Post # 1
I’m overreacting, right? They offered to pay for our wedding and insisted they wanted us to be happy, choose what we liked, etc. But then came the horrorified face when we said we didn’t want to do a receiving line, we didn’t want a full mass, I chose mis-matched bridesmaids dress styles, and then finally, we’d opted for the wording “Together with their families” on our invitations to handle some awkwardness with my separated parents (one of whom is not very nice/not in my life), only to learn after they hinted and hinted, thay my future in-laws DO want their names on the invitations. I completely get it. You’re footing the bill. But if you want us to have what we want, why insist on this? It’s awkward for me and this piece of paper, formal or not, is going out to our entire family. The prospect of having to walk down the aisle alone is hard enough, nevermind broadcast to our ENTIRE combined families that I’m a bastard and my fiance’s parents are paying for everything. It’s embarrassing and if I’d ever thought it would come to this with invitations, I’d have had the smaller wedding I wanted instead of this gigantic circus for his family!!! ahhggg. Please give me some pointers here.
Post # 3
I don’t really know… are you close enough with your in-laws that you could have that conversation with them? That you feel kind of embarrassed that your parents aren’t playing a larger role, and you feel like the invitation just draws attention to that?
Beyond that I think you need to have a real discussion of what strings are attached to them paying, and then decide from there if it’s worth it.
Post # 4
Well if they are paying for 100% of the wedding I don’t necessarily think it’s appropriate for the invite to be worded “together with their families” which would imply that both families as well as the bride and groom are hosting the event. I do think that if they are truly hosting the entire event they should get credit for it.
Post # 5
I don’t know, I’m of the firm belief that you pay for things for people (or donate to causes) because you want to – not for the satisfaction of getting thanked. So it always strikes me as odd when people insist on being on an invitation at the expense of the other family. That’s just my opinion.
If I were you, I would honestly just sit my Mother-In-Law down and say (more or less) what you said here. “I totally understand why you want to be on the inviation. We are incredibly grateful for your generosity in paying for this wedding. I’m afraid that if we place your name on the invitation and not my family it is broadcasting my family drama and highlighting my hardships with my own parents. I think its very clear that you are hosting, but do can you see how this is really a tight spot for me?”
Can you have the ILs introduced as the “hosts” at the reception? Or have Future Father-In-Law give the welcome? Then everyone will get it, but it doesn’t have to be foiled into stationary.
Post # 6
I think maybe what bothers me (and probably them) is the “together with their families” wording. Maybe if the invitations were worded simply “you are cordially invited to the wedding of…” without any reference to who is hosting it wouldn’t seem misleading? Maybe misleading isn’t the word, but something just feels off about it. Since they are hosting they do deserve to be acknowledged in some way, perhaps in the introductions or by having them welcome the guests would be a good compromise if you don’t feel comfortable putting it in writing.
ETA: And I have to assume they are doing this out of the kindness of their heart and not because they are looking for a thank you. Some donations are made anonymously, others are not, that doesn’t make the intent of the gift any less meaningful in my opinion.
Post # 7
Talk to them and see if you can find some kind of comprimise. I know a lot of people who parents paid but names weren’t on the invites, my Fi and I are paying and we are putting on our parents name, so it depends on the situation.
Post # 8
How exactly do they want the name on their invites? Can you list both families.