Father Faces Backlash For Banning Daughters From His Wedding After They Plot To Spill Wine On Bride’s Dress

Blended families are never without their challenges, and when it comes to a second marriage, tensions can run high. One father has spent years navigating the rocky relationship between his four daughters and his fiancée, Daniela.

After years of resistance, the girls had recently started to warm up to her, leading the father to believe their relationship was on the mend.

But just before his wedding, the father learned that his daughters had secretly planned to sabotage his fiancée’s wedding dress in what they called a “prank.”

Furious and hurt, he made the tough decision to ban them from the wedding.

It’s understandable that the father in this scenario feels deeply betrayed and uncertain, he’s about to marry someone he cares about, his daughters previously struggled with accepting his fiancée, and now he’s learned of a plan that feels like a direct attack on the relationship he’s building.

The incident, his daughters allegedly planning to spill red wine on his fiancée’s wedding dress, doesn’t merely reflect teenage mischief; it contains a symbolic rejection of their father’s partner and the new family structure.

Research into stepfamily dynamics shows that children in blended families often experience more stress and adjustment issues compared with children in stable biological families.

For example, a longitudinal study found that higher-quality relationships between stepparents and children were linked to fewer internalizing and externalizing problems among youth.

This suggests the father’s daughters may be struggling with the transition, though it doesn’t excuse their behavior.

Furthermore, evidence indicates that children in households with step‑ or half‑siblings may show higher rates of aggression.

That doesn’t mean the father is automatically wrong to ban his daughters from the wedding, but it does suggest there’s more behind the act than simply “bad kids.”

The father’s decision to exclude them is rooted in protecting his fiancée and the integrity of the event, while also signalling that trust had been broken.

Yet from the daughters’ standpoint, and their grandparents’, the ban risks permanent damage to their relationship with him and their stepmother, particularly if they feel they were never given a genuine chance to make amends.

What the father should do now is multiply his efforts to clarify the issue, hold a calm family meeting where he shares exactly why the ban was imposed, invites the daughters to apologise sincerely, and lets them demonstrate changed behavior in clear, measurable ways (e.g., meaningful gestures toward inclusion, rebuilding trust).

At the same time, he should reassure his fiancée and affirm the wedding will proceed with dignity and respect.

If the daughters meet those conditions, he may consider reinstating their attendance, under a modified arrangement (e.g., arriving later, supervised, with expectations), so the daughters aren’t eternally excluded.

Doing so would preserve the wedding’s integrity while leaving the door open for reconciliation.

In the end, the incident is less about the dress or the prank and more about how the father’s new relationship is perceived by his daughters, and how their trust and acceptance must be actively rebuilt.

Here’s the input from the Reddit crowd:

These users were all in agreement, there’s something missing from this picture.

This group wasn’t convinced by the story. They pointed out that the behavior of four daughters and the sister all being adamantly opposed to the fiancée was extreme.

These commenters wanted the OP to be upfront with Daniela and have a serious conversation with the daughters.

This group expressed serious doubt about the whole scenario.

The father is in a difficult position, torn between his loyalty to his daughters and his desire to protect his fiancée from harm.

While his anger and disappointment are understandable, especially after finding out about the planned prank, is banning his daughters from the wedding too harsh?

Could he have handled the situation differently, perhaps with more open communication and consequences? Or was this his only option given the severity of the situation?

What do you think, should he have allowed them to attend, or did he make the right call in keeping them out? Share your thoughts below!