When a Wedding reception says "adult" only does that mean over 18 or 21?

[Cannot_Wait_4Disney]

Really don't want this to turn into a debate whether a reception should have kids or not but my sister and I were just wondering the age? She said 18, I say 21 because of obviously the alcohol.
What would you guys assume?

I would assume it's the age of a legal adult, which is 18 unless the reception was at some bar or something where only those over 21 are allowed in. And if that is the case, the invite should say so.

 

[jevs]

To me an adult = 18.

 

[mi*vida*loca]

The invitation should be addressed to who is invited. "Adults only" leaves too much to figure out. 18 or 21. I've had invites that said "no children" or "adults only" but I can bring my 16 year old son.

 

[FlightlessDuck]

Really don't want this to turn into a debate whether a reception should have kids or not but my sister and I were just wondering the age? She said 18, I say 21 because of obviously the alcohol.

But I've been to weddings with children where there is alcohol...

 

[tvguy]

Most provinces are 19, a few are 18. The drinking age hasn't been 21 since 1971.

Yes, I know, I travel to Canada frequently. Both my kids had their first "legal" drink at 18 in Canada.
But like I said, surprised Canada hasn't raised it back to 21 given the issues with DUI incidents in the 18 to 21 age group.

 

[mi*vida*loca]

But I've been to weddings with children where there is alcohol...

All weddings I've been to have alcohol and children.

ETA: Actually almost every single party I've ever been to has alcohol and children.

 

[Kitty 34]

All weddings I've been to have alcohol and children.

My sister and I both have never been to a wedding/reception where there were not children and all served alcohol. I guess that's why we were confused with the Adults only invite as she and I have never received that type of invite.

It really doesn't concern me as my youngest is 28!

 

[Christine]

Someone I know had "Adults Only Reception" printed on their RSVP card. The inside of the invite was clear who was invited, but that statement was added because they actually were allowing children to come to the ceremony itself, but not the reception (for which they had a babysitter hired).

 

[SirDuff]

Amazed Canada hasn't gone back to 21.

Why?

 

[anniemae]

I think adult would be 18, but the standard etiquette is whoever is on the invitation.

If the invitation is addressed to Mr. and Mrs. Jones, then only those two people are invited. If it addressed to The Jones Family, then the whole family is invited. I have never seen anything with "adults only" on an invitation. I would go by who it is addressed to as a rule of thumb.

 

[nkereina]

When I was 18, I still lived with my parents. There were "adult only" weddings that they were invited to where I assumed I was not invited, simply because I was still a "dependent" so to speak. By age of 18, if I was invited, I assume I would get my own invitation or the invite would be addressed to everyone in the house.

 

[Hikergirl]

It is the norm (here) for alcohol to be served at wedding receptions, so if I got an invite that said "adults only" I would assume 18.
If you think you will have issues with people not following etiquette by only RSVPing for the people listed on the inner envelope, I think the idea of writing something to the effect of " we'd love to share our day with everyone but do to space restrictions we have to limit it to those over 18"........ or whatever age you choose.

 

[PlainJane]

Yes, ours was completely kid appropriate, too. Getting married at age 28, though, we counted and the 120 adults we invited had about 60 kids 12 and under between them. So it was about not wanting a third of our guests to be kids, and how crazy that would be. 10-15 kids would have been fine, but we weren't going to pick favorites so just didn't invite any. Three couples did bring a child anyway, though.

Some people just can't comprehend that the rules apply to them. There was one couple we didn't invite because I didn't trust them to not bring their kids and to not make a scene. I still feel kind of bad about it, but I knew the likelihood of them getting into a fight during the wedding was very high, and I also knew they had trouble keeping one of their children out of trouble. It was also a very small wedding. Very close friends and family. So, it's not like we invited everyone we knew and left them out.

 

[mi*vida*loca]

Yes, ours was completely kid appropriate, too. Getting married at age 28, though, we counted and the 120 adults we invited had about 60 kids 12 and under between them. So it was about not wanting a third of our guests to be kids, and how crazy that would be. 10-15 kids would have been fine, but we weren't going to pick favorites so just didn't invite any. Three couples did bring a child anyway, though.

Since we have issues within our family and my XH's family regarding RSVP's (family thinking an invite stating "Smith Family" means you can bring your MIL or SIL and her kids or an invite stating "Mr and Mrs" means you can still bring your kids) we have decided to do an RSVP card like this for my DD's quinceanera......

We will fill in each name on the RSVP card. I'm not against kids and most of our parties have children but we can easily be overrun by LOTS of kids under 10. We will have to draw the line somewhere. We will be picking and choosing who can bring their kids and most likely go by who is close to DD and who is not.

 

[Mizzoufan]

I'd would think it would mean 21 and over. My guess is there will be a bar

 

[tzolkin]

In a technical sense I would assume 18, not 21. I've never heard of alcohol only being served at a reception/party/event if everyone is over 21, so that would really never cross my mind.

But on a wedding invitation it's too vague to have much meaning. The specific family members invited should be included on the invitation to clarify.

I would assume it to mean no children of invitees.

But what if the "children" of the invitees are over 18?
That would make the phrasing "adults only" confusing rather than just saying Mr. & Mrs. ___.

 

[DizBelle]

I would say that if the guest has to attend "with their parents" then they are a "child" that is not invited.

 

[Rockette]

I avoided having an "adults only" reception this August for my wedding. It's a bit open to interpretation on purpose, and I think it's more for maturity's sake.

That said we're having it at a private venue (house) where babysitters will be available.

Wedding receptions, at least where I grew up, are mostly adult venues anyway.

 

[karmic]

I do not think it has anything to do with the presence of alcohol but not wanting uninvited children at the wedding. Over the years there have been many threads on this forum about weddings and children that would get quite heated and there fore very entertaining

 

[Wishing on a star]

I would def. assume 18 years and older.
That is what is considered to be an 'adult'.

I would not think that alcohol would be the factor.
That would be kind of like saying, only those who will be drinking are invited.
Many adults, even 21 and older, might not imbibe.
And many families would allow an 18-20 year old to partake in a drink or two for such an occasion.

I also would think that anyone 18 or older would receive their own invitation, or be mentioned by name on the parent's 'family' invitation.

If the parent's 'family' invitation was to Mr., Mrs, and Family.... adults only... that really is not clear, and does leave a lot up to interpretation.