Couple Disagrees About Where to Seat Family Member with Newborn Over Concerns About Disruption During Ceremony

An anonymous Reddit user worried that a baby belonging to the fiancé's sibling would disrupt the ceremony, which they want to be mostly "child-free"

One to-be-wed couple has found themselves at odds over where to seat one of their youngest family members at their upcoming ceremony.

An anonymous Reddit user took to a popular forum to detail their concerns about having their fiancé's sibling — who is currently pregnant and plans to bring the newborn baby — sit up close to the altar with the rest of the family. The post explained that the expected infant is one of just a few exceptions to the otherwise "child-free wedding." The couple is only allowing their siblings' and cousins' kids to attend, who are between the ages of 3 and 11 years old, "because they are family."

"I’m concerned about the potential for a newborn to cry during the ceremony, which is very important to us since babies just cry whenever," the user wrote. "I suggested that if my fiancé's sibling wants to attend, they could sit in a back corner so they could leave quickly if needed, and it wouldn’t affect the ceremony or videographer."

The post continues, "My fiancé thinks it’s rude to suggest this before the baby is even born and is upset about the idea. I’m stressed with planning and want to minimize disruptions."

Related: Wedding Singer Gifts Performance for Friend's Reception. After a Falling Out, Bride Still Expects Band for Free

Hoping to hear objective perspectives about who is in the wrong, the Reddit user noted that the couple both agreed to a no-child policy, save for their young family members.

"We will welcome these kids at the reception but want a peaceful ceremony," they added in the post, admitting this was already a compromise to their initial desire to have a no-kid wedding. "I view a newborn baby to be much more unpredictable since they can cry at any point in time from my experience."

The poster admitted to having limited knowledge of kids' behavior, not being a parent themselves and not being particularly familiar with the children on the guest list. In addendum to their post, they shared that the wedding cost "a ton of money," hence why such details were so important to the couple and why they're "planning or stressing so much on this" decision.

One person in the replies pointed out that the newborn wouldn't be the only unpredictable member of the crowd, and others agreed.

"I don't think you understand the concept of a child-free wedding if you are allowing children," the commenter wrote. "I hate to be the one to break this to you, but the [3-year-old] is by far more likely to disrupt your ceremony than the infant is."

Related: Text Invite to Black-Tie Wedding Includes Questionable Requests for Guests to Eat Elsewhere, Send Cash Gifts

Another anonymous response recalled how, in their experience, wedding guests are typically understanding when disruptions are caused by kids.

"Every wedding I’ve attended where a baby cried or a small child somehow was loud enough to be heard during the ceremony was met with kindness, understanding, and (depending on the type of disruption — asking questions or some kind of cute noise) laughter."

In summation, the same user questioned the weight of the author's concerns: "Your wedding should definitely be about you and what you want, but for crying out loud, it’s not like you’ll be taking a video of the ceremony and submitting it for Oscar consideration," they wrote, adding, "Who actually cares if a baby cries for a minute or two during your wedding, as long as your friends and loved ones are there to celebrate you and your fiancé?"

For more People news, make sure to sign up for our newsletter!

Read the original article on People.