My in-laws want me to change my wedding menu, just for them

The future bride has asked for advice after her future in-laws were upset over a classic item being left off. 

A woman has taken to Reddit after hitting a crossroads with her in-laws over what food to serve at her wedding.

The woman and her husband-to-be are both foodies and have created a menu with a mix of unique options they both love.

However, his parents are upset they’re not serving any traditional dishes, like steak. Is it wrong for the couple not to change their menu for them?

Want to join the family? Sign up to our Kidspot newsletter for more stories like this.

Image: iStock.

RELATED: My wife told my son to ‘get out of the picture’

“I’m really struggling with the idea of changing things for just a few guests”

“My fiancé and I love food and have worked with our caterer to create a menu we’re really excited about. It includes a mix of options like seafood, pasta, and some vegetarian dishes—basically, things we both love.” she began in the post.

“My future in-laws are extremely traditional eaters and are upset that we’re not serving any “classic meat-and-potatoes” dishes. They’re genuinely great people, but they’re the type who think a meal without a steak is a waste of time.”

The poster said that this is when the discourse started.

“They’ve asked, repeatedly, if we could add a steak option or just “something simple,” and they’ve even hinted at covering the extra cost,” she said.

“Here’s the problem: our menu is already set, and adding another option would mess with the caterer’s timeline and, honestly, with our budget. Plus, this is a day we want to celebrate our way.”

The problem has since expanded to involve her fiance and other family members - but she’s doing her best to stand her ground.

“I told my fiancé I didn’t want to make changes, and he’s supportive, but he did suggest maybe offering to pay for a few “plain” dinners just for them. When I talked to my in-laws, they made it clear they thought I was being selfish by not accommodating them,” she said.

“Some of my family members think I should just let them have their steak, but I’m really struggling with the idea of changing things for just a few guests.”

Introducing our new podcast: Mum Club! Listen and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts so you never miss an episode.

RELATED: I’m not sharing any of my inheritance with my wife

“They can always eat at home”

Many commenters immediately jumped to the woman’s defence, saying that at the end of the day, it’s her wedding - not theirs.

“Are they coming for the wedding or are they coming for the food? Start ignoring them/change the subject when they bring it up. They can always eat at home!” one said.

“You serve them steak and everyone at the wedding will feel snubbed. If they were vegans and wanted a vegan option, that's something I would accommodate (and did for my son's rehearsal dinner). But steak? They aren't going to die without steak.” another added.

“Your wedding is about you and your fiancé. Guests are there to show their support of your union, not to be catered to. So long as you're not being extra (e.g. requiring a weird dress code, challenging guests personal morals/values, or potentionally jeopardizing their health or safety), guests should just go along with what the couple has planned.” said a third.

“Two weeks ago I was the best woman in my cousin’s wedding and we live in the south of Italy so food is a BIG part of weddings lol They went for a more “gourmet” menu and since I’m kind of a picky eater almost every dish had something in it I didn’t like. You know what I did? Pushed aside what I didn’t like (if possible) and only ate what I liked. It didn’t even come to my mind to ask them for a change.” said another, sharing their own perspective.

“Is a few steaks the hill on which you are willing to both die?”

Others, however, said that the couple were being selfish by not accommodating their needs - and the needs of other guests.

“I’m trying to figure out how you set a menu with seafood and pasta knowing half your guests are meat eaters? Rule of thumb is to always have a BASIC option for guests (even chicken)… Your wedding and you can do what you want, but choosing food YOU like for 60 people seems odd, but your wedding and you can do whatever you want…” one said.

“Is a few steaks the hill on which you are willing to both die, and tarnish your relationship with your new family?” said another.

“You are entering into a lifelong relationship at your wedding, not just with your new husband but his family. Would catering (pun fully intended) to their dining habits really be worth the drama you are creating by being so dismissive of something so simple? Let the in-laws eat steak!”

“It is your day and you can serve whatever you want. But as a host, don’t you want your guests to enjoy the meal? If you know your husband’s side of the family have a different preference it would be kind to include an option they’ll like too,” a third agreed.

“You can’t please every one of course. And you don’t know everyone’s tastes, allergies etc.. but you do know about this pretty easy to accommodate preference.”

Some even offered suggestions of a compromise.

“If you provide a steak option to the in-laws, it has to be an option for all the guests. All guests must be treated equally at events,” one commenter began.

“I wouldn’t offer steak as it is pretty darned expensive. You could offer a roast beef meal. This is much more affordable and is offered at most buffet meals. I would think that it could be done as a sit down meal for a wedding also. Pork loin or chicken are also more affordable options.”

“Have two separate dinners for your MIL & FIL,” another suggested.

“In the grand scheme of things, your future husband is backing you, which is how it's supposed to be. So why not just do something that won't impact your budget or catering timeline. Just have two dinners for them, even if they are carryouts.”

Originally published as My in-laws want me to change my wedding menu, just for them