Engagement issues already....

[tarheelmjfan]

There is no reason when it comes to things like shower gifts that haven't been committed to that the MIL can't keep them even (by lowering the value for both siblings).
If MIL finds another new outfit for the second wedding is her priority rather than contributing to the wedding it's her choice.
And like their choice has consquences for them, her choices may have consquences for her.

The MIL shouldn't have to shortchange her DD, because her DS decides he wants to get married a couple months after his sister's previously planned wedding. To me, if anyone gets shortchanged, it should be couple #2.

IMO, the sister should not have to suffer the consequences of her brother's decision. Everyone should go to the first wedding as planned & go to the second wedding, if it's convenient. They should also give to the sister as planned, & give what they can to the brother. Couple #2 chose a time that works for the bride's family not the grooms, which is their prerogative. That decision has consequences that they should accept without hard feelings. It's a decision they made.

 

[Kae]

How would your daughter feel if it was the other way around? I have to agree with the MIL too close.

Kae

 

[okeydokey]

There is no reason when it comes to things like shower gifts that haven't been committed to that the MIL can't keep them even (by lowering the value for both siblings).
If MIL finds another new outfit for the second wedding is her priority rather than contributing to the wedding it's her choice.
And like their choice has consquences for them, her choices may have consquences for her.



Your mother was intending to Lu for one wedding and instead of doing so for the one that had already been planning her wedding she gave it to the other one, it was you that said your Oct sister was shafted, by your mother.
There was no reason that your mother had to shaft either one, she could have split the money she had equally and she chose not to too.
I don't have all the answers but I can do basic math. If I have x amount j can afford and two weddings that need it then each bride gets y. Pretty simple.

Why should she lower her planned gift for the first wedding? If she had planned on X amount for the first sibling, that is what she should do.

If that only leaves a smaller amount for the second planned wedding, that is the consequence for the couple who planned another wedding so close after the first. Choices may have consequences for them.

 

[focusondisney]

It boggles my mind the apparent disdain for groom's families here. Karma is a
-itch. I really hope some of you have sons who are learning how to treat their mothers.

 

[tarheelmjfan]

It boggles my mind the apparent disdain for groom's families here. Karma is a
-itch. I really hope some of you have sons who are learning how to treat their mothers.

It seems to me that most of us are saying the groom's family isn't getting the consideration they deserve. Those that are solidly on the bride's side, appear to think it's all about what the couple wants & no one else matters. They've also somehow gotten the idea that the groom regularly vetoes the bride, if they don't agree. I don't personally know any of those grooms. In my experience, it's all about what the bride wants & the groom agrees to keep the peace with his fiance.

 

[roseaster]

There is no reason when it comes to things like shower gifts that haven't been committed to that the MIL can't keep them even (by lowering the value for both siblings).
If MIL finds another new outfit for the second wedding is her priority rather than contributing to the wedding it's her choice.
And like their choice has consquences for them, her choices may have consquences for her.



Your mother was intending to Lu for one wedding and instead of doing so for the one that had already been planning her wedding she gave it to the other one, it was you that said your Oct sister was shafted, by your mother.
There was no reason that your mother had to shaft either one, she could have split the money she had equally and she chose not to too.
I don't have all the answers but I can do basic math. If I have x amount j can afford and two weddings that need it then each bride gets y. Pretty simple.

So, if the ILs made a promise of a gift, such as, "as our gift to you we will pay for your honeymoon, or reception, or insert whatever aspect of the wedding you want." She should renege on that promise because the brother and his fiancee decided to plan a wedding less than 2 months after the daughter's already planned wedding?

Or if the MOG promised to pay for a reception at a certain place she should now make her daughter, who already planned her reception, change it to a cheaper place because she now has to cut in half her contribution to the wedding.

No one knows that the bride and groom expect or asked the MOG to pay for anything. They may not expect a single thing from the groom's family. I just see the MOG as saying, "I wish you would wait a few months so I could contribute as much to your wedding as I have contributed to your sister's."

I don't think that she is being difficult or trying to cause problems. The OP, herself, said that the MOG is happy about the engagement. I think she was honest and brought up a legitimate concern. I think she threw in the other things about graduation and the sister having "her time" as a way to help bolster her idea and deflect from the idea that the real issue is money. People can be very sensitive about money.

 

[Lilacs4Me]

IF the OP is not exagerating things (I feel she might be) it doesn't sound like the mother of the groom in this case explained that she could only afford X amount if they choose to get married at this time, but was otherwise fine with the plans. If the OP is to be taken at face value, the mother of the groom felt the weddings should not be so close together not only for financial reasons but so as not to overshadow her daughter's year as a a bride, and so she'll have more time to help plan both weddings, etc.

My point is that the couple getting married MIGHT not be looking for financial or planning help and there is nothing wrong with that (and just being asked to attend a local wedding 2 months after the first does not seem like an imposition to me).

As for critiquing how your mother handled it not being the point of your post---well, the blame shouldn't all go to the sister who had a short engagement, I assume she did not force your parents to pay for her and not the other sister. So far as I can tell you brought it up as an example of why it is wrong of a sibling to get married close to the same time as another sibling--some of us do not see this as the root problem in your scenario and are explaining why.

The actual point of my post was to point out how hard it was for the rest of the family to deal with two weddings within 6 months of each other. I'm not rich, don't claim to be, but I can budget for a sister's wedding and I can do simple math too, and STILL felt like it was a PITA to have had to budget for throwing another shower, buying a bridesmaid dress, buy a gift, throw a bachelorette party, blah, blah, blah twice in 6 months because one sister couldn't figure out it wasn't NICE to do that to another sister (much less the rest of us)

There is a fine line between having the right to do whatever you want, whenever you want, for your own wedding day, and not being a jerk about it. IMO, planning your own wedding within a couple months of a sibling "because you can and nobody can tell you no because it's not their day" blurs the line just a wee bit.

ETA: I do agree with you on most of what you are saying. I don't think either the MOG or the bride are bad - I just think that the bride (and MOB) aren't understanding that this will affect more than just one aspect of the entire affair. Good luck to them all. They will need it!

 

[NHdisneylover]

It seems to me that most of us are saying the groom's family isn't getting the consideration they deserve. Those that are solidly on the bride's side, appear to think it's all about what the couple wants & no one else matters. They've also somehow gotten the idea that the groom regularly vetoes the bride, if they don't agree. I don't personally know any of those grooms. In my experience, it's all about what the bride wants & the groom agrees to keep the peace with his fiance.

and this is why I think people are reading so much in to so much of this, by assuming things are just like their own experiences.

The bride might well be overtaking everything and the groom doing whatever her bidding is, but just like I do not assume that the future MiL is a tyrant nor do I assume the couple are inconsiderate, I don't assume a domineering bride---maybe partially because my husband had a lot of say in our wedding. 3/4 of the guests were his family. We got married in the Catholic church beucase it mattered so much to his mother (I was raised without religion), he chose the music and the beer and much of the food, etc, etc. I cannot think of any decision he was not involved in other than my boquet and my dress (and even that I had buttons down the back added becuase I knew he loved that look).
I know not everyone is like that---but 3 out of 4 of the kids in his family the grooms had a lot of say, and in the fourth neither the bride nor the groom did much planning---they bascially agreed to have a wedding to make their parents happy but then asked not to plan it.

I know it doesn't work that way for all, but I sure don't assume everyone cow tows to some demanding bride in every case---how is assumign that any less awful than assuming the groom's mom shouldn't have any say?

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

It seems to me that most of us are saying the groom's family isn't getting the consideration they deserve. Those that are solidly on the bride's side, appear to think it's all about what the couple wants & no one else matters. They've also somehow gotten the idea that the groom regularly vetoes the bride, if they don't agree. I don't personally know any of those grooms. In my experience, it's all about what the bride wants & the groom agrees to keep the peace with his fiance.

That maybe true as a sterotype and does seem to be true with your experience but sure as heck wasn't with mine 3 1/2 years ago. You know funny thing is my husband and I actually planned our wedding together.

Now that wasn't the experience with my best friend who got married nearly 2 years ago. Her husband did exactly one thing for the whole wedding and that was stand at the altar..everything else down to the tuxes was picked out by her. If I stop the story now you might assume she's one of those typical "me me me" brides who demanded everything be this way or it was the highway.

Truth is she was really upset that he didn't help plan. She saw how involved my husband had been and that it was a joint venture and how her's was the complete opposite.

We all know those brides, we all know those grooms, we all know those mother-in-laws (both sides) but we also know people who don't fit into those molds.

 

[Wishing on a star]

Yes, def. a lot of assumptions going on here.
We don't know every detail.

The thing is, that my thoughts and opinions are NOT based upon any assumptions.

If I have two (or more) kids, then I should hope/expect that there be two (or more) weddings/grandchildren/etc...
The idea that what I want to 'give' to one child would shortchange the other is really 'off' and 'sad'. The idea that one child should put their life/plans on hold, and expect his fiance to put her life/plans on hold because "it is the siblings year'. Wow.

The fact (no assumption here at all) is that the couple in the original post are giving a full year 'save the date' in advance.
If that isn't enough for that mother, then yes, I see that as an issue and will feel free to judge.
No assumption. No hesitation.

 

[tarheelmjfan]

That maybe true as a sterotype and does seem to be true with your experience but sure as heck wasn't with mine 3 1/2 years ago. You know funny thing is my husband and I actually planned our wedding together.

Now that wasn't the experience with my best friend who got married nearly 2 years ago. Her husband did exactly one thing for the whole wedding and that was stand at the altar..everything else down to the tuxes was picked out by her. If I stop the story now you might assume she's one of those typical "me me me" brides who demanded everything be this way or it was the highway.

Truth is she was really upset that he didn't help plan. She saw how involved my husband had been and that it was a joint venture and how her's was the complete opposite.

We all know those brides, we all know those grooms, we all know those mother-in-laws (both sides) but we also know people who don't fit into those molds.

You're right people don't fit into molds, but I think you'd find your DH was the exception not the rule. The fiance in this situation may be more involved in the wedding planning, but it's hard to imagine that, when it's obvious his family isn't a priority here. The OP has said the wedding was planned around her younger DDs schedule, among other things, but the groom's family's schedule doesn't appear to be a consideration at all. Any nice person would have said it was okay with them that their brother was getting married less than three months after them. Asking his sister was wasted breath. Of course, she going to say she's okay with it. Maybe, Mom is not only worried about money, but she's also voicing concerns that her DD doesn't feel comfortable voicing. To me, common sense says planning two sibling weddings this close together will be difficult for the average family. OTOH, I'm not the least bit surprised the fiance hasn't spoken up for his family. That's par for the course, in my experience.

 

[tarheelmjfan]

Yes, def. a lot of assumptions going on here.
We don't know every detail.

The thing is, that my thoughts and opinions are NOT based upon any assumptions.

If I have two (or more) kids, then I should hope/expect that there be two (or more) weddings/grandchildren/etc...
The idea that what I want to 'give' to one child would shortchange the other is really 'off' and 'sad'. The idea that one child should put their life/plans on hold, and expect his fiance to put her life/plans on hold because "it is the siblings year'. Wow.

The fact (no assumption here at all) is that the couple in the original post are giving a full year 'save the date' in advance.
If that isn't enough for that mother, then yes, I see that as an issue and will feel free to judge.
No assumption. No hesitation.

So, you would be perfectly fine telling your child, that had a wedding date set, that you will give her $10,000 for her wedding, then changing that commitment several months later to $5,000, because you now have to pay for another child's wedding that was planned after all the first child's plans were in place? I don't know about you, but I don't make a habit of making my child promises that I don't keep.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

You're right people don't fit into molds, but I think you'd find your DH was the exception not the rule.

Yes we are considered the exception, by the sterotype that is, but my point was exceptions do exist and in fact several people on this thread have voiced how their weddings went which were also exceptions.

The fiance in this situation may be more involved in the wedding planning, but it's hard to imagine that, when it's obvious his family isn't a priority here. The OP has said the wedding was planned around her younger DDs schedule, among other things, but the groom's family's schedule doesn't appear to be a consideration at all.

See that's an assumption that the fiance doesn't care about his family's situation just because he is in agreement with the date. I'm not really defending the OP here but as she's not the groom's mother we don't necessarily know what he considered. Could it be that the daughter and the son chose a date (without mentioning it to others) and then one was like "ohh wait that's ... not that's not going to work" so they chose a different date? I've got no clue here but I also don't know that the groom said "ehh my family doesn't matter honey but yours does".

Any nice person would have said it was okay with them that their brother was getting married less than three months after them. Asking his sister was wasted breath. Of course, she going to say she's okay with it.

That's true but wasn't it a consideration of the bride to ask the sister? Isn't that what many are saying the bride hasn't done which is be considerate of the groom's family? I would say regardless of decorum in saying yes a date is ok when it may not be, the bride did reach out to the groom's sister which wasn't required at all.

To me, common sense says planning two sibling weddings this close together will be difficult for the average family.

Can't say that's common sense because as we've seen plenty of people have differing opinions on the time frame.

OTOH, I'm not the least bit surprised the fiance has spoken up for his family. That's par for the course, in my experience.

I'm kinda confused here..did you mean you're not the least bit surprised he hasn't or has spoken up for his family?

 

[Wishing on a star]

So, you would be perfectly fine telling your child, that had a wedding date set, that you will give her $10,000 for her wedding, then changing that commitment several months later to $5,000, because you now have to pay for another child's wedding that was planned after all the first child's plans were in place? I don't know about you, but I don't make a habit of making my child promises that I don't keep.

If I had two children who had been in serious (long term) relationships and who might be married in the next year or two, I would absolutely NEVER PROMISE ONE SIBLING MORE THAN I COULD AFFORD without shortchanging the other.

There would be absolutely NO reason to renege on a promise, because I would have considered BOTH of my children before making any such promise. Because, that would be putting me in a position of having made a promise that I can not keep.

Again, no assumptions, no hesitation...
No apologies.

PS: Not to even mention...
You wrote "now you have to pay for another wedding...." There has been absolutely no indication that this groom's mother/parents are 'paying' for this wedding. Does not even sound like the couple has even asked... According to the couple mentioned here to have incomes and they have put down-payments on the venue, etc... I am going to venture a small guess here, that as the mother/parents of the bride, the OP might be helping to fund the wedding as well.

 

[Hrhpd]

Yes, def. a lot of assumptions going on here.
We don't know every detail.

The thing is, that my thoughts and opinions are NOT based upon any assumptions.

If I have two (or more) kids, then I should hope/expect that there be two (or more) weddings/grandchildren/etc...
The idea that what I want to 'give' to one child would shortchange the other is really 'off' and 'sad'. The idea that one child should put their life/plans on hold, and expect his fiance to put her life/plans on hold because "it is the siblings year'. Wow.

The fact (no assumption here at all) is that the couple in the original post are giving a full year 'save the date' in advance.
If that isn't enough for that mother, then yes, I see that as an issue and will feel free to judge.
No assumption. No hesitation.

Of course you are basing all your opinions on assumptions.

Unless you know both families personally, you are making assumptions about the financial position of both families, you are making assumptions on what was or was not promised to the grooms sister, you are making assumptions that you know what or if any wedding contracts have already been signed and making assumptions that if contracts have been signed, they can easily be broken. You are making assumptions that the groom's sister has not put down deposits, even though the groom himself has put down deposits, and that Mom can get that money back to now split between the two children.

It is not as easy to say, OK, now Johnny is also getting married so we will split the money given to both children. 15 months out is not very far out for weddings as many deposits have already been made to secure venues and vendors for your date. The groom's mother may very well not be able to get out of contracts to take some money back from the wedding already in the works to give it to the groom.

The groom has already put down a deposit on his venue. What makes you so positive that there are no contractual obligations for the bride's wedding, which is earlier and is already in the planning stages?

 

[tarheelmjfan]

Yes we are considered the exception, by the sterotype that is, but my point was exceptions do exist and in fact several people on this thread have voiced how their weddings went which were also exceptions.


I'm my experience, it's not simply a stereotype, I have a large family & friends, & the groom has never voiced an adamant opinion. Your DH is definitely in the minority. For those who had a DH that wanted to get involved in the planning, lucky you.

See that's an assumption that the fiance doesn't care about his family's situation just because he is in agreement with the date. I'm not really defending the OP here but as she's not the groom's mother we don't necessarily know what he considered. Could it be that the daughter and the son chose a date (without mentioning it to others) and then one was like "ohh wait that's ... not that's not going to work" so they chose a different date? I've got no clue here but I also don't know that the groom said "ehh my family doesn't matter honey but yours does".

Let's be honest. We're all assuming a lot, including you. The OP hasn't provided much information that wasn't intended to support the bride. As the MOB, that's to be expected. I'm not saying the groom said his family didn't matter. Odds are he went along with his fiance, which most of them do, & agreed to "whatever". This is from personal experience & from the fact that the MOG's opinion appears to have been ignored. Most people don't completely forget their sisters or boyfriend's sister's wedding, until they've already chosen a date & put down a deposit. Regardless, the OP states her DD put down the deposit knowing her future MIL had problems with the date.

That's true but wasn't it a consideration of the bride to ask the sister? Isn't that what many are saying the bride hasn't done which is be considerate of the groom's family? I would say regardless of decorum in saying yes a date is ok when it may not be, the bride did reach out to the groom's sister which wasn't required at all.

Yes, it was a consideration of the bride to ask the sister, but the sister had no choice but to agree. The sister is doing the mature thing & saying it's okay. That doesn't mean she doesn't have a problem with it. All I get out of that exchange is that the fiance has a good sister. We can't ignore the fact that if the date had been set at a reasonable amount of time after the already planned wedding, there would be no reason to put the sister in a position where she had to say she was okay with it, whether she was or not.

Can't say that's common sense because as we've seen plenty of people have differing opinions on the time frame.

We've seen evidence of people paying for their own wedding & not expecting anything from their families. We've also seen evidence of cousins or friends having close wedding. A wedding involving the same parents, with the same family spending money on both is a different story.

I'm kinda confused here..did you mean you're not the least bit surprised he hasn't or has spoken up for his family?

You're not confused at all. You knew it was a typo based on the rest of my post. I've corrected it to help with your confusion.

 

[tarheelmjfan]

If I had two children who had been in serious (long term) relationships and who might be married in the next year or two, I would absolutely NEVER PROMISE ONE SIBLING MORE THAN I COULD AFFORD without shortchanging the other.

There would be absolutely NO reason to renege on a promise, because I would have considered BOTH of my children before making any such promise. Because, that would be putting me in a position of having made a promise that I can not keep.

Again, no assumptions, no hesitation...
No apologies.

PS: Not to even mention...
You wrote "now you have to pay for another wedding...." There has been absolutely no indication that this groom's mother/parents are 'paying' for this wedding. Does not even sound like the couple has even asked... According to the couple mentioned here to have incomes and they have put down-payments on the venue, etc... I am going to venture a small guess here, that as the mother/parents of the bride, the OP might be helping to fund the wedding as well.

You're right we don't know about finances for this wedding, because we've been given a very one sided point of view. As I've said, the OP is the MOB so that's to be expected. As for the rest of your post, how many kids do you have at marrying age? My guess is none or at the most one. It's not as easy to raise & provide for kids, as it is declare what you'll do when yours are that age. If you don't have any at that age, you don't have a clue what you'd do. If I'm wrong, my apologies to you. Kudos to you for considering every possibility before it happens. I wish I'd don't that earlier.

 

[Christine]

Yes, def. a lot of assumptions going on here.
We don't know every detail.

The thing is, that my thoughts and opinions are NOT based upon any assumptions.

If I have two (or more) kids, then I should hope/expect that there be two (or more) weddings/grandchildren/etc...
The idea that what I want to 'give' to one child would shortchange the other is really 'off' and 'sad'. The idea that one child should put their life/plans on hold, and expect his fiance to put her life/plans on hold because "it is the siblings year'. Wow.

The fact (no assumption here at all) is that the couple in the original post are giving a full year 'save the date' in advance.
If that isn't enough for that mother, then yes, I see that as an issue and will feel free to judge.
No assumption. No hesitation.

The problem here is that the first wedding is further along in the planning. It was planned without knowledge of a second wedding on the horizon. Contracts have been made, deposits set and money will be owed. There is no time for the this parent to change her contribution amounts from, say, $10K to $5K due to the second wedding.

 

[tarheelmjfan]

The problem here is that the first wedding is further along in the planning. It was planned without knowledge of a second wedding on the horizon. Contracts have been made, deposits set and money will be owed. There is no time for the this parent to change her contribution amounts from, say, $10K to $5K due to the second wedding.

Again, common sense.

 

[mom2rtk]

The problem here is that the first wedding is further along in the planning. It was planned without knowledge of a second wedding on the horizon. Contracts have been made, deposits set and money will be owed. There is no time for the this parent to change her contribution amounts from, say, $10K to $5K due to the second wedding.

Not to mention the endless conversations that have undoubtedly taken place between mother and daughter about what they can and can't do for the wedding. It would create a pile of bad feelings to all of a sudden pull back and have to change all of that.