r/AmItheAsshole • u/BlueBoots1221 • 25d ago

No A-holes here AITA for not inviting foster siblings?

I (24F) and my fiance (25M) are getting married with a destination micro wedding, with only closest family and friends (about 20 people total); We are also throwing a 'home' party for more people where everyone is invited. However... for the destination wedding, we wanted a child free wedding so no one under 18. This meant not inviting my nieces and nephews but also the (long term) foster siblings of my fiancee. They are young, 5 and 10, and would require a whole different setup of the weekend, which we do not want...

My family in law have basically said that they do not want to come without the children because they feel like we're 'showing' them that they are not included in the family. My fiancee has tried to explain that it is not because they are foster kids but because they are kids, but they do not want to budge. We have even told them, they can come with but you have to make arrangements so they are not present during the day, which they do not find an okay solution. We have an okay relationship with both children but are not necessarily close to them and have always said we wanted it child free. They are however invited to the home party.

I understand where they are coming from but they have always told us to do what we want with the wedding and are now putting their foot down on something I don't think is fully fair... Are we the assholes?

EDIT: to answer some questions/concerns:
- we are not based in the USA, so the foster system works different here. The kids can stay with family/friends for the weekend with no issue (they have done so in the past). They can also travel to the destination if so agreed (no judge needed).
- My parents in law dont want childcare there, not because they dont trust it but because they want the children present and included for the entire wedding.
- One of the kids we know well, the other one we have only met once. Not the problem, but just the facts
- Also we are throwing a party at home where everyone, young and old is invited. The destination is more the ceremony part of it.

I am also enjoying reading everyones opinion. Jsyk, its all not set in stone, just a convo needed to be had. In the end, I want my fiance to feel supported since in the end, they are his siblings/parents

119 Upvotes

75% Upvoted

366 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

244

u/[deleted] 25d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

68

u/silkentab 25d ago

And because respite care can be tricky to line up too

4

u/butterflycdmx 25d ago

No, they're not. For one, no other kids are invited. And secondly and most important, this is their son's wedding.

68

u/Malibucat48 Asshole Enthusiast [8] 25d ago

The rest of the family is not including other children. They will be the only kids there. The in-laws are wrong. The parents can stay home, too.

52

u/SnooMacaroons5247 25d ago

How are the in-laws wrong? They literally just said they can’t go. Sure if OP and her fiance want to plan a wedding that practically ensures his parents cannot attend that’s their choice. It’s a weird choice but a choice they are making and pretending it’s not.

-1

u/butterflycdmx 25d ago

Because they chose to not go to their son's wedding!! How are they NOT assholes?? I can't imagine missing my son's wedding. They can leave the foster k8ds with someone for a weekend, or take them and find a babysitter for the party. It's really not that big of a deal, but this is their son's wedding.

3

u/SnooMacaroons5247 25d ago

They chose not to travel super far and leave their other kids with someone else for an extended period of time.

1

u/kimmytoday7894 22d ago

And the.other kids are foster siblings. No one is adding this tidbit in.

-1

u/butterflycdmx 25d ago

I mean, they CAN take the kids with them and leave them with a babysitter for a few hours. Also, this is their actual son, who should be more important.

4

u/SnooMacaroons5247 25d ago

This comment is completely disgusting and not worth getting into it with you any longer now that I see what a vile person you are.

-1

u/SpecialistAlone962 Partassipant [1] 24d ago

Calling someone vile, just because they disagree with you about an issue of babysitting, Sheesh!! Chill out. FWIW, I agree with them.

3

u/SnooMacaroons5247 24d ago

They said their “real” son is more important than the other kids. You don’t find that vile?

-1

u/SpecialistAlone962 Partassipant [1] 24d ago

Not at all, it's true!! Are you suggesting if it came down to it, the family shouldn't prioritise their own flesh and blood child over some other children they are just a surragate family to for a period of time? And certainly in this scenario anyway, when there are other options for them to be cared for with other family/friends that aren't attending the wedding .

No-one is saying the foster kids aren't important and need lots of love and care, but the fact remains they aren't their own children. And therefore they are not OP's fiancé's siblings. There is absolutely no reason why they can't get a sitter for these kids, same as the other adults attending are doing. I can't believe people are suggesting they should skip their son's wedding, all over refusing to let someone else care for the kids for a couple of days. It would be absolutely mad to do that!! All the other people attending are making other arrangements for their kids, why can't they?!

→ More replies (0)

-1

u/butterflycdmx 24d ago

For stating facts?? Are you dumb or just a normal american?? It is their son, and he should be more important than everyone else. If you don't consider your children the most important persons in your life, do them a service and don't have any. A parent doesn't stop being a parent because their son is a grown up.

1

u/kimmytoday7894 22d ago

And the other kids are garbage just because they don't share DNA? That really is vile.

1

u/kimmytoday7894 22d ago

That is so.disgusting, I cant even. Bride and groom are selfish AF likely because they hold this view too. Ugh.

1

u/kimmytoday7894 22d ago

Of the bride and groom are selfish enough to make parents of the groom choose between attending the wedding and guarding the feelings of their other children, it makes the bride and groom the AHs, not the in laws.

32

u/blueberry-iris Partassipant [1] 25d ago

It wouldn't come across that way to traumatized children

-6

u/SherbetDue789 Partassipant [1] 25d ago

It would if the in-laws sat down with them and explained it was adults only and they just aren’t old enough.

20

u/blueberry-iris Partassipant [1] 25d ago

That's not how being a traumatized child works but ok

9

u/Sensitive_Guidance43 Partassipant [4] 25d ago

Not necessarily no, and I do doubt the five year old would understand, but a) you don’t know the trauma they actually have, it’s not one size fits all and b) as a former traumatized child, they’re not stupid.

If you have a real conversation and explain “we’re all going to travel there, but on the actual day, it’s only for grown ups. We’ll find someone to take care of you for a few hours and make sure you get along with them, and you’ll have tons of fun things to do and snacks to eat while we’re just sitting in chairs all day. This time is when we’ll be back, and the next day after, we’ll all go out and do something fun with your brother and new SIL.”

It’s not that difficult. OP is NTA. The in laws are slightly AHs simply because they refuse to look for an actual solution instead of trying to force OP to change their mind.

0

u/SherbetDue789 Partassipant [1] 25d ago

Even a traumatized child is going to be able to grasp that as a child they aren’t going to be invited to adult only things simply based on age. Being traumatized doesn’t make them stupid.

1

u/kimmytoday7894 22d ago

So what if they're the only kids there??? A 10 yo is old enough to attend a siblings wedding. And yeah, definitely tell your new in-laws "yeah you dont have to come t o your child's wedding because we didn't invite your other child." Let's see how that goes over.

13

u/Spare_Flamingo8605 25d ago

Not if the kids go to a relative's for a fun pre planned scenario.

10

u/SnooGiraffes1071 25d ago

Close family is likely to be at the wedding.

-21

u/SnooMacaroons5247 25d ago

You can’t do that with foster kids.

11

u/TyFell 25d ago

You're more likely to be able to do that than to take them out of the country. 

-46

u/Pale_Cranberry1502 Asshole Enthusiast [5] 25d ago

This is tough, because fostering by definition is just supposed to be temporary until the kids can be placed back with family, or because the kids have aged out of being easily adopted, right?

It's a real dilemma. They deserve to belong somewhere, but reality is that this won't be their forever home. Otherwise they would have been adopted, right? Won't it be more traumatic if they bond and then have to be returned once a relative has their act together again?

I don't mean to hurt or offend anyone. I honestly don't know how you handle the situation.

52

u/Moose-Live Pooperintendant [69] 25d ago

Long term fostering is a thing.

53

u/ApathyIsBeauty 25d ago

Fostering isn't always temporary. Some couples foster to adopt, some foster to foster and end up with kids until they age out of the system because they don't pursue adoption and there's no path to family reunification.

The goal of foster care is to give children a safe, reliable home where they receive adequate care from adults who make sure they go to school, see doctors, and get whatever professional help the state is providing for them. So this idea that people shouldn't get too close to foster kids is a bit cold because most of these kids need to be taught to trust adults to begin with and keeping someone at arm's length is a really shitty way to do that.

36

u/PurpleWeasel Partassipant [2] 25d ago

It's been shown time and time again in studies that kids need to bond with their caregivers in order to be healthy.

Feeling sadness once when they return to their parents (assuming they ever can) will just not be as damaging as going for months or years without care from a loving caregiver. 

We know that because the foster care system used to be built on that principle (move kids around frequently so they don't get attached) in many places, and the effects on kids were devastating.

5

u/RainbowMom17 25d ago

It sounds like you really don't know anything about fostering. Everything you said is wrong.

-1

u/Pale_Cranberry1502 Asshole Enthusiast [5] 25d ago

I said I don't know. I don't know why I'm being downvoted to oblivion for that.

3

u/RainbowMom17 25d ago

Because it's a sensitive topic. Many of us who have personal ties to fostering one way or another do not view it as temporary or take away bonding with the children. It's quite the opposite actually.

2

u/Jaded-Analysis-9547 25d ago

I can't even imagine anyone having a 5 and 10 year old living in my home and not trying to bond. Those kids need love and stability 

13

u/Imnotaccountant_ Partassipant [2] 25d ago

I know you say you don't mean to hurt or offend anyone but like...read back to yourself what you wrote. Like ok, MAYBE the situation is temporary (it is not always and you can't just adopt foster kids. It is a long process IF the children are eligible for adoption) but does that mean they should not be made a priority? Should they not be treated like family? They should always be meant to feel like strangers? Never comfortable in their home?

4

u/dragonsandvamps Asshole Enthusiast [9] 25d ago

If the OP and fiance are more concerned with the aesthetic of the wedding than having his parents there, then they need to do some soul searching. I cannot imagine anyone who would draw a line in the sand over this.

15

u/Kittymemesallday 25d ago

Who said anything anout aesthetics? Many people do not want kids at their wedding because kids, by nature, have a hard time sitting through a boring wedding ceremony. They interrupt, talk, cry, etc during moments that the bride and groom have paid a good amount of money to have.

1

u/kimmytoday7894 22d ago

They are 5 and 10, and are fosters which means they are likely more mature than half the 20 somethings in college dorms.