Poll

You're holding a formal event, for which you have invited social units (married/engaged/living together) together, but others who do not fall into those catagories alone.  After the invites are sent one of your solo guests becomes engaged. Your invites go

Leave the guest list alone.
Extend an invitaion to the fiencee.
Send an invitaion to fiencee, and hope they don't realise they wern't initally invited, if their partener hasn't RSVP'd.
Send an invitaion to fiencee, and hope they don't realise they wern't initally invited, if the RSVP date hasn't past, even if partner has responded.
The unavoidable other, plese explain.

Author Topic: Hypothietical, a change to a socail unit post invitaion.  (Read 5820 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

camlan

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 8505
Re: Hypothietical, a change to a socail unit post invitaion.
« Reply #15 on: November 05, 2012, 04:56:52 PM »
There's really no reason for anyone to feel snubbed or offended. As far as the hosts knew, they weren't in a committed relationship that required extending the social unit rule to them. But that's also why I'd call or invite them in person--tone of voice says so much. "We had no idea! We are so hoping s/he can come! We'd love to meet him/her!" said with gushing enthusiasm says so much more than a second invitation dropped into the mail.

How do you phrase it if you did know the fiance/e when they were just the girl/boyfriend?

If I had known they were in a serious relationship and not living together because of distance, money or the like, I'd have invited the other person.

If I had not known how serious the relationship was, i.e. that getting engaged was likely to happen soon, I'd go with something like, "Susie, congratulations on the engagement! I had no idea things were so serious with you and Rick! Of course, he's invited to BigFormalEvent now, too! Can't wait to see both of you!"

The message that I'd hope to be sending is that Susie is important enough in my life to get invited to the big, formal event. And now that Rick is engaged to her and is an important part of her life, he's invited too. This supposes, of course, that Rick is a distant enough acquaintance that I wouldn't have invited him on his own. But his status has now changed. Susie would hopefully understand that. And if she doesn't, well, I'd have done the right thing. Susie can accept that or be upset. Not my call.
Nothing is impossible, the word itself says, “I’m possible!” –Audrey Hepburn


lowspark

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3669
Re: Hypothietical, a change to a socail unit post invitaion.
« Reply #16 on: November 06, 2012, 08:16:37 AM »
I had to vote other because, well, I can't imagine ever extending an invitation to someone in a rel@tionship serious enough that an engagement was pending and not including their SO.  Sure by strict etiquette its allowed, but by my personal code of conduct its not. YMMV

I suppose if I was in the situation though, I would immediately get on the phone, congratulate the person and say "of course please bring your fiance along to [event]!"

This. Exactly. I most likely would have invited the SO in the first place, and if that weren't the case, I'd pick up the phone and extend the invitation verbally at the same time as extending my felicitations.

I imagine that there's a 99% chance that regardless of the venue, there's a way to squeeze in one more person.

LifeOnPluto

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 6450
    • Blog
Re: Hypothietical, a change to a socail unit post invitaion.
« Reply #17 on: November 08, 2012, 09:26:07 PM »
I had to vote other because, well, I can't imagine ever extending an invitation to someone in a rel@tionship serious enough that an engagement was pending and not including their SO.  Sure by strict etiquette its allowed, but by my personal code of conduct its not. YMMV

I suppose if I was in the situation though, I would immediately get on the phone, congratulate the person and say "of course please bring your fiance along to [event]!"

This. Exactly. I most likely would have invited the SO in the first place, and if that weren't the case, I'd pick up the phone and extend the invitation verbally at the same time as extending my felicitations.

I imagine that there's a 99% chance that regardless of the venue, there's a way to squeeze in one more person.

I agree with this as well. It would have to be a whirlwind courtship or something, for me not to have invited my friend's partner in the first place. 

I would also definitely extend an invitation to the new fiance, and do my very best to fit him in, etc.

And if the said new fiance felt "snubbed" that he hadn't been invited in the first place, that's entirely on him (keeping in mind that I'd only NOT invite short-term/casual partners).

jedikaiti

  • Swiss Army Nerd
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2670
  • A pie in the hand is worth two in the mail.
Re: Hypothietical, a change to a socail unit post invitaion.
« Reply #18 on: November 09, 2012, 07:07:52 PM »
I had to vote other because, well, I can't imagine ever extending an invitation to someone in a rel@tionship serious enough that an engagement was pending and not including their SO.  Sure by strict etiquette its allowed, but by my personal code of conduct its not. YMMV

I suppose if I was in the situation though, I would immediately get on the phone, congratulate the person and say "of course please bring your fiance along to [event]!"

This. Exactly. I most likely would have invited the SO in the first place, and if that weren't the case, I'd pick up the phone and extend the invitation verbally at the same time as extending my felicitations.

I imagine that there's a 99% chance that regardless of the venue, there's a way to squeeze in one more person.

I agree with this as well. It would have to be a whirlwind courtship or something, for me not to have invited my friend's partner in the first place. 

I would also definitely extend an invitation to the new fiance, and do my very best to fit him in, etc.

And if the said new fiance felt "snubbed" that he hadn't been invited in the first place, that's entirely on him (keeping in mind that I'd only NOT invite short-term/casual partners).

Likewise. With most people I'd want at my wedding, odds are that if they're in a relationship that's sufficiently established enough to get engaged between the save-the-dates and the invites, or even between the invites and the wedding, then they were probably sufficiently established enough to be invited together in the first place.

That said, I do know that there are people out there who think that if you're not engaged within 6 months of the first date (or being introduced, or other arbitrary time period), then there's something wrong, and can therefore go from totally unattached to ordering the cake in the time it takes most of my friends & family to start thinking about maybe moving in together and/or popping the question. Barring those who prefer their relationships to go like a romantic comedy on fast forward, or an unusually long time between the STDs, the invitations, and the wedding, I tend to think that any couple sufficiently established to get engaged anytime soon is sufficiently established to be invited together.
What part of v_e = \sqrt{\frac{2GM}{r}} don't you understand? It's only rocket science!

"The problem with re-examining your brilliant ideas is that more often than not, you discover they are the intellectual equivalent of saying, 'Hold my beer and watch this!'" - Cindy Couture

SpikeMichigan

  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 64
Re: Hypothietical, a change to a socail unit post invitaion.
« Reply #19 on: November 12, 2012, 09:50:30 AM »


    Like others have said, it would be unlikely I wouldn't invite a good friend without their partner if they were serious (providing this is a somewhat formal affair) - with a few exceptions, my friends SO's are kind of my friends too.

   However, lets say you for all intents and purposes thought your friend was single, until you hear she has met someone, fallen in love and gotten engaged (or even married) in a 'True Romance' situation. Does their new SO still merit an invite on the social unit rule? Adding hypothetical to hypothetical I know, but I'd be interested to hear.

bopper

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 12214
Re: Hypothietical, a change to a socail unit post invitaion.
« Reply #20 on: November 15, 2012, 09:12:33 PM »
if you can, just call the guest and say "I just heard that you got engaged!  I wanted to let you know that Darling is invited too.  I can't wait to hear about the proposal!"

LadyR

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 978
    • Musings of A Pinterest Mom
Re: Hypothietical, a change to a socail unit post invitaion.
« Reply #21 on: November 24, 2012, 03:16:15 AM »
When i got married, we decided no "and guest" but friend in established relationships could bring their partner, regardless of living situation. My friend Jake was single when we made up our guest list, but at some point between then and him receivng  the invation, he had begun a relationship. He asked if he could bring her, i said no, as our numbers ere really tight and it was a new relationship and i hadn't met her. He was ok with it. Flash forward three years later and they're engaged and we think she's wonderful. We really regret not extending the invite to her. In this case, the couple is already established and engaged, i'd definitely extend the invite.


Winterlight

  • On the internet, no one can tell you're a dog- arf.
  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 9665
Re: Hypothietical, a change to a socail unit post invitaion.
« Reply #22 on: November 27, 2012, 11:31:22 AM »
I think I'd do my best to invite the partner unless there was just no way (a week before my wedding when there is no room left.)
If wisdom’s ways you wisely seek,
Five things observe with care,
To whom you speak,
Of whom you speak,
And how, and when, and where.
Caroline Lake Ingalls

bah12

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 5050
Re: Hypothietical, a change to a socail unit post invitaion.
« Reply #23 on: November 29, 2012, 12:31:35 PM »
This is such a hard question to answer because it is so situational.  First, I can't imagine that I would distinguish  between serious relationships based on whether or not a couple was living together.  So, I'd either invite married/engaged couples only or couples in serious enough relationships that they would be a considered a social unit regardless of their living situation.  And more likely the latter would be my default.

As for what to do when a couple does become engaged after invites went out, it would also depend on how close the event is and whether or not I could reasonably accommodate another guest.  I don't think the snubbed/not snubbed thing is even an issue as I would imagine if one half of a serious couple was invited to an event, that the partner would realize that they weren't invited.  If the rules were acceptable to them before they got engaged (and they are acceptable rules), then surely a change of status and a subsequent invite wouldn't suddenly offend them.

So, assuming that I could reasonably accommodate another person, I would call them up and congratulate them on their engagement and ask if they'd like to come to my event.

kareng57

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 12230
Re: Hypothietical, a change to a socail unit post invitaion.
« Reply #24 on: November 29, 2012, 12:37:37 PM »
I can kind of see it happening, if the guest is someone that the HC doesn't have frequent contact with - an out-of-town cousin, perhaps.  Some people are fairly quiet about relationships, even when they've become quite serious.

I think this is one of the pitfalls of sending invitations out too early - peoples' life circumstances do change.

bah12

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 5050
Re: Hypothietical, a change to a socail unit post invitaion.
« Reply #25 on: November 29, 2012, 01:12:29 PM »
I can kind of see it happening, if the guest is someone that the HC doesn't have frequent contact with - an out-of-town cousin, perhaps.  Some people are fairly quiet about relationships, even when they've become quite serious.

I think this is one of the pitfalls of sending invitations out too early - peoples' life circumstances do change.

If this is the case, then I think it's even easier:

"Congratulations on your engagement!  Gosh, we haven't talked in so long...I'm sorry for not even realizing that all this was going on.  Please bring your fiance to my upcoming wedding.  I'd love to meet him!"

camlan

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 8505
Re: Hypothietical, a change to a socail unit post invitaion.
« Reply #26 on: November 29, 2012, 02:16:18 PM »
I can kind of see it happening, if the guest is someone that the HC doesn't have frequent contact with - an out-of-town cousin, perhaps.  Some people are fairly quiet about relationships, even when they've become quite serious.

I think this is one of the pitfalls of sending invitations out too early - peoples' life circumstances do change.

I found out one brother had a girlfriend when he announced his engagement. Of course, he was stationed on another continent at the time, which is sort of an excuse--but he hadn't mentioned her at all in phone calls or letters or while at home visiting, not for the four years they'd known each other. Another brother showed up at a family wedding with a lovely young lady as his "plus one" that none of us had ever heard of, let alone met. They were engaged four months later. They'd known each other for 10 years and been in a relationship for at least five. That brother lived about 500 miles from the rest of the family.

Some people just really kept serious relationships to themselves until they have to make them public.
Nothing is impossible, the word itself says, “I’m possible!” –Audrey Hepburn


Soprych

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 135
Re: Hypothietical, a change to a socail unit post invitaion.
« Reply #27 on: December 15, 2012, 12:31:38 AM »
Perhaps if I  organizing a reception where the financial aspect determined my guest list with little to no wiggle room and a post invitation social unit occurred I would still use the same financial scrutiny.  If I had known that the single was a couple, would they have been on the guest list?  If finances meant I could not have invited two people in the first place I don;t know how I could and the new fiance. 

If however I was organizing a reception where I was focused primarily on rules like only Relatives living in state or my best friends from Highschool or first cousins only, I would include the new addition.

CluelessBride

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1647
Re: Hypothietical, a change to a socail unit post invitaion.
« Reply #28 on: December 17, 2012, 11:28:02 AM »
This is one of those situations where I think the answer varies depending on which side is asking. If you (general) are the one hosting the event, I think it's gracious to extend the invitation if at all possible. Finances might be a shaky excuse, because a host should be budgeting for all of their invited guests to accept in case they do, and (at least in my social circle) 100% attendance is unlikely at all but very small events. However, depending on the timing of the social unit change, it might be a logistical nightmare to add a plate or re-do a seating chart. Or the host might have an issue with the +1 and would have opted to not invite the original guest if it meant also inviting the +1.

So if you (general) are the one invited and have a social unit change after receiving the invite, I think etiquette requires that you graciously accept that it may not be possible to invite your new other half. Or to graciously accept an extension of the original invitation to include your SO without making it into a "thing".


gellchom

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2106
Re: Hypothietical, a change to a socail unit post invitaion.
« Reply #29 on: January 12, 2013, 06:06:59 PM »
I think that the etiquette rule is that you must invite the new fiance/e.  Don't worry about them being offended because they didn't make the cut on their own.  It's unfortunate if they do, but that's life.  Now that they are getting married, they will both get invited to many things that they wouldn't on their own!

I, too, can think of plenty of situations -- geographically distant cousins came to mind immediately for me, too -- where I wouldn't have invited even a fairly serious boy/girlfriend in the first place.  Even if I happened to know how serious the relationship was, and likely I wouldn't, for, say, every one of all my cousins' children, everyone has guest list limits.  Furthermore, particularly in the case of relatives, it can put unwarranted pressure on the relationship to invite boy/girlfriends, especially where it would mean expensive travel.  So be careful.