Just if they want to. They shouldn't be expected to. It might be nice if they offered if the couple don't have a lot of money, but it's not as if a wedding is life and death (though some people certainly act as though it is) and they can always have a simple registery office ceremony if that's all they can afford.
I think it depends on the age of the son/daughter, and whether or not they can afford to pay for the wedding themselves. If the couple are in their 30s and already have a house of their own, then they should pay for it. If they are in their twenties, and just starting out, then the parents should help out. Either way, it should be both sides of the family, not just the daughter's.
I think it depends on the traditions of the families and their views towards marriages. I still know of many couples whose families have paid for the wedding, because that was something they absolutely wanted to do. Similarly, I know many couples who have paid for it all themselves. I think it's one best decided upon by each family, based on their own views, customs and practices.
Years ago it was the Bride's parents who paid, but that ship has long sailed. Now the couple pay, they work, they sometimes live together for years before a wedding, so why should their parents fork out (not like long ago when people married quite young and wouldn't have had the money for a wedding). If they want to contribute, then can, but it would definitely be optional these days.
Since March 2009 the Government in Australia now look at de facto is just about married, as far as a lot of legal issues!
So in this case, really it is up to the couple to pay for the wedding themselves.
They really can't expect parents to do it now.That would be asking way too much.
I don't think parents have such an obligation, especially if the two have already finished their studies. I don't get this mentality. I had a small civil ceremony and I don't feel less "married" for this.
No, I don't think so. The tradition of the bride's family paying for the wedding is an outdated one, I believe. When I got married almost 16 years ago, my husband and I paid for our own wedding. It was a small low key affair which was all we could afford.
I think the original intention of parents paying for weddings was to assist a new couple with the significant financial challenges associated with starting a life-long union, including the celebration of such a major-life event as this. I still think it is a nice gesture for parents to do this within their own means.
However, if is a second wedding, or the couple actually commenced that union years before deFacto-style, then it's a bit like getting married and then suddenly expecting your parents to pay for the wedding years after the event. The ship has already sailed in my view.
But I agree, at the end of the day, it really depends on cultural customs etc - each to their own I guess - and my view is just one.
Depends on how much they want to spend on the wedding. I contributed about $3K to my son's wedding 5 years ago and her parents about the same as my son did have a mortgage and not a lot of money. My daughter recently got married and I contributed about the same amount. Her MIL provided the venue (her home) and cooked the food and I did the decorations. The dress was on Ebay and looked like it was made for her. It is possible to work things out on a budget and I had no problem contributing what I thought was a reasonable amount of money. If either of them had wanted a lavish wedding they would have been on their own!