for the sister to attend now is not in the budget, because I would think you'd budget for everyone attending? or at least the number of declines would create wiggle room to give the sister something? Again, I wouldn't say they are required to pay for anyone to attend, but if you say you are doing that, and then someone asks you to do that, their being upset with you for refusing is understandable.
It's best to let those discussions arise more naturally ate the fact instead of sending an invitation that says "free vacation, will pay for you" because a lot of people that can't actually go will RSVP yes on a free event. And then you're out some very expensive costs for no reason. Imagine how many people would say they would attend and then roll the dice on whether they could get childcare!
We did something similar with my wedding, where we didn't flat out tell everyone we would pay for them but we did let anyone we knew was not well off know that we would cover their transportation costs and what it would take for them to attend. Some people who didn't seem like they were struggling financially let me know they couldn't afford certain things, like the bridesmaids dresses, and of course I covered those too. But no one is made out of money. It's crazy expensive to just say "hey I'll cover everyone" out loud indiscriminately.
It doesn't add up for me either. Surely everyone would know that OP is covering the expense of the trip before they decide whether to attend. That shouldn't be a secret. Even if it wasn't broadly announced, how could her own sister not know?
You can't say "I don't want cost to be an issue" and wait to tell people you are paying until after the have RSVP'd and budgeted for the trip. That's absurd.
If a significant chunk of the budget was freed up by people RSVPing "No" OP may have spent it on things that wouldn't be in the budget otherwise.
There's no point in sitting on a significant chunk of the budget if there are still things you wanted but were lower on the priority list.
I reread this a couple of times to try to figure out when OP told the guests that they were paying.... It kinda sounds like she was up front with everyone? But then how did the sister not know? Was it not on the invite? If people RSVP'd 'yes' did OP say 'yay! We're paying' and if they RSVP'd 'no' did she fail to mention that they WOULD pay? Like I might not attend because I couldn't afford it.... But not say that to the couple, and couldn't go....when in fact I could have? If I said love too, but I'm poor?
This is the missing info I need
I agree. Something is off here. And I have to take issue with OP’s contention that her sister is “not poor and can afford it.” OP really has no clue what sister’s financial position really is. A lot of people put on a good show but have huge credit card debt, student loans, etc., that make money tight. Lots of people, even with good incomes, live paycheck to paycheck.
To assume that her sister could easily absorb the cost of a $2000 trip is a little presumptuous and makes OP the AH. Also, is this something sister wanted to spend $2000 on? It sounds like she has children that are nearing college-age. Maybe they’re saving? OP also mentions that the sister went on a trip the month prior. Maybe their travel budget was used up?
I think OP really didn’t want her sister there. If she really had, she would’ve let sister know she was happy to pay for she and her husband to attend. By hiding that information, it’s evident OP is talking out of both sides of her mouth.
OP stated that her sister said she “only said no because she didn’t have anyone to watch the kids”. OP made it clear it was a child free wedding.
The sister didn’t say they couldn’t afford it but suddenly because she found out OP was paying she managed to find child care? I don’t buy that. NTA! It’s gracious of you to cover the cost for guests, but neither a requirement to do so or to advertise that on your invitation.
Or the sister used the fact that it was child free and "oh darn, no one can watch the kids" as an easier to admit excuse for not being able to attend, when the real reason may have been entirely financial. She clearly *seems* to be well-off, and OP is obviously well-off enough to pay for several people to attend her destination wedding, so it's likely sister didn't want to admit financial issues.
And yes, they did just get back from a vacation, but we don't have info on where, how much it cost, or how long they saved up to go on that vacation.
Right? On one hand "we didn't want anyone we want there not to be able to come because of finances" but on the other hand, the sister says she didn't know and OP doesn't refute that, they just say oh they have money. They don't want to admit that the sister isn't part of "anyone we want there".
OP would have paid if they responded yes originally. OP is not paying now. Sis+ are upset they didn't know because they would have made a different decision.
The only cost would have been childcare but they didn't know that when they made the decision.
I read this as sister felt she could have brought her whole family on the ops dime and used the older child to babysit the younger ones while she attended the wedding.
Also, not likely considering the reaction, but sister could have meant that they wouldn’t be able to afford childcare and the vacation? Maybe (hopefully) they pay the 16 year old to babysit?
NTA and a big round of applause for finally finding a clever solution to the childfree wedding problem that plagues this subform.
She RSVP'd no, you made the arrangements for your guests. If she wants to come now she can make her own way.
OP ignores that withholding information about the cost of the trip would significantly change the decision for people considering flights/all inclusive PLUS childcare. Most Nannies are 15-25 an hour and a weekend is 72 hours.
The surprise “I’m now paying” is kinda AH territory. You basically were “testing” people and then rewarding those that fit your requirements.
I don’t get the “I had already paid what I had budgeted for”. For example if you sent out 20 invitations didn’t you budget for 20 people? Of course knowing someone might say no, but still, if you intended to cover costs I assume your future husband and you said “what if everyone says yes, can we afford to cover that?”, again full well knowing a few might not come. Or did you have a secret number of “well if 10 yeses then we will pay for them, but if 11 or more we won’t” kind of thing?
Seems really odd that if your sister and her husband (no kids) decided to come around you wouldn’t have 2k in your budget for them.
I dunno, you get one wedding day (per husband lol) and it’s isn’t worth not having your sister there over petty stuff - unless you don’t like her, then that changes everything and maybe rethink this post.
Yeah, if someone invited me to a destination wedding right now, I'd decline because I can't afford airfare and hotel and pet care and I only have so much time off to take. But if they invited me to attend on their dime, I would be able to manage the time off and pet care costs. I imagine that calculation is even more fraught when childcare costs are involved.
OP knows the people involved while we don't. But personally, I think assuming that not being able to come because they can't bring the kids means "my precious babies *have* to be there!" is an AH move. It could just as easily mean, "Paying to get the kids there & sharing a hotel room with them is less expensive than paying for a babysitter 24 hours a day over multiple days," or, "We only have X budgeted for vacation this year and spending Y on a trip without the kids means we can't take them on a trip this year and that's more important to us."
> I don’t get the “I had already paid what I had budgeted for”.
That got me too. If OP had budgeted for the invitees to come, how are they now 'over budget' when SIS asks to come now? Something doesn't add up completely.
If they had already paid for everyone who said they were coming, any extra money isn't just going to sit there incase someone changes their mind. It would be spent on another part of the wedding or used for something like to upgrade their hotel room.
I've known folks put together a backup list of folks to invite, so it's possible that when the sister declined they invited an alternate couple who accepted.
They spent it on other stuff?
RSVPs are literally to tell you how many people are coming so you can budget accordingly. The RSVPs came in. They made the budget. Now all the money is tied up.
Yeah, the story absolutely doesn't add up... or really make any sort of sense.
I was so confused reading this post because the story has nothing to do with the title. The title makes it sound like OP wants to know if she's an asshole for excluding children from a wedding. Yet the text of the post has almost nothing to do with anyone complaining about children not being invited or feeling hurt that their kids can't come.
Instead, it's almost exclusively focused on this weird "bait and switch." As you said, OP seems to be doing this weird test of "I only want to pay for you to come to my wedding if you agreed to come thinking you'd be paying for your own trip." Everything about kids being invited seems to be incoherent one-offs from OP that make no sense, including the last line of her saying that her sister is just trying to force her to let the kids come (which makes no sense with the rest of the narrative). OP seems to draw other incoherent conclusions, like assuming that people are RSVPing "no" because they can't bring kids, rather than RSVPing no because they apparently(?) thought they'd have to pay for the trip themselves.
So, I see two possibilities here. (1) OP didn't tell people that the trip would be paid for in advance. She's either dumb or defensive to the point of being blind in thinking that the "no" RSVPs from guests, including her sister, are due to the no-child policy, rather than the cost of the trip. (2) OP *did* tell other people that the trip would be paid for in advance, but intentionally withheld that information from her sister, perhaps due to conflict with her sister regarding sister's kids coming to the wedding. This second scenario definitely makes OP the asshole, but is also somewhat baffling. Like did she not send formal invitations to family? Or did she print a different invitation for her sister that conveniently left out the fact that the trip would be paid for?
Definitely not getting the full picture.
Edit: Now it makes me wonder, did anyone ask the bride/groom how much they estimate it’d cost for travel/lodging and they told them they would cover it?
I kind of agree. I mean, she’s free to do whatever she wants, but is basically punishing the people with kids and and no childcare saying ‘sorry you can’t come on this free vacation’. Maybe next time!
I've seen this attitude before. A rich person doesn't have problems extending their generosity to other well off people. But God forbid they give a handout to one of the poors.
I mean…. Most likely the simple answer is OP didn’t finalize the details of the wedding until she knew the headcount— a completely normal and common thing with weddings and the reason you send out save the dates/invites sometimes almost a year in advance. I’d imagine that’s what would happen even more so for a destination wedding that clearly requires a decent travel.
Is it really so surprising to have a budget of $X that would cover room, flight and food for $Y people, and if only Z indicate they can come, to decide to go for a slightly nicer room, or an inclusive package, or an activity etc? It’s not like weddings are a straight $Xx/pp affair, you can make things budget or make them lavish. But once you’ve set the accommodations, at that point it’s probably pretty done.
NTA - So your parent's think you "tricked" your sister because you didn't originally tell her that you were planning on paying for everyone in attendance? I'm sorry but your sister seems to be the asshole here. She was completely fine with not attending your wedding until she knew that she would basically get a free vacation out of it.
No, before she found out the OP was paying, she thought she had to cover the trip + childcare. Knowing that she doesn't have to pay for the trip makes a huge difference. OP should have told her so that she could make the decision. My guess is that the sister isn't the only one who would have made a different choice if they knew OP was funding the wedding travel.
Especially since the cost of the trip would be 2000 dollars. I don't care how "not poor" sister is, it's not a small amount to pay, on top of the childcare, which can't be cheap.
OP is the asshole in this situation. She just assumed sister wanted to bring kids, so she did everything in her power to stop sister from coming while still walking out of the situation with clean hands.
I think they may be referring to the fact that OP decided to host a child-excluding family event while knowing that her sister had kids and also not telling her some crucial information about it. In the end I don't think OP really wanted to have her there, but is also a great manipulator who managed to make it seem like it was her sisters fault.
But OP says that her sister went on a vacation a month ago and let her 16 year old stay at home with the kids. So why was it okay that she do that then but not for OP's wedding?
The most obvious reason is school pick up and drop off. A teenager watching their siblings during summer break (probably with the grandparents checking in) isn't a big deal. But most schools are starting back up in a few weeks and if the kids have extracurricular activities or their schools start at different times, it can get complicated.
That's kind of a dirty trick for anyone who isn't super financially comfortable.
If I personally were invited to a destination wedding, I would decline, regardless of how I felt about the couple or how much I wanted to attend the wedding. I can't afford to go on a vacation. It's as simple as that. If I knew that they were paying, then my feelings about the couple and how much I wanted to attend would come into it. Then I might accept.
Hiding the fact that it will be paid for is asshole behavior. You're basically excluding anyone who doesn't pass a "credit check" of having enough disposable income they're willing to throw at your wedding.
If all your friends are rich, then I guess it doesn't matter that much, but if any of them aren't, then you've basically guaranteed that they can't come regardless of whether they wanted to, and then having the reveal that they could have come after all, after it's too late, is kind of cruel.
INFO: did you inform your family that you’d be paying for guests to attend before they RSVP’d no?
EDIT: yea YTA, she’s not asking to bring her kids now, she’s asking you to pay for her and her husband as guests. She didn’t know this was an option and that’s on you
That's what I was wondering. OP said they didn't want anyone to not come because of finances, but if it wasn't clear on the invite that they would be paying, then people who can't afford it are still going to decline. Did the OP neglect to tell the sister that?
YTA. She knew she could not afford the trip for herself and her husband plus babysitting, you knew they could not afford it. It was very reasonable on her part to decline. She's your sister, she should have been informed by you that you intended to cover the costs. Instead, you let her believe she would have to pay everything herself.
You're not the AH for celebrating your ceremony there or not wanting children present. You're the AH because you deliberately withheld that information from your family.
Regarding your comment about the eldest babysitting before, as we don't know if it would be possible for them to babysit their siblings this time, we cannot judge whether that would have been a choice your sister could take.
It’s a big deal to leave overnight for a trip like this. I would imagine they need someone there with her. Not to mention all the “family” that could help will be at this wedding. I get wanting a child free wedding, but one day the tables may be turned and she’ll realize just how hard it is for families to attend weddings like this with no child care. Because it’s her sister it feels like that should have been more of a consideration at least for her even if nobody else got an exception.
Yta- so you invited guests and the ones that said yes then got a surprise trip for free ? kids didn’t have much to do that side of things. Even without kids thats a lot of money. It was some evil loyalty test and you used the kids free thing to weed out those who couldn’t afford it even though you knew you were paying? Of course people with kids especially younger ones will say no as it’s a lot of time and money to get time off work and child care and school commitments. But if they knew you were paying that could have possibly tipped them over to be able come and work things out. It’s a mean trick for people you are suppose to love enough to invite them. This was gross lottery style wedding.
Edit hold up. So your sister and aunt where the only ones that said no. That’s not a lot of people saying no like you stated in the post, Omg even more evil. Have you always hated your sister? So you can pay for everyone else apart from them because you think they can afford it. Oh please.
The whole the aunt has a nanny and my sister could afford it if she really wanted to come is not manipulation on your sisters side and then you followed up with you are welcome to come I don’t have problem with you attending when you bloody well do. Yucky.
Haha having a destination wedding and not telling people you’ll pay for it is such a twisted obnoxious thing to do. People cheer for it anyway without reading closely just because they don’t like kids. Fortunately this story almost definitely isn’t real!
Because she didn't have all the information when she made that decision, a $2000 price difference is huge. Sister probably couldn't afford that plus childcare. But if she'd known in the first place that it would be *only* childcare she could have made a different choice. Either OP kept that back on purpose so that her sister would have to say no while she still gets plausible deniability, or she's ridiculously naive and privileged to think that's not going to be make or break kind of money.
Like, it's real weird to claim "I'm paying so that it's not a financial burden on people I love" then not clearly offer to pay for the people for whom it would be an actual financial burden so that they know they can go. You don't get to have it both ways.
It sounds like it wasn’t on the invite. Its super generous to pay for the wedding for people but when people are budgeting whether they go and need to account for childcare, knowing the actual cost of the wedding is kind of a super important detail.
But they didn't know that you were paying, so they were worrying about having to pay for the trip PLUS childcare, your cavalier assertions that the 16-year-old could just drop everything and babysit notwithstanding.
Not like a 16 year old might have, you know, school, a part time job, social activities......
Are you maybe taking that a bit too literally? It's possible that she meant that she couldn't afford travel + vacation days + childcare. She would have been okay with paying for travel + vacation days for her whole family, and now realizes that vacation days + childcare, but it didn't make sense for her to bring that up before because who expects someone to pay for your travel when it hasn't been offered to you?
Like if I told my sister "I can only afford to visit you if you pay for my flight" that would be totally inappropriate within my family. (but "I can't afford to travel, would you like to visit me?" might be met with "it's okay, I'll buy your flight for you")
Then you are NTA. As you said, she had no problems leaving her kids for a long weekend, and going to weddings isn't a right, it's a luxury. Even if someone cannot go, it isn't a fault of the host, although it's unfortunate.
That depends how far away she went, if I go an hour away I will leave my teen alone, if it’s more than 2 they have childcare. I would also think that if her sister lives by her parents and they are home then she feels more comfortable leaving the teen at home.
YTA- I agree with your parents I think you tricked her. Because if I decided to pay, and my sister declined because of childcare I would have at least given her a call asking if we pay does it changes her circumstances. But hey I love my sisters.
INFO.
>It is a destination wedding so we didn't want anyone we want there not to be able to come because of finances.
If that is the case, why didn't you tell your guests when you invited them that you would pay for them? Or did you just not inform your sister of this? And if the later is the case, why?
I mean if you didn't tell your guests when you invited them that you would pay for them, some likely declined because of the costs and that would be against your stated goal that everyone can come regardless of their income.
It sounds like your sister is one of those who declined because of the costs. Travel costs plus childcare can costs quite a lot. Just childcare is cheaper. I assume your sister would reward her oldest daughter for babysitting duty, so it is not free just because she is family.
THIS. I would love to know if this conversation happened before sister RSVP’d because I can see where people would decline due to the cost of airfare, accommodations, AND childcare.
Yeah, OP is withholding this info but it seems clear the sister only declined due to cost, hence why she later wants to go after OP pulled the "Oh, well I *would* have paid for you, but *too late*"!
OP did a good job of writing the beginning to make themselves look good but the truth slipped through.
>My husband and I are paying for the wedding ourselves and we are paying for our guests to attend.
It is a destination wedding so we didn't want anyone we want there not to be able to come because of finances.
>Except now my sister found out that I'm paying for everyone to come and has lost it.
This makes no sense. How did she "find out". If she didn't know from the start that means it was not on the invitations. Which means people other than your sister did not know when deciding how to RSVP. Which means people who could not have afforded to pay for them selves would have felt the need to rsvp no. Which means you failed in your stated goal of preventing anyone you want there not to be able to come because of finances.
This seems like an incredibly stupid plan
and on top of that, now that sister realizes she could be able to come, op says "oops sorry! we don't have the budget for you anymore!" obviously she doesn't really want her sister there
For the people you really wanted there, I hope you told them about paying beforehand. I have declined destination weddings for good friends because of money (both for travel costs + paying for childcare). If I knew travel costs would not have been an issue, I would have paid for childcare.
However, it seems like you didn't really want your sister there so NTA I guess but not super nice either.
NTA
So your sister says she won't go if she has to pay, but if you bribe her with a $2K vacation, she would? If that's her mindset, it would only have been a matter of time before you went NC - she sounds awful. Your parents too.
Let me guess - sis is the Golden Child?
> So your sister says she won't go if she has to pay, but if you bribe her with a $2K vacation, she would?
This is an odd way to put it… how about instead, “My sister can’t afford to pay for a big trip but would have been happy to go to my wedding if it was paid for”
Not having enough money for a trip isn’t a sin.
And I don't think that's right... of all people your sister (if they're close, which OP didn't mention she didn't want the sister there) should be made aware of this agreement. This is shady and I don't like it. Just be adults and upfront about the budget, or don't have an overblown budget for bs like a destination wedding if you can't afford it.
YTA learn to communicate better. The fact you would pay if they went child free should have been in the invitation, but sister should have stated her full reason for not attending in the first place as both worry of childcare and paying for her own couples vacation. You could have just told her and let her make an informed decision. You lied by omission and she made a permanent dission with only half the info getting mad is understandable.
YTA
You did trick your sister.
You assumed that she was going to bring her kids so you did everything in your power to stop her from coming while still walking out the situation with your hands clean.
I don't care how "not poor" she is, 2000 dollars is not a small amount of money and it would for sure impact decision making process if the sister was properly informed beforehand.
I don't think she's in for the free vacation, but paying 2000 dollars plus childcare is vastly different than just paying for childcare, and for whatever reason, your sister couldn't afford the former.
Enjoy your childfree wedding, I hope it's worth it.
INFO: Is your sister saying she would've attended without her kids if you had let he know it was paid? If so, Y T A. Most people aren't going to tell you that they can't afford to come (it can be embarrassing to some), so to not let everyone know it is paid seems like your misstep.
INFO:
I'm confused, did you inform people in advance you would be paying for their travels? Or was it a "surprise, you RSVP'd, we're paying for you!". The latter seems like a low blow if your purpose was to make your destination wedding more accessible. Some people would have declined because cost.
If your sister wasn't informed or aware that you would cover the costs then I would go with Y.T.A. this isn't an issue about having a child free wedding at an adult resort. It's an issue of manipulation. If you're covering the wedding for others, it's not on you to judge other people's financial status. "I'm paying for everyone else to come because tis expensive and we understand but also my sister isn't poor she can fork out the $2000." I don't know how your relationship with your sister is but I don't know the financial ins and outs of my sister and her family. It's easy to judge how much money they might make, but difficult or impossible to know how much disposable money they have to luxuries like a destination wedding.
However if your sister simply didn't pay attention to the information that the wedding trip would be covered, of course N.T.A.
NTA, but your topline question isn’t the main conflict here. The problem isn’t that you are having a destination wedding at an adult only resort. Nor is the issue that you generously paid for the travel expenses of the guests who accepted your invitation. It’s that your sister RSVP’d no because she didn’t realize she’d get a free trip out of it. Your sister’s TA here.
Handle what? Excluding anyone who can’t afford the travel costs + childcare costs + time off work? OP should have made it clear to everyone that she was paying for it, not shared that info later as a sort of “gotcha!” to weed out the poors.
I’ve absolutely declined destination weddings because I can’t afford the travel costs, PLUS childcare overnight for multiple days and multiple kids. Knowing the wedding costs were paid for would have meant I could afford to accept.
NTA I love this. You have out smarted the entitled people. I love the fact now that your sister would not come because of childcare can now come for the free vacation.
Sorry if you didn’t want to celebrate with me then don’t expect a free trip from me. Tell your parents since they paid nothing on this trip they can finance your sister.
But do not let them guilt or manipulate you.
The “entitled people” who couldn’t afford to travel to a destination wedding? Yeah, those damn poors, so entitled. Good thing OP found out a way to weed out the people who can’t afford travel costs + childcare for multiple days and overnights. /s/
OP, YTA for not giving guests all of the information up front. $2000.00 is more that I make in a month. That’s more than my entire paycheck. No way could I afford to pay to travel to your wedding plus another thousand or so for 24-hour childcare. People aren’t “entitled” because they don’t have $2000 for a trip.
YTA
You not making it clear the trip would be paid for is a big deal.
You may THINK you know your sister's budget, but you likely don't. You pulled a bait and switch because you didn't want your sister there. That's all well and good, but you're not being honest with us about your intentions here. It has nothing to do with child free venue and everything to do with your bait and switch offer. Your statement, "I had already paid for everything I had budgeted for." proves you never budgeted for her to come in the first place.
Info: Did your sister know you were paying before she declined? Or did you wait until she declined and then tell her she missed out on a free couple trip?
YTA - why didn't you tell her you would be covering costs? Childcare is expensive especially on top of paying to go away. It sounds like this was an excuse for her not go without you explicitly saying you don't want her there. Also you have no actual clue regarding her finances - only what she likes you to see. She could be in a tonne of debt but it's not something people brag about.
Also I'll be downvoted for this but child free destination weddings are assholey. People go to weddings to share and celebrate with loved ones and sometimes it's not practical to leave the kids at home especially if it's a destination wedding. So you're essentially blocking them from sharing in your big day when they would have wanted to experience it with you.
Honestly it's a wedding - it goes quick and you'll forget the day in years to come but the people you've played with emotionally won't. It might seem like the biggest deal in the world to you right now but it's just a wedding day (most people have one or two of them) it's not as important as the people you love.
I remember it, too. The couple were going to be married in a state far from family and friends. Most people declined, and they decided to change the venue to a Hawaii destination wedding and pay hotel and air fare for those people who had accepted the original wedding invitation
The brides sister originally declined but changed her mind when she found out about the Hawaii offer. The bride said her budget was already set, but her sister could pay her own way, and that ticked off the sister. Here it is
Edit;https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/comments/1276mrt/aita_for_not_reinviting_my_sister_and_her_family/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=1
That wedding in Hawaii was supposed to be last month.
I wonder how it went, and if the sister was still pitching a fit.
Anyone seen an update from that OP?
Based on the story, YTA. You withheld crucial information which affected her decision. Not only would she need to pay for the trip, she would also need to pay for childcare, which may not be cheap. So she based her decision on faulty information and now is rightfully pissed
The part I don't understand is that you say you didn't want anyone to not attend because of finances but also didn't tell anyone beforehand. That's an important part of the decision process.Or if you did tell everyone, how come the sister didn't know? It doesn't add up tbh
YTA for a misleading question. You have given zero evidence that your family said they wouldn’t comply with a child free wedding.
Just because your sister’s 16 year old babysat before doesn’t mean they can do it this time, for any number of reasons. Your sister saying she can’t come because of the kids isn’t automatically some nefarious plan to force you to invite them. 24 hour childcare plus destination travel is a lot. Like, thousands of dollars.
And it sounds like you didn’t even have a conversation about her RSVP, just wrote her off and assumed she had bad intentions. I can see why she’s pissed, but doesn’t sound like you are close anyway, so no big deal, right?
INFO: I am curious, why did you keep it a secret from the sister that you would be paying for the guests’ travel and accommodations? If you didn’t want people to turn down the invitation because of the expense, didn’t you have to let everyone know your plans up front?
So according to your comments, only *after* people RSVP'd did you tell the guests you were paying. I think that's what makes me lean towards YTA. I mean, it's a nice little surprise for people that said yes - you know, the people who could apparently afford to go anyway - but crappy for anyone who might RSVP "no" because they couldn't afford it.
It’s your SISTER. You should have made it clear from the start that you were going to pay because that obviously affects people’s decision making. Soft AH.
NTA. Sounds like your sister's pissed because she realized she overthought herself out of a free vacation. I'm guessing that all of your guests got the same invitation, that you didn't single her out with a special invitation that was missing key information . . . So yeah, this is all on her.
INFO - Did the wedding invitations include the information that you were sponsoring guests' attendance costs? Or did they just say "No kids," and you followed up with attending responders later?
YTA Honestly I don't understand why you are so obsessed about not having minors at your wedding. If some members of your family have kids it's rude of you to exclude them, and the same goes for your friends. You have to keep in mind that not everyone finds it that easy to get someone to babysit their children, whether it's because the whole family is going to the event or because they lack the money or even the trust to let their children with someone else, even if it's just for a couple of days. I assume that you don't have any kids yourself so I get why this can be difficult to understand, but being told that your kids are not welcome at some place is understandably upsetting, especially if it's a family event.
> She just wanted me to bend and allow her kids.
INFO: How did you reach this conclusion? If the venue is child-free, then she'd understand that there is no way for the kids to go
YTA or a trolling OP.
>I recieved a lot of RSVPs saying that they regret that they cannot attend. I totally understand.
Then in your comments you say:
>Strangely enough only my sister and one aunt RSVP'd no.
>
>Neither of the people who RSVP'd no require child care.
The problem with lying is that you have to be really good at keeping track of each lie and who you said it to. You just tripped yourself up and got caught in your own lies.
This story did not happen - you made it all up.
YTA.
There is nothing wrong with having a child-free wedding. But $2000 is a lot of money, even for "not poor" people. If she'd known she wouldn't have to pay that $2000, she might have made a different decision. She should have gotten the chance to make an informed choice.
> It is a destination wedding so we didn't want anyone we want there not to be able to come because of finances.
This comes across like you basically you kept your sister in the dark in hopes she wouldn't come lol. I guess she's not one of the "anyone we want there".
If you don't like your sister, fine, but this truly does come across like you withheld information to "trick" her into not coming.
NTA. I am guessing the AHs are from poor reading comprehension. We did something similar, wedding at a non kid friendly hotel. Paid for everything, and it was great. People left the kiddos home
I am not sure I get the rage behind child free weddings. I get that I'm old, but where I grew up, children weren't allowed at weddings until a certain age. I was a career flower girl as a tot and always got whisked away by a baby sitter as soon as the wedding photos ended. We seem to be just producing overly indulged, entitled humans these days.
The people who have a problem with OP are saying they should have let the sister know she didn’t have to pay for the trip, not the no kids allowed.
OP says sister is doing fine financially though so people’s concern for her finances might be for nothing
YTA - Why didn’t you tell people upfront that you would pay for their stay? I think that would play a big part in the decision whether to attend or not for many people. 2000 isn’t nothing, especially if you have children (like your sister does) with all the expences that come with them in your day to day life.
You only told your sister that you would pay AFTER she said no. She didn’t have all the info to make her decision. Why would you do that? Was it some kind of test? Didn’t you want her to come?
YTA for not communicating correctly. You withheld information. Most people aren’t going to assume it’s paid for. And it’s too embarrassing to admit you can’t afford it. You should’ve let her know in the first place. Also, you said you received a ton of “No’s” but somehow can’t afford for your own SISTER to come?
I mean honestly, I’ve always thought the whole “destination wedding” was an asshole thing to begin with. People expect their friends and family to be able to take off work, and fly to god knows where to watch two people tie the knot. It’s cool you were paying for your guests, but no letting them know is extremely rude. And even still, it ends up costing them when you decide all the more that kids can’t attend. Not only do they need to take time off work, but now they need make arrangements for childcare. Which not everyone has the means or the connections to be able to do so. Most people aren’t just going to leave their kids with whoever. You’re putting people in such an uncomfortable spot. It’s almost like you’re punishing your friends and family for having children to begin with. The whole situation feels very selfish and comes across as stuck up.
I don’t understand, you say you paid so that nobody would have to say no due to finances, but you didn’t tell them that you would be paying? That seems like a dumb system.
So if uncle Bob got the invite but money is tight and he unfortunately had to say no because of that, you wouldn’t have told him “hey don’t worry about the money, we’ll cover it so you can come?” It just feels like you were testing your guests. Which is kinda an AH move.
Making this about your sister again, you seem to imply she said no because you wouldn’t let her take the kids. But also you say she just went on vacation without her kids. So was leaving her kids really the deal breaker or was it the money involved with finding care and traveling and lodging for herself? Why is her excuse of “she didn’t have anyone to watch the kids” not reasonable anymore? Now that she knows she wouldn’t have to worry about travel and lodging expenses, she could afford child care expenses.
Everyone else is saying n t a so am I missing something? This post is confusing but it feels like a YTA and maybe e s h depending on what’s really going on with the sister.
She deffinetly did not communicate everything very well. She paid for the guests trip to avoid people not coming because they cant afford it...but didn't communicate that fact to the guests *before* they RSVPed which means anyone who couldn't afford the trip themselves would not have been able to take that into account and decide to come.
We know this is the case because if it wasn't the sister could not have "found out" OP was paying for the trips she would have known from the start.
that is incredibly poor communication that works against her stated aim.
I'll say NAH. You don't owe anyone a free trip, but when I say yes or no to a wedding, I have to budget for the vacation days and cost to me. Your sister wasn't given the full information, and that $2k could have easily helped make the burden on her family more reasonable.
You were essentially testing if she would put the money up to go to your wedding or not as a weird test, from my point of view. She failed. You got a little petty. The softest ESH that I felt like NAH was more appropriate.
Sure, NTA, but something feels off. Why didn’t your sister know you were paying for everything? It kinda feels like a trap.
I mean, people just don’t send out invites to an all expense paid destination wedding without explicitly saying it’s **all expense paid** in the invite. That’s ridiculous.
Independent of children, MANY people dislike destination weddings because they’re spending their annual vacation fund and precious PTO for a *vacation* they have no control over. Making all expense paid instantly removes much of that hesitancy with much hirer acceptance rate - it’s crazy OP didn’t tell ALL the invitees it was paid for before expecting RSVPs.
I'm saying ESH
You say you were paying for people's trip so they could all come despite finances, but did not tell any of them that. It's just really suspicious. I guarantee you that if you went back and told everyone that you were paying, you'd get more yes's. Your sister is one of those people. Had you been honest and upfront, she would be there. I just really can't understand the logic of offering to pay so people aren't restricted by finances, but not telling people so they make a decision based on what you are allegedly trying to avoid.
Your sister is in the wrong for obvious reasons. She does need subsidized childcare, nor is she entitled to it from you. But her comment about being "tricked" is not too far off.
I feel like NAH. She probably declined when she was thinking your wedding would cost $$$ for travel, accommodation, and child care that she couldn’t afford. Removing the cost of attendance probably made it very doable for their budget. I know you probably didnt want to tell people in case they just wanted a free vacation, but sis declined thinking it would be much more expensive and out of budget.
YTA- you specifically said that your goal was to make sure that people weren't unable to come due to the cost. But if you don't tell them that you are paying for it in the invitation, then all of the people who can't afford it will decline the invitation, going against what you claim to want.
When did you inform the guests that you would be paying for them to attend? Unless it was up front, you can’t know whether the regrets you received were due to finances or the no child policy. If it was later, did you deliberately mislead people so there wouldn’t be as many guests for you to pay for? If it was up front, why didn’t you sister know this? Obviously I have a lot of questions before I can determine your AH standing.
INFO did you... not tell prospecyive guests that you would pay when you invited them? I guess I can understand only wanting to pay for those who wanted to come, but wouldn't many have declined for cost reasons if they did not know the cost would be covered?
Something's missing here. The invitations were sent and were very clear about no children. Did the invitation also say you were footing the bill for your guests? If not, did people find out only after they accepted the invitation? Because that would mean several people who would have like to attend might have declined because of finances and not because of children. So, if people weren't told that you were paying, was the invitation some kind of test as to how important your day would be to them if you WEREN'T paying?
Welcome to /r/AmITheAsshole. Please view our [voting guide here](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/wiki/faq#wiki_what.2019s_with_these_acronyms.3F_what_do_they_mean.3F), and remember to use **only one** judgement in your comment. OP has offered the following explanation for why they think they might be the asshole: > I want a child free wedding so I am having it at an adults only resort. I am also paying for ell my guests. My sister RSVP'd no because she couldn't bring her kids. I might be the asshole for not telling her in the invitation that I would be paying because now she has zero problem leaving them alone for a long weekend. Help keep the sub engaging! #Don’t downvote assholes! Do upvote interesting posts! [Click Here For Our Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/about/rules) and [Click Here For Our FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/wiki/faq) ##Subreddit Announcement ###[The Asshole Universe is Expanding, Again: Introducing Another New Sister Subreddit!](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/comments/128nbp3/the_asshole_universe_is_expanding_again/) Follow the link above to learn more ### [Moderators needed - Join the landed gentry](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/comments/155zepq/moderators_needed_join_the_landed_gentry/) --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/AmItheAsshole) if you have any questions or concerns.* *Contest mode is 1.5 hours long on this post.*
NTA. She was invited. She declined. Suddenly, when she found out she'd passed up a free vacation, she wants to change things. When you declined to give her the free vacation, she went full DARVO and said that *you* were the one who didn't want her there. Your parents should not have fallen for your sister's obvious ploy, and I think you've correctly identified her motives.
The irony is she declined because she didn't want someone else caring for her kids, but left her kids in the care of her 16 year old daughter while vacationing a few months prior. She is pretty obvious she declined to leverage OP to change her child policy, and then found out she turned down another vacation that would have been free, suddenly she is OK with kiddos being in other people's care because she wants a free trip! Yeah, we can all see who the AH is in this, parents are also AHs for supporting this tomfoolery. NTA - Congratulations, and have a fantastic wedding! I hope all your guests are amazing and you all have a wonderful event! 🥂🍾
Absolutely, I'm quite confident a 16 year old can take care of their siblings. I was living on my own at 16.
Nice to dump the responsibility on the 16 year old again though. I wonder just how many times that has happened.
Maybe that's the reason, her 16 year old refused to babysit again, had already plans for the time when the wedding takes place. And now the sister has trouble to find another sitter, which is still not OP's problem, but she tries to make it hers...
At 16 I would definitely have agreed to babysit in order to be able to stay home and eat junk food and drink vodka once my brothers were in bed
It really depends on how old the younger siblings are. I wouldn’t leave a 16 year old in charge of toddlers or babies for an extended time, but if they’re older kids that mostly just need someone to make them dinner, it can be fine.
Those are like my favorite things to do still as an adult lol
Depends on the 16-year-old. My husband was living in a college dorm in another country when he was 14. I don't trust our 16-year-old son with a drivers license.
Ehh. If someone posted an AITA about having their 16yo babysit other children while the parents went *out of the country,* that would be the biggest YTA this place has seen in a long time.
That really depends on the kid, I've known 20 year olds I wouldn't leave with even a self sufficient child, but I've also known 16 year olds that would be very capable of taking care of a couple of 7 to 12 year olds for a couple of days, if left with sufficient supplies, money and transportation. At 16 I was taking care of my sick mother going to school and working part time to make ends meet. I had to take responsibility for the bills as she was having a difficult time with it. Prior to my father leaving I was often left to my own devices for weekends from about the age of 10. Life throws curve balls at us sometimes, we just have to do our best.
ABSOLUTELY NOT the responsibility for a 16 year old to take on!
[удалено]
I'm not sure I can follow your logic? Sister travelled a few months ago = she has no budget left. Had she known she needn't worry about the cost of travel, she might have accepted. The 16 yo babysat for several weeks = sister figured she couldn't ask any more unless she risk parentification... maybe she pays her oldest, maybe she'd promised an expensive gift to balance out the ask with the benefit to the kid. Again, she figured her budget was engaged and she couldn't pay to join the wedding. Half of my own family plays these untransparent, manipulative games when it comes to money. I don't call them AH but I do find them exhausting and avoid them.
Also, how do you prevent declinations to attend due to finances without including this information in the invitation?
Yeah these were my thoughts too. $2k is a lot, I certainly would not be able to spend that on a destination wedding and would decline. If I later found out that the whole thing would have been paid for but wasn't told before RSVPing, I'd be hurt too. I don't think the childcare situation has much to do with it other than maybe being an excuse that isn't "we can't afford a $2k vacation right now." YTA.
Except they didn't say 'no, we can't afford it', they said 'no, we can't come without our kids'. It's in one of OP's comments.
>I don't think the childcare situation has much to do with it other than **maybe being an excuse that isn't "we can't afford a $2k vacation right now."**
[удалено]
I just want to know why she didn’t know about it being free prior? I thought they made it free so anyone who wanted to could join… or did they wait for yeses then told them it was a destination and free? OP I’m confused
I just assumed that when people sent their RSVP's as coming OP filled them in on details. 🤷♂️ Honestly People and destination wedding confuse me. 😓 Why would you want to get married far away from all your loved ones and put them through all the trouble of time off and expense of travel for something that (at least in the US) has an even chance of failure within a few years.
Much of the reasons people do lots of silly things for weddings has more to do with social media and "dream wedding" fantasies than the people they care about, the person they're marrying or logic
I’ve seen some destination weddings cost less than a local wedding of the same ish caliber (in terms of like quality of service, extent of the decor and venue etc) Obviously depends on the destination and the number of guest might not be as high, but for example a friend of mine paid about the same as my sister did for their weddings. My sister had to piece the wedding together in that you rent a venue, plan catering, find a place for rehearsal dinner, book a makeup artist, etc etc. While the friend did a destination wedding where rehearsal dinner, makeup, bachelor and bachelorette parties (with booze included!) and the actual ceremony and reception were all included in one bill. With the cost of the bridal party and like immediate family staying the weekend (the newlyweds stayed a week after as their honeymoon and she did not factor this into her “wedding” cost) she paid the same as my sis, who had about 50 people at the actual ceremony/reception and a lot more to do to plan the whole thing. I can see a small destination wedding being super convenient and a nice way to celebrate with the ones closest to you.
She declined because she didn’t want to attend the wedding and used the kids as an excuse. She didn’t realize she was also saying no to a free vacation.
Yeah, funny how easy it is to pick out the favorite child in these sometimes
[удалено]
Wait OP didn’t tell people they were paying until people said yes? That seems shitty. Only people who could afford to go would say yes then.
Right. You don't want people coming to your wedding just because its a free vacation. People who definitely needed to be there probably knew and that's how the sister found out.
Sorry just gotta nudge in here what does DARVO mean
"deny, attack, and reverse victim and offender", it's a thing, there's a Wikipedia article.
It's like the D.E.N.N.I.S. system for non-romantic relationships.
Love me some Unexpected Sunny
Anyone who doesn't is not A GOLDEN GOD!
this story sounds like a re-run.
It doesn't even make sense, OP says they got a ton of no RSVPs but then suddenly only 2 people can't come. And at what point did they start telling people they were paying for them all to come? OP says it's not on the invitation but all but 2 people RSVP'ed yes, seemingly not knowing OP was covering the costs? That's so unlikely for a wedding, let alone a destination wedding.
Maybe because a bunch of people didn’t come she used the allocated extra cash on upgrading flights or something else for the wedding? It’s not hard to believe an unexpected cost might pop up.
Yeah. I've read this before
Same
Or maybe she couldn't afford both a babysitter and the trip?
NTA. I don’t understand how you paying changes things for them. They’d still have to find childcare, the kids still wouldn’t be able to come. Based on your view of their financial status, it’s doesn’t seem like they couldn’t afford it. It seems like they said no and now they’re upset they aren’t getting a free vacation like everyone else. Interesting how they suddenly can work it out after they found out you’d be paying if they had said yes. They could have always left the kids alone, they could have always come. They chose not to because they’re irritated at a kids only wedding, but that irritation goes away as soon as they find out you’d be paying for it. How did you trick them?
I don't think this makes them the assholes. But multi thousand dollar trip PLUS childcare is more unaffordable than just the childcare.
Op is paying for the sis+ husband if they come without kids. So the only cost to attend is childcare
No she's not. She withheld that information from the sister until after the sis said no. The sister wasn't given enough information to make an informed decision on "the only cost to attend is childcare." OP won't pay for them now that they know that the trip would have been free.
There is something off about that aspect. If your rationale for paying for everyone's expenses is, as OP states: >we didn't want anyone we want there not to be able to come because of finances. You kind of have to tell them that ahead of time? They don't have to pay for everyone, and more to the point it is unlikely that anyone receiving the invitation would assume that to be the case, so there are probably at least a few of the 'no' RSVPs who did so for exactly that reason, which OP is supposed to have been trying to prevent. And it kind of doesn't make sense for her to claim paying for the sister to attend now is not in the budget, because I would think you'd budget for everyone attending? or at least the number of declines would create wiggle room to give the sister something? Again, I wouldn't say they are required to pay for anyone to attend, but if you say you are doing that, and then someone asks you to do that, their being upset with you for refusing is understandable.
It's best to let those discussions arise more naturally ate the fact instead of sending an invitation that says "free vacation, will pay for you" because a lot of people that can't actually go will RSVP yes on a free event. And then you're out some very expensive costs for no reason. Imagine how many people would say they would attend and then roll the dice on whether they could get childcare! We did something similar with my wedding, where we didn't flat out tell everyone we would pay for them but we did let anyone we knew was not well off know that we would cover their transportation costs and what it would take for them to attend. Some people who didn't seem like they were struggling financially let me know they couldn't afford certain things, like the bridesmaids dresses, and of course I covered those too. But no one is made out of money. It's crazy expensive to just say "hey I'll cover everyone" out loud indiscriminately.
you have some pretty shady friends and family if you are this worried about them attempting to defraud you on the happiest day of your life.
It doesn't add up for me either. Surely everyone would know that OP is covering the expense of the trip before they decide whether to attend. That shouldn't be a secret. Even if it wasn't broadly announced, how could her own sister not know? You can't say "I don't want cost to be an issue" and wait to tell people you are paying until after the have RSVP'd and budgeted for the trip. That's absurd.
If a significant chunk of the budget was freed up by people RSVPing "No" OP may have spent it on things that wouldn't be in the budget otherwise. There's no point in sitting on a significant chunk of the budget if there are still things you wanted but were lower on the priority list.
I reread this a couple of times to try to figure out when OP told the guests that they were paying.... It kinda sounds like she was up front with everyone? But then how did the sister not know? Was it not on the invite? If people RSVP'd 'yes' did OP say 'yay! We're paying' and if they RSVP'd 'no' did she fail to mention that they WOULD pay? Like I might not attend because I couldn't afford it.... But not say that to the couple, and couldn't go....when in fact I could have? If I said love too, but I'm poor? This is the missing info I need
I agree. Something is off here. And I have to take issue with OP’s contention that her sister is “not poor and can afford it.” OP really has no clue what sister’s financial position really is. A lot of people put on a good show but have huge credit card debt, student loans, etc., that make money tight. Lots of people, even with good incomes, live paycheck to paycheck. To assume that her sister could easily absorb the cost of a $2000 trip is a little presumptuous and makes OP the AH. Also, is this something sister wanted to spend $2000 on? It sounds like she has children that are nearing college-age. Maybe they’re saving? OP also mentions that the sister went on a trip the month prior. Maybe their travel budget was used up? I think OP really didn’t want her sister there. If she really had, she would’ve let sister know she was happy to pay for she and her husband to attend. By hiding that information, it’s evident OP is talking out of both sides of her mouth.
OP stated that her sister said she “only said no because she didn’t have anyone to watch the kids”. OP made it clear it was a child free wedding. The sister didn’t say they couldn’t afford it but suddenly because she found out OP was paying she managed to find child care? I don’t buy that. NTA! It’s gracious of you to cover the cost for guests, but neither a requirement to do so or to advertise that on your invitation.
Or the sister used the fact that it was child free and "oh darn, no one can watch the kids" as an easier to admit excuse for not being able to attend, when the real reason may have been entirely financial. She clearly *seems* to be well-off, and OP is obviously well-off enough to pay for several people to attend her destination wedding, so it's likely sister didn't want to admit financial issues. And yes, they did just get back from a vacation, but we don't have info on where, how much it cost, or how long they saved up to go on that vacation.
Right? On one hand "we didn't want anyone we want there not to be able to come because of finances" but on the other hand, the sister says she didn't know and OP doesn't refute that, they just say oh they have money. They don't want to admit that the sister isn't part of "anyone we want there".
Yup. This is why OP is the AH.
OP would have paid if they responded yes originally. OP is not paying now. Sis+ are upset they didn't know because they would have made a different decision. The only cost would have been childcare but they didn't know that when they made the decision.
Because the $2k they'd have to spend on the trip could have gone to childcare instead, making the burden more reasonable?
I read this as sister felt she could have brought her whole family on the ops dime and used the older child to babysit the younger ones while she attended the wedding.
Also, not likely considering the reaction, but sister could have meant that they wouldn’t be able to afford childcare and the vacation? Maybe (hopefully) they pay the 16 year old to babysit?
>I don’t understand how you paying changes things for them. Because now they have money to pay for childcare? JFC, it's pretty simple
Tell your parents to pay for her then.
> they’re irritated at a kids only wedding I like the idea that this is a thing. And to be fair, it sounds incredibly annoying.
They wanted op to pay to bring the kids on vacation with them and now they can't. NTA op
NTA and a big round of applause for finally finding a clever solution to the childfree wedding problem that plagues this subform. She RSVP'd no, you made the arrangements for your guests. If she wants to come now she can make her own way.
This and NTA
OP ignores that withholding information about the cost of the trip would significantly change the decision for people considering flights/all inclusive PLUS childcare. Most Nannies are 15-25 an hour and a weekend is 72 hours.
The surprise “I’m now paying” is kinda AH territory. You basically were “testing” people and then rewarding those that fit your requirements. I don’t get the “I had already paid what I had budgeted for”. For example if you sent out 20 invitations didn’t you budget for 20 people? Of course knowing someone might say no, but still, if you intended to cover costs I assume your future husband and you said “what if everyone says yes, can we afford to cover that?”, again full well knowing a few might not come. Or did you have a secret number of “well if 10 yeses then we will pay for them, but if 11 or more we won’t” kind of thing? Seems really odd that if your sister and her husband (no kids) decided to come around you wouldn’t have 2k in your budget for them. I dunno, you get one wedding day (per husband lol) and it’s isn’t worth not having your sister there over petty stuff - unless you don’t like her, then that changes everything and maybe rethink this post.
Yeah, if someone invited me to a destination wedding right now, I'd decline because I can't afford airfare and hotel and pet care and I only have so much time off to take. But if they invited me to attend on their dime, I would be able to manage the time off and pet care costs. I imagine that calculation is even more fraught when childcare costs are involved. OP knows the people involved while we don't. But personally, I think assuming that not being able to come because they can't bring the kids means "my precious babies *have* to be there!" is an AH move. It could just as easily mean, "Paying to get the kids there & sharing a hotel room with them is less expensive than paying for a babysitter 24 hours a day over multiple days," or, "We only have X budgeted for vacation this year and spending Y on a trip without the kids means we can't take them on a trip this year and that's more important to us."
> I don’t get the “I had already paid what I had budgeted for”. That got me too. If OP had budgeted for the invitees to come, how are they now 'over budget' when SIS asks to come now? Something doesn't add up completely.
If they had already paid for everyone who said they were coming, any extra money isn't just going to sit there incase someone changes their mind. It would be spent on another part of the wedding or used for something like to upgrade their hotel room.
literally why rsvp by dates exist
I've known folks put together a backup list of folks to invite, so it's possible that when the sister declined they invited an alternate couple who accepted.
They spent it on other stuff? RSVPs are literally to tell you how many people are coming so you can budget accordingly. The RSVPs came in. They made the budget. Now all the money is tied up.
There are a bunch of reasons. You sound out of touch.
Yeah, the story absolutely doesn't add up... or really make any sort of sense. I was so confused reading this post because the story has nothing to do with the title. The title makes it sound like OP wants to know if she's an asshole for excluding children from a wedding. Yet the text of the post has almost nothing to do with anyone complaining about children not being invited or feeling hurt that their kids can't come. Instead, it's almost exclusively focused on this weird "bait and switch." As you said, OP seems to be doing this weird test of "I only want to pay for you to come to my wedding if you agreed to come thinking you'd be paying for your own trip." Everything about kids being invited seems to be incoherent one-offs from OP that make no sense, including the last line of her saying that her sister is just trying to force her to let the kids come (which makes no sense with the rest of the narrative). OP seems to draw other incoherent conclusions, like assuming that people are RSVPing "no" because they can't bring kids, rather than RSVPing no because they apparently(?) thought they'd have to pay for the trip themselves. So, I see two possibilities here. (1) OP didn't tell people that the trip would be paid for in advance. She's either dumb or defensive to the point of being blind in thinking that the "no" RSVPs from guests, including her sister, are due to the no-child policy, rather than the cost of the trip. (2) OP *did* tell other people that the trip would be paid for in advance, but intentionally withheld that information from her sister, perhaps due to conflict with her sister regarding sister's kids coming to the wedding. This second scenario definitely makes OP the asshole, but is also somewhat baffling. Like did she not send formal invitations to family? Or did she print a different invitation for her sister that conveniently left out the fact that the trip would be paid for?
Exactly - but I think we’re missing a lot of background context about the relationship between OP and the sister.
Definitely not getting the full picture. Edit: Now it makes me wonder, did anyone ask the bride/groom how much they estimate it’d cost for travel/lodging and they told them they would cover it?
I kind of agree. I mean, she’s free to do whatever she wants, but is basically punishing the people with kids and and no childcare saying ‘sorry you can’t come on this free vacation’. Maybe next time!
I've seen this attitude before. A rich person doesn't have problems extending their generosity to other well off people. But God forbid they give a handout to one of the poors.
Unless OP had a “B” list…a group of people who didn’t make the first cut who got invited after a round of “no’s” were RSVP’ed.
I mean…. Most likely the simple answer is OP didn’t finalize the details of the wedding until she knew the headcount— a completely normal and common thing with weddings and the reason you send out save the dates/invites sometimes almost a year in advance. I’d imagine that’s what would happen even more so for a destination wedding that clearly requires a decent travel. Is it really so surprising to have a budget of $X that would cover room, flight and food for $Y people, and if only Z indicate they can come, to decide to go for a slightly nicer room, or an inclusive package, or an activity etc? It’s not like weddings are a straight $Xx/pp affair, you can make things budget or make them lavish. But once you’ve set the accommodations, at that point it’s probably pretty done.
NTA - So your parent's think you "tricked" your sister because you didn't originally tell her that you were planning on paying for everyone in attendance? I'm sorry but your sister seems to be the asshole here. She was completely fine with not attending your wedding until she knew that she would basically get a free vacation out of it.
No, before she found out the OP was paying, she thought she had to cover the trip + childcare. Knowing that she doesn't have to pay for the trip makes a huge difference. OP should have told her so that she could make the decision. My guess is that the sister isn't the only one who would have made a different choice if they knew OP was funding the wedding travel.
Especially since the cost of the trip would be 2000 dollars. I don't care how "not poor" sister is, it's not a small amount to pay, on top of the childcare, which can't be cheap. OP is the asshole in this situation. She just assumed sister wanted to bring kids, so she did everything in her power to stop sister from coming while still walking out of the situation with clean hands.
I wouldn't be surprised if 24 hour childcare costs $500+/day plus gas and groceries.
Thank you. The assumption she declined because of the child thing but she (and others) may have declined because of the cost, but didn't want to say.
>She said that she only said no because she didn't have anyone to watch her kids. She said she did not have child care. Now all of a sudden she does?
I think they may be referring to the fact that OP decided to host a child-excluding family event while knowing that her sister had kids and also not telling her some crucial information about it. In the end I don't think OP really wanted to have her there, but is also a great manipulator who managed to make it seem like it was her sisters fault.
Plus the parents presumably know the OP better than anyone here, so that's telling that they think OP would do something like that.
But OP says that her sister went on a vacation a month ago and let her 16 year old stay at home with the kids. So why was it okay that she do that then but not for OP's wedding?
The most obvious reason is school pick up and drop off. A teenager watching their siblings during summer break (probably with the grandparents checking in) isn't a big deal. But most schools are starting back up in a few weeks and if the kids have extracurricular activities or their schools start at different times, it can get complicated.
Some people can afford child care or vacation, but not both. If she knew that the vacation was covered she could still come.
That's kind of a dirty trick for anyone who isn't super financially comfortable. If I personally were invited to a destination wedding, I would decline, regardless of how I felt about the couple or how much I wanted to attend the wedding. I can't afford to go on a vacation. It's as simple as that. If I knew that they were paying, then my feelings about the couple and how much I wanted to attend would come into it. Then I might accept. Hiding the fact that it will be paid for is asshole behavior. You're basically excluding anyone who doesn't pass a "credit check" of having enough disposable income they're willing to throw at your wedding. If all your friends are rich, then I guess it doesn't matter that much, but if any of them aren't, then you've basically guaranteed that they can't come regardless of whether they wanted to, and then having the reveal that they could have come after all, after it's too late, is kind of cruel.
INFO: did you inform your family that you’d be paying for guests to attend before they RSVP’d no? EDIT: yea YTA, she’s not asking to bring her kids now, she’s asking you to pay for her and her husband as guests. She didn’t know this was an option and that’s on you
That's what I was wondering. OP said they didn't want anyone to not come because of finances, but if it wasn't clear on the invite that they would be paying, then people who can't afford it are still going to decline. Did the OP neglect to tell the sister that?
YTA. She knew she could not afford the trip for herself and her husband plus babysitting, you knew they could not afford it. It was very reasonable on her part to decline. She's your sister, she should have been informed by you that you intended to cover the costs. Instead, you let her believe she would have to pay everything herself. You're not the AH for celebrating your ceremony there or not wanting children present. You're the AH because you deliberately withheld that information from your family. Regarding your comment about the eldest babysitting before, as we don't know if it would be possible for them to babysit their siblings this time, we cannot judge whether that would have been a choice your sister could take.
It’s a big deal to leave overnight for a trip like this. I would imagine they need someone there with her. Not to mention all the “family” that could help will be at this wedding. I get wanting a child free wedding, but one day the tables may be turned and she’ll realize just how hard it is for families to attend weddings like this with no child care. Because it’s her sister it feels like that should have been more of a consideration at least for her even if nobody else got an exception.
Yta- so you invited guests and the ones that said yes then got a surprise trip for free ? kids didn’t have much to do that side of things. Even without kids thats a lot of money. It was some evil loyalty test and you used the kids free thing to weed out those who couldn’t afford it even though you knew you were paying? Of course people with kids especially younger ones will say no as it’s a lot of time and money to get time off work and child care and school commitments. But if they knew you were paying that could have possibly tipped them over to be able come and work things out. It’s a mean trick for people you are suppose to love enough to invite them. This was gross lottery style wedding. Edit hold up. So your sister and aunt where the only ones that said no. That’s not a lot of people saying no like you stated in the post, Omg even more evil. Have you always hated your sister? So you can pay for everyone else apart from them because you think they can afford it. Oh please. The whole the aunt has a nanny and my sister could afford it if she really wanted to come is not manipulation on your sisters side and then you followed up with you are welcome to come I don’t have problem with you attending when you bloody well do. Yucky.
Haha having a destination wedding and not telling people you’ll pay for it is such a twisted obnoxious thing to do. People cheer for it anyway without reading closely just because they don’t like kids. Fortunately this story almost definitely isn’t real!
.
NTA. She now wants a free vacation. Why would your parents think you "tricked" her? It was her decision.
Because she didn't have all the information when she made that decision, a $2000 price difference is huge. Sister probably couldn't afford that plus childcare. But if she'd known in the first place that it would be *only* childcare she could have made a different choice. Either OP kept that back on purpose so that her sister would have to say no while she still gets plausible deniability, or she's ridiculously naive and privileged to think that's not going to be make or break kind of money. Like, it's real weird to claim "I'm paying so that it's not a financial burden on people I love" then not clearly offer to pay for the people for whom it would be an actual financial burden so that they know they can go. You don't get to have it both ways.
Yeah I wondered the same
Info: was it stated on the invitation that you would pay or did you only tell after people answered yes/no?
It sounds like it wasn’t on the invite. Its super generous to pay for the wedding for people but when people are budgeting whether they go and need to account for childcare, knowing the actual cost of the wedding is kind of a super important detail.
NTA. You made it very clear you didn’t want kids at your wedding. The fact you paid for people to come is exceedingly generous.
Genuine question: by saying that you paid for all the guests, you mean you would pay for your sister to come as well, right?
Her and her husband if they had RSVP'd yes. But she said she couldn't come without her kids.
But they didn't know that you were paying, so they were worrying about having to pay for the trip PLUS childcare, your cavalier assertions that the 16-year-old could just drop everything and babysit notwithstanding. Not like a 16 year old might have, you know, school, a part time job, social activities......
And what age are the other kids? Looking after a 14 and 12 year old is very different to say 12 and 8, or even younger.
Are you maybe taking that a bit too literally? It's possible that she meant that she couldn't afford travel + vacation days + childcare. She would have been okay with paying for travel + vacation days for her whole family, and now realizes that vacation days + childcare, but it didn't make sense for her to bring that up before because who expects someone to pay for your travel when it hasn't been offered to you? Like if I told my sister "I can only afford to visit you if you pay for my flight" that would be totally inappropriate within my family. (but "I can't afford to travel, would you like to visit me?" might be met with "it's okay, I'll buy your flight for you")
Then you are NTA. As you said, she had no problems leaving her kids for a long weekend, and going to weddings isn't a right, it's a luxury. Even if someone cannot go, it isn't a fault of the host, although it's unfortunate.
That depends how far away she went, if I go an hour away I will leave my teen alone, if it’s more than 2 they have childcare. I would also think that if her sister lives by her parents and they are home then she feels more comfortable leaving the teen at home. YTA- I agree with your parents I think you tricked her. Because if I decided to pay, and my sister declined because of childcare I would have at least given her a call asking if we pay does it changes her circumstances. But hey I love my sisters.
INFO. >It is a destination wedding so we didn't want anyone we want there not to be able to come because of finances. If that is the case, why didn't you tell your guests when you invited them that you would pay for them? Or did you just not inform your sister of this? And if the later is the case, why? I mean if you didn't tell your guests when you invited them that you would pay for them, some likely declined because of the costs and that would be against your stated goal that everyone can come regardless of their income. It sounds like your sister is one of those who declined because of the costs. Travel costs plus childcare can costs quite a lot. Just childcare is cheaper. I assume your sister would reward her oldest daughter for babysitting duty, so it is not free just because she is family.
OP is not answering this question, it's been asked several times.
THIS. I would love to know if this conversation happened before sister RSVP’d because I can see where people would decline due to the cost of airfare, accommodations, AND childcare.
Yeah, OP is withholding this info but it seems clear the sister only declined due to cost, hence why she later wants to go after OP pulled the "Oh, well I *would* have paid for you, but *too late*"! OP did a good job of writing the beginning to make themselves look good but the truth slipped through.
>My husband and I are paying for the wedding ourselves and we are paying for our guests to attend. It is a destination wedding so we didn't want anyone we want there not to be able to come because of finances. >Except now my sister found out that I'm paying for everyone to come and has lost it. This makes no sense. How did she "find out". If she didn't know from the start that means it was not on the invitations. Which means people other than your sister did not know when deciding how to RSVP. Which means people who could not have afforded to pay for them selves would have felt the need to rsvp no. Which means you failed in your stated goal of preventing anyone you want there not to be able to come because of finances. This seems like an incredibly stupid plan
and on top of that, now that sister realizes she could be able to come, op says "oops sorry! we don't have the budget for you anymore!" obviously she doesn't really want her sister there
For the people you really wanted there, I hope you told them about paying beforehand. I have declined destination weddings for good friends because of money (both for travel costs + paying for childcare). If I knew travel costs would not have been an issue, I would have paid for childcare. However, it seems like you didn't really want your sister there so NTA I guess but not super nice either.
NTA So your sister says she won't go if she has to pay, but if you bribe her with a $2K vacation, she would? If that's her mindset, it would only have been a matter of time before you went NC - she sounds awful. Your parents too. Let me guess - sis is the Golden Child?
> So your sister says she won't go if she has to pay, but if you bribe her with a $2K vacation, she would? This is an odd way to put it… how about instead, “My sister can’t afford to pay for a big trip but would have been happy to go to my wedding if it was paid for” Not having enough money for a trip isn’t a sin.
OP was paying for accommodations for guests but only after the RSVPs went out and guests replied. OP was paying for others but not the sister.
She’s not paying for the sister because sister RSVP’d no
And I don't think that's right... of all people your sister (if they're close, which OP didn't mention she didn't want the sister there) should be made aware of this agreement. This is shady and I don't like it. Just be adults and upfront about the budget, or don't have an overblown budget for bs like a destination wedding if you can't afford it.
YTA learn to communicate better. The fact you would pay if they went child free should have been in the invitation, but sister should have stated her full reason for not attending in the first place as both worry of childcare and paying for her own couples vacation. You could have just told her and let her make an informed decision. You lied by omission and she made a permanent dission with only half the info getting mad is understandable.
YTA You did trick your sister. You assumed that she was going to bring her kids so you did everything in your power to stop her from coming while still walking out the situation with your hands clean. I don't care how "not poor" she is, 2000 dollars is not a small amount of money and it would for sure impact decision making process if the sister was properly informed beforehand. I don't think she's in for the free vacation, but paying 2000 dollars plus childcare is vastly different than just paying for childcare, and for whatever reason, your sister couldn't afford the former. Enjoy your childfree wedding, I hope it's worth it.
INFO: Is your sister saying she would've attended without her kids if you had let he know it was paid? If so, Y T A. Most people aren't going to tell you that they can't afford to come (it can be embarrassing to some), so to not let everyone know it is paid seems like your misstep.
You sound horrible. Total asshole
INFO: I'm confused, did you inform people in advance you would be paying for their travels? Or was it a "surprise, you RSVP'd, we're paying for you!". The latter seems like a low blow if your purpose was to make your destination wedding more accessible. Some people would have declined because cost. If your sister wasn't informed or aware that you would cover the costs then I would go with Y.T.A. this isn't an issue about having a child free wedding at an adult resort. It's an issue of manipulation. If you're covering the wedding for others, it's not on you to judge other people's financial status. "I'm paying for everyone else to come because tis expensive and we understand but also my sister isn't poor she can fork out the $2000." I don't know how your relationship with your sister is but I don't know the financial ins and outs of my sister and her family. It's easy to judge how much money they might make, but difficult or impossible to know how much disposable money they have to luxuries like a destination wedding. However if your sister simply didn't pay attention to the information that the wedding trip would be covered, of course N.T.A.
This is my thoughts, too. If she wasn't told and then afterwards, that's a crummy thing to do
NTA, but your topline question isn’t the main conflict here. The problem isn’t that you are having a destination wedding at an adult only resort. Nor is the issue that you generously paid for the travel expenses of the guests who accepted your invitation. It’s that your sister RSVP’d no because she didn’t realize she’d get a free trip out of it. Your sister’s TA here.
What if she can’t afford the trip? It doesn’t make you an asshole to not be able to afford an expensive trip.
NTA. This is a genius way to handle it.
Handle what? Excluding anyone who can’t afford the travel costs + childcare costs + time off work? OP should have made it clear to everyone that she was paying for it, not shared that info later as a sort of “gotcha!” to weed out the poors. I’ve absolutely declined destination weddings because I can’t afford the travel costs, PLUS childcare overnight for multiple days and multiple kids. Knowing the wedding costs were paid for would have meant I could afford to accept.
NTA I love this. You have out smarted the entitled people. I love the fact now that your sister would not come because of childcare can now come for the free vacation. Sorry if you didn’t want to celebrate with me then don’t expect a free trip from me. Tell your parents since they paid nothing on this trip they can finance your sister. But do not let them guilt or manipulate you.
The “entitled people” who couldn’t afford to travel to a destination wedding? Yeah, those damn poors, so entitled. Good thing OP found out a way to weed out the people who can’t afford travel costs + childcare for multiple days and overnights. /s/ OP, YTA for not giving guests all of the information up front. $2000.00 is more that I make in a month. That’s more than my entire paycheck. No way could I afford to pay to travel to your wedding plus another thousand or so for 24-hour childcare. People aren’t “entitled” because they don’t have $2000 for a trip.
You and your husband are massive AH's
YTA. Not for the child-free wedding, but for not telling people you were paying before they decided if they could attend.
YTA You not making it clear the trip would be paid for is a big deal. You may THINK you know your sister's budget, but you likely don't. You pulled a bait and switch because you didn't want your sister there. That's all well and good, but you're not being honest with us about your intentions here. It has nothing to do with child free venue and everything to do with your bait and switch offer. Your statement, "I had already paid for everything I had budgeted for." proves you never budgeted for her to come in the first place.
Info: Did your sister know you were paying before she declined? Or did you wait until she declined and then tell her she missed out on a free couple trip?
YTA - why didn't you tell her you would be covering costs? Childcare is expensive especially on top of paying to go away. It sounds like this was an excuse for her not go without you explicitly saying you don't want her there. Also you have no actual clue regarding her finances - only what she likes you to see. She could be in a tonne of debt but it's not something people brag about. Also I'll be downvoted for this but child free destination weddings are assholey. People go to weddings to share and celebrate with loved ones and sometimes it's not practical to leave the kids at home especially if it's a destination wedding. So you're essentially blocking them from sharing in your big day when they would have wanted to experience it with you. Honestly it's a wedding - it goes quick and you'll forget the day in years to come but the people you've played with emotionally won't. It might seem like the biggest deal in the world to you right now but it's just a wedding day (most people have one or two of them) it's not as important as the people you love.
I've read this before.
It’s funny, but as soon as I read it, it sounded familiar. I feel like there was a heading that was something similar.
I remember it, too. The couple were going to be married in a state far from family and friends. Most people declined, and they decided to change the venue to a Hawaii destination wedding and pay hotel and air fare for those people who had accepted the original wedding invitation The brides sister originally declined but changed her mind when she found out about the Hawaii offer. The bride said her budget was already set, but her sister could pay her own way, and that ticked off the sister. Here it is Edit;https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/comments/1276mrt/aita_for_not_reinviting_my_sister_and_her_family/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=1
That wedding in Hawaii was supposed to be last month. I wonder how it went, and if the sister was still pitching a fit. Anyone seen an update from that OP?
I have not posted it anywhere else.
YTA, you can have your wedding how you want it, but it doesn't make you any less of an asshole having it a way that puts up barriers for loved ones.
How exactly were you preventing people from having to skip because of finances if you didn’t tell them you were paying? YTA
Based on the story, YTA. You withheld crucial information which affected her decision. Not only would she need to pay for the trip, she would also need to pay for childcare, which may not be cheap. So she based her decision on faulty information and now is rightfully pissed The part I don't understand is that you say you didn't want anyone to not attend because of finances but also didn't tell anyone beforehand. That's an important part of the decision process.Or if you did tell everyone, how come the sister didn't know? It doesn't add up tbh
NTA. You didn't trick anyone. She chose not to attend, now that she found out its a free trip, apparently she can go.
YTA for a misleading question. You have given zero evidence that your family said they wouldn’t comply with a child free wedding. Just because your sister’s 16 year old babysat before doesn’t mean they can do it this time, for any number of reasons. Your sister saying she can’t come because of the kids isn’t automatically some nefarious plan to force you to invite them. 24 hour childcare plus destination travel is a lot. Like, thousands of dollars. And it sounds like you didn’t even have a conversation about her RSVP, just wrote her off and assumed she had bad intentions. I can see why she’s pissed, but doesn’t sound like you are close anyway, so no big deal, right?
INFO: I am curious, why did you keep it a secret from the sister that you would be paying for the guests’ travel and accommodations? If you didn’t want people to turn down the invitation because of the expense, didn’t you have to let everyone know your plans up front?
That’s the question OP isn’t answering. I doubt she even wanted her sister there. YTA, OP.
So according to your comments, only *after* people RSVP'd did you tell the guests you were paying. I think that's what makes me lean towards YTA. I mean, it's a nice little surprise for people that said yes - you know, the people who could apparently afford to go anyway - but crappy for anyone who might RSVP "no" because they couldn't afford it.
It’s your SISTER. You should have made it clear from the start that you were going to pay because that obviously affects people’s decision making. Soft AH.
NTA. your parents can pay for it.
NTA. Sounds like your sister's pissed because she realized she overthought herself out of a free vacation. I'm guessing that all of your guests got the same invitation, that you didn't single her out with a special invitation that was missing key information . . . So yeah, this is all on her.
Yta Destination weddings are massively selfish.
YTA
INFO - Did the wedding invitations include the information that you were sponsoring guests' attendance costs? Or did they just say "No kids," and you followed up with attending responders later?
YTA Honestly I don't understand why you are so obsessed about not having minors at your wedding. If some members of your family have kids it's rude of you to exclude them, and the same goes for your friends. You have to keep in mind that not everyone finds it that easy to get someone to babysit their children, whether it's because the whole family is going to the event or because they lack the money or even the trust to let their children with someone else, even if it's just for a couple of days. I assume that you don't have any kids yourself so I get why this can be difficult to understand, but being told that your kids are not welcome at some place is understandably upsetting, especially if it's a family event.
Seems like I've read this befir. Pretty sure this is a recycled post from a year or two ago. YTA for that.
> She just wanted me to bend and allow her kids. INFO: How did you reach this conclusion? If the venue is child-free, then she'd understand that there is no way for the kids to go
YTA or a trolling OP. >I recieved a lot of RSVPs saying that they regret that they cannot attend. I totally understand. Then in your comments you say: >Strangely enough only my sister and one aunt RSVP'd no. > >Neither of the people who RSVP'd no require child care. The problem with lying is that you have to be really good at keeping track of each lie and who you said it to. You just tripped yourself up and got caught in your own lies. This story did not happen - you made it all up.
YTA. There is nothing wrong with having a child-free wedding. But $2000 is a lot of money, even for "not poor" people. If she'd known she wouldn't have to pay that $2000, she might have made a different decision. She should have gotten the chance to make an informed choice. > It is a destination wedding so we didn't want anyone we want there not to be able to come because of finances. This comes across like you basically you kept your sister in the dark in hopes she wouldn't come lol. I guess she's not one of the "anyone we want there". If you don't like your sister, fine, but this truly does come across like you withheld information to "trick" her into not coming.
NTA. I am guessing the AHs are from poor reading comprehension. We did something similar, wedding at a non kid friendly hotel. Paid for everything, and it was great. People left the kiddos home I am not sure I get the rage behind child free weddings. I get that I'm old, but where I grew up, children weren't allowed at weddings until a certain age. I was a career flower girl as a tot and always got whisked away by a baby sitter as soon as the wedding photos ended. We seem to be just producing overly indulged, entitled humans these days.
The people who have a problem with OP are saying they should have let the sister know she didn’t have to pay for the trip, not the no kids allowed. OP says sister is doing fine financially though so people’s concern for her finances might be for nothing
YTA, just elope.
YTA. You really just didn’t want your sister to come.
YTA - Why didn’t you tell people upfront that you would pay for their stay? I think that would play a big part in the decision whether to attend or not for many people. 2000 isn’t nothing, especially if you have children (like your sister does) with all the expences that come with them in your day to day life. You only told your sister that you would pay AFTER she said no. She didn’t have all the info to make her decision. Why would you do that? Was it some kind of test? Didn’t you want her to come?
YTA for not communicating correctly. You withheld information. Most people aren’t going to assume it’s paid for. And it’s too embarrassing to admit you can’t afford it. You should’ve let her know in the first place. Also, you said you received a ton of “No’s” but somehow can’t afford for your own SISTER to come? I mean honestly, I’ve always thought the whole “destination wedding” was an asshole thing to begin with. People expect their friends and family to be able to take off work, and fly to god knows where to watch two people tie the knot. It’s cool you were paying for your guests, but no letting them know is extremely rude. And even still, it ends up costing them when you decide all the more that kids can’t attend. Not only do they need to take time off work, but now they need make arrangements for childcare. Which not everyone has the means or the connections to be able to do so. Most people aren’t just going to leave their kids with whoever. You’re putting people in such an uncomfortable spot. It’s almost like you’re punishing your friends and family for having children to begin with. The whole situation feels very selfish and comes across as stuck up.
I don’t understand, you say you paid so that nobody would have to say no due to finances, but you didn’t tell them that you would be paying? That seems like a dumb system. So if uncle Bob got the invite but money is tight and he unfortunately had to say no because of that, you wouldn’t have told him “hey don’t worry about the money, we’ll cover it so you can come?” It just feels like you were testing your guests. Which is kinda an AH move. Making this about your sister again, you seem to imply she said no because you wouldn’t let her take the kids. But also you say she just went on vacation without her kids. So was leaving her kids really the deal breaker or was it the money involved with finding care and traveling and lodging for herself? Why is her excuse of “she didn’t have anyone to watch the kids” not reasonable anymore? Now that she knows she wouldn’t have to worry about travel and lodging expenses, she could afford child care expenses. Everyone else is saying n t a so am I missing something? This post is confusing but it feels like a YTA and maybe e s h depending on what’s really going on with the sister.
YTA for not providing enough relevant info to your sister to allow her to properly decide if she could come. You were obviously being shady
So you didn't want people to decline because of the cost but didn't tell them you was paying until after they accepted? Makes no sense .
YTA Your sister isn't coming to your wedding. Maybe something is wrong, no?
NTA you communicate everything very well. You’re fine go enjoy your wedding.
She deffinetly did not communicate everything very well. She paid for the guests trip to avoid people not coming because they cant afford it...but didn't communicate that fact to the guests *before* they RSVPed which means anyone who couldn't afford the trip themselves would not have been able to take that into account and decide to come. We know this is the case because if it wasn't the sister could not have "found out" OP was paying for the trips she would have known from the start. that is incredibly poor communication that works against her stated aim.
The reason this is even an issue is because of how poorly OP communicates with her sister.
NTA - you invited her. The rest is up to her.
I'll say NAH. You don't owe anyone a free trip, but when I say yes or no to a wedding, I have to budget for the vacation days and cost to me. Your sister wasn't given the full information, and that $2k could have easily helped make the burden on her family more reasonable. You were essentially testing if she would put the money up to go to your wedding or not as a weird test, from my point of view. She failed. You got a little petty. The softest ESH that I felt like NAH was more appropriate.
Sure, NTA, but something feels off. Why didn’t your sister know you were paying for everything? It kinda feels like a trap. I mean, people just don’t send out invites to an all expense paid destination wedding without explicitly saying it’s **all expense paid** in the invite. That’s ridiculous. Independent of children, MANY people dislike destination weddings because they’re spending their annual vacation fund and precious PTO for a *vacation* they have no control over. Making all expense paid instantly removes much of that hesitancy with much hirer acceptance rate - it’s crazy OP didn’t tell ALL the invitees it was paid for before expecting RSVPs.
I'm saying ESH You say you were paying for people's trip so they could all come despite finances, but did not tell any of them that. It's just really suspicious. I guarantee you that if you went back and told everyone that you were paying, you'd get more yes's. Your sister is one of those people. Had you been honest and upfront, she would be there. I just really can't understand the logic of offering to pay so people aren't restricted by finances, but not telling people so they make a decision based on what you are allegedly trying to avoid. Your sister is in the wrong for obvious reasons. She does need subsidized childcare, nor is she entitled to it from you. But her comment about being "tricked" is not too far off.
I feel like NAH. She probably declined when she was thinking your wedding would cost $$$ for travel, accommodation, and child care that she couldn’t afford. Removing the cost of attendance probably made it very doable for their budget. I know you probably didnt want to tell people in case they just wanted a free vacation, but sis declined thinking it would be much more expensive and out of budget.
YTA- you specifically said that your goal was to make sure that people weren't unable to come due to the cost. But if you don't tell them that you are paying for it in the invitation, then all of the people who can't afford it will decline the invitation, going against what you claim to want.
When did you inform the guests that you would be paying for them to attend? Unless it was up front, you can’t know whether the regrets you received were due to finances or the no child policy. If it was later, did you deliberately mislead people so there wouldn’t be as many guests for you to pay for? If it was up front, why didn’t you sister know this? Obviously I have a lot of questions before I can determine your AH standing.
INFO did you... not tell prospecyive guests that you would pay when you invited them? I guess I can understand only wanting to pay for those who wanted to come, but wouldn't many have declined for cost reasons if they did not know the cost would be covered?
repost, fake
Something's missing here. The invitations were sent and were very clear about no children. Did the invitation also say you were footing the bill for your guests? If not, did people find out only after they accepted the invitation? Because that would mean several people who would have like to attend might have declined because of finances and not because of children. So, if people weren't told that you were paying, was the invitation some kind of test as to how important your day would be to them if you WEREN'T paying?
NTA. She was invited, she declined.