Does etiquette require that we invite people's live-in boyfriends/girlfriends to our wedding?

[EnglishTeacher]

I am in the process of finalizing the guest list for our wedding so that I can send out invitations soon. The problem is that our reception venue holds fewer people than I was originally led to believe, and the potential guest list somehow grew since I booked the site.

Unfortunately, this means that we will need to make some cuts to the list, if everyone is to fit in the reception site. We will have to remove some guests from the list, and we will not be able to extend “plus ones” to our single friends. We will, of course, invite the spouse or fiancé of any married or engaged friend. I would like to draw the line there and make a “married or engaged only” rule when it comes to inviting guests. Can I get away with that rule, or do I also need to invite all of our cousins’ live-in boyfriends and girlfriends, even though they are not engaged? Does it partly depend on age or how long they have been together? For example, if I had an aunt who had been living with a partner for 10 years, I would certainly invite the partner; but I am far less inclined to invite my college-aged cousin’s boyfriend whom she has been cohabitating with for a year.

If we had more room at the reception site, none of this would be an issue, but space is limited.

 

[pensmama87]

My understanding is that if the relationship is serious, even if they are not engaged, you should invite the significant other as well. So if they live together or have been together a long time (I’d say a year, maybe?) then they would get an invite.

You could also just not invite the people who are cohabiting. It doesn’t sound like you much care for them, anyway.

We did not invite “plus ones” to our wedding and apparently that’s a rather new thing, anyway.

Keep in mind too that not everyone will come.

 

[Lorelei12]

If we had more room at the reception site, none of this would be an issue, but space is limited. I will admit I somewhat resent the idea of having to cut people whom I would like to be present, to make room for people I’ve never met just because they are living with my cousin, which they shouldn’t be doing anyway (not my business, but still).

This was exactly the position I was in a few years ago. We had space and money limitations, and simply couldn’t invite everyone who was in a relationship, living together or not. We just decided to keep it to spouses and fiancé(e)s, which made everything simpler and wasn’t supposed to offend anyone. I also didn’t want to be in the position of deciding whose relationship was “more important”- was I supposed to invite my cousin’s boyfriend who I never met and she’d been living with him for a short time, or my friend’s boyfriend who she’d been dating for four years? Morally I refused to use “living together” as a yardstick for measuring how serious a relationship was, and in the case above it didn’t make sense anyway.

I will say this offended several people, who did not hesitate to tell us so. We were even confronted at my own bridal shower and threatened by someone who said they wouldn’t attend if they couldn’t bring their significant other. My husband handled that one and told them nicely that we’d be sorry if they didn’t come, but that we were not going to be making changes to the guest list. A few others simply asked us whether we’d forgotten their boyfriends/girlfriends (some of whom we didn’t even know existed…) and were polite when we said we hadn’t.

I wouldn’t do anything differently. We had limitations and did the best thing we knew how to within those parameters, and tried to be fair by not inviting one person’s boyfriend/girlfriend and not the other. I think it’s like most other things with weddings- you’re never going to make everyone happy so just do what you need to do and people can either like it or not.

 

[EnglishTeacher]

My understanding is that if the relationship is serious, even if they are not engaged, you should invite the significant other as well. So if they live together or have been together a long time (I’d say a year, maybe?) then they would get an invite.

That’s what seems to be the rule from what I’ve read, too.

You could also just not invite the people who are cohabiting. It doesn’t sound like you much care for them, anyway.

It is not that I don’t like them, and I don’t mean for it to sound as though I am contemptuous of them, as I am not. Most of the people that I am thinking of, with one or two exceptions on my side of the family, are my fiancé’s relatives, and I don’t really know them well. We do have to invite them, though (the relatives, that is–still deciding on the boyfriends/girlfriends).

We did not invite “plus ones” to our wedding and apparently that’s a rather new thing, anyway.

Keep in mind too that not everyone will come.

That is true, too.

 

[EnglishTeacher]

I am in the process of finalizing the guest list for our wedding so that I can send out invitations soon. The problem is that our reception venue holds fewer people than I was originally led to believe, and the potential guest list somehow grew since I booked the site.

Unfortunately, this means that we will need to make some cuts to the list, if everyone is to fit in the reception site. We will have to remove some guests from the list, and we will not be able to extend “plus ones” to our single friends. We will, of course, invite the spouse or fiancé of any married or engaged friend. I would like to draw the line there and make a “married or engaged only” rule when it comes to inviting guests. Can I get away with that rule, or do I also need to invite all of our cousins’ live-in boyfriends and girlfriends, even though they are not engaged? Does it partly depend on age or how long they have been together? For example, if I had an aunt who had been living with a partner for 10 years, I would certainly invite the partner; but I am far less inclined to invite my college-aged cousin’s boyfriend whom she has been cohabitating with for a year.

If we had more room at the reception site, none of this would be an issue, but space is limited. If we had more room at the reception site, none of this would be an issue, but space is limited. I will admit I somewhat resent the idea of having to cut people whom I would like to be present, to make room for people I’ve never met just because they are living with my cousin, which they shouldn’t be doing anyway (not my business, but still).

 

[BlueEyedLady]

Yes, traditional etiquette is that social units should not be separated. That means married, engaged, or living together. No, you don’t have to invite live in partners (who could force you?), but you will be violating common etiquette standards and your guests will notice. That’s just one of those basic things like thank you cards.

I wouldn’t have attended a wedding that my then live in boyfriend (now husband) wasn’t invited to. We work hard and we wanted to spend our weekends together (still do). Besides, I couldn’t justify spending our money on a gift and travel for a wedding that only one of us was invited to.

 

[Kelfa28]

I would say no and agree with the other two posters.

I was the hammer when it came to our guest list because we had a limited number of people we could invite and since about 70% of the guest list was my husband’s side of the family…it was easier for me to be the bad guy.

It worked out because just about everyone we invited that had a significant other was either married or engaged and there were only three exceptions. Two cousins my husband was very, very close with and my best friend all had long-term, live-in SOs and we invited them all. It was only three extra people we had to make room for and I figured we’d have at least a few other guests send regrets…which we did so the numbers evened out anyway.

We cut friends and family members that we weren’t close to first.

I do recall having one incident that needed to be dealt with. The best man’s brother was invited and was under the impression that he could bring a guest and wanted to bring his new girlfriend. A girlfriend no one, on his side of the family liked and neither my husband, nor I met.
I believe his sisters took care of that for us and told him he wasn’t going to bring this girl to the wedding.
In the end he was a no-show for our wedding.

 

[wcknight]

I am in the process of finalizing the guest list for our wedding so that I can send out invitations soon. The problem is that our reception venue holds fewer people than I was originally led to believe, and the potential guest list somehow grew since I booked the site.

Unfortunately, this means that we will need to make some cuts to the list, if everyone is to fit in the reception site. We will have to remove some guests from the list, and we will not be able to extend “plus ones” to our single friends. We will, of course, invite the spouse or fiancé of any married or engaged friend. I would like to draw the line there and make a “married or engaged only” rule when it comes to inviting guests. Can I get away with that rule, or do I also need to invite all of our cousins’ live-in boyfriends and girlfriends, even though they are not engaged? Does it partly depend on age or how long they have been together? For example, if I had an aunt who had been living with a partner for 10 years, I would certainly invite the partner; but I am far less inclined to invite my college-aged cousin’s boyfriend whom she has been cohabitating with for a year.

If we had more room at the reception site, none of this would be an issue, but space is limited.

Depends on how close the relation is to the parents or the bride and groom. We have such a huge family that even kids or our cousins are not invited, We’ve had one call us up about a significant other, and we just had to put them on hold… we sent out over 250 invites for a restaurant that holds about 220,… many will not make it, but leaving out significant others or distant relatives is low on our priority list,

We even had one who said can a significant other take the place of someone on our guest list who was not coming. We had to tell them no, or not until we hear from just about everyone else. There are a lot of other guests who are more important to us than someone we don’t even know or have never met.

 

[EasterJoy]

This is a tough one, particularly with relatives who are likely to show up with their live-in partner whether you invite them or not. It also puts you on the spot, since it isn’t quite fair to invite both partners in a co-habitating couple while the partners of those waiting until marriage to move in together get left off of the list. Those who would be common law spouses in any jurisdiction are usually treated as spouses for social events, though. I’d say you’re stuck treating a live-in as a fiance, particularly when it is a relative.

I feel for you, because in many families it seems you are stuck with a list of either 30 (immediate family) or it jumps immediately to 300 (because you have to invite every cousin you have as soon as you include your friends from high school and college), particularly if you are getting married in the town where you both went to high school.

One thing I would suggest is to consult with a wedding planner about how many “overbooks” you can figure in. My mom figured that somewhere between 25% and 35% of those invited to a wedding wouldn’t be able to come, especially during “high wedding season.” That number goes down, however, when the list has been pruned more down to those who believe they are in the “command performance” category that need a “better excuse” to miss your big day. Even better than a wedding planner would be a relative who married recently, as he or she would have a good idea of what kind of turnout you can expect from the extended family.

From what I gather, you will not be heartbroken at all if this live-in can’t be at your wedding. This has to be somebody you barely know. What you can do if you feel stuck with inviting them both, however, is to call your cousin and ask her if she and/or her live-in think they’ll be able to come, because your guest list is tight and you’re trying to decide who you have to leave off your list. That gives her an “out” to say “gee, we won’t be able to make it” or “gosh, Jeremy has a conflict” without feeling you’ll be upset about it. Ol’ “Jeremy” might not feel bad about that at all.

 

[Tarpeian_Rock]

Doesn’t etiquette require that an adult - regardless of whether or not there is a live-in relationship - be invited with an escort or guest so that they don’t attend the event alone?

 

[BlueEyedLady]

This is a tough one, particularly with relatives who are likely to show up with their live-in partner whether you invite them or not. **It also puts you on the spot, since it isn’t quite fair to invite both partners in a co-habitating couple while the partners of those waiting until marriage to move in together get left off of the list.**Those who would be common law spouses in any jurisdiction are usually treated as spouses for social events, though. I’d say you’re stuck treating a live-in as a fiance, particularly when it is a relative.

We had a hard limit on the size of our wedding, so we were very rigid about only inviting married/engaged/living together SOs. We found out via my MIL after the invites went out that one of my husband’s cousins had the bolded complaint that we didn’t invite her boyfriend. Her very conservative catholic father told her that of course he wasn’t invited, they were not family. They were doing things the correct way and that as a single woman, she should be proud to show up alone to a family thing where only married and cohabitating partners were invited because that meant that she was presenting herself morally. Now, that cousin was only 20 years old, so who knows if he meant it or if he just didn’t take her college relationship seriously.

We used that as a hard rule because we didn’t want to get in the business of determining which couples were “serious” enough, so we let them tell us. If they presented themselves as a social unit, we went with that. If they didn’t, we acknowledged that choice as well.

 

[EnglishTeacher]

Doesn’t etiquette require that an adult - regardless of whether or not there is a live-in relationship - be invited with an escort or guest so that they don’t attend the event alone?

No, it doesn’t (although I wondered about this myself, from a guest’s perspective, a while back). Any etiquette guide I’ve consulted says that if you wish to and if your space and budget allows, it can be nice gesture, but is not required. Most people will know at least some of the other guests at a wedding anyway and shouldn’t have a problem finding people to talk to.

 

[EnglishTeacher]

This was exactly the position I was in a few years ago. We had space and money limitations, and simply couldn’t invite everyone who was in a relationship, living together or not. We just decided to keep it to spouses and fiancé(e)s, which made everything simpler and wasn’t supposed to offend anyone. I also didn’t want to be in the position of deciding whose relationship was “more important”- was I supposed to invite my cousin’s boyfriend who I never met and she’d been living with him for a short time, or my friend’s boyfriend who she’d been dating for four years? Morally I refused to use “living together” as a yardstick for measuring how serious a relationship was, and in the case above it didn’t make sense anyway.

EasterJoy:

It also puts you on the spot, since it isn’t quite fair to invite both partners in a co-habitating couple while the partners of those waiting until marriage to move in together get left off of the list.

Yes, this and this were very much my reasoning. You have to draw a line somewhere, and I strongly prefer to draw it at “married and engaged.” I hesitate to draw it at “living together” both for moral reasons and because it is not fair to those who are in a relationship but not planning to live together until marriage.

 

[1ke]

There are no rules. With wedding invitations, family, friends, and feelings, it’s the* kobayashi maru*-- no win scenario.

Do what you are able to, guest-wise, and be prepared for others to be upset no matter what you do. Your limit is your limit. If you want to invite fewer people so that those you do invite can bring a guest, then do so. If you’d rather have more of the people you care about invited sans guest, then do that.

But either way, someone’s feelings will get hurt… even the person you haven’t seen in 15 years, the 23rd cousin twice removed, etc.

 

[EnglishTeacher]

I feel for you, because in many families it seems you are stuck with a list of either 30 (immediate family) or it jumps immediately to 300 (because you have to invite every cousin you have as soon as you include your friends from high school and college), particularly if you are getting married in the town where you both went to high school.

Yes, has pretty much been our situation. I am excited to see everyone, but it’s more difficult to draw the limits than I thought it would be.

One thing I would suggest is to consult with a wedding planner about how many “overbooks” you can figure in. My mom figured that somewhere between 25% and 35% of those invited to a wedding wouldn’t be able to come, especially during “high wedding season.” That number goes down, however, when the list has been pruned more down to those who believe they are in the “command performance” category that need a “better excuse” to miss your big day. Even better than a wedding planner would be a relative who married recently, as he or she would have a good idea of what kind of turnout you can expect from the extended family.

Yes, we are trying to figure out how much we can “overbook.” I can’t afford a wedding planner, but have been consulting with other family who got married within the last few years.

 

[EasterJoy]

Yes, has pretty much been our situation. I am excited to see everyone, but it’s more difficult to draw the limits than I thought it would be.

Yes, we are trying to figure out how much we can “overbook.” I can’t afford a wedding planner, but have been consulting with other family who got married within the last few years.

Your relatives will probably have a better idea than a wedding planner would have, anyway. They know the actual “target group” better, particularly if they are roughly as close to the relatives in question as you are.

 

[EnglishTeacher]

Yes, traditional etiquette is that social units should not be separated. That means married, engaged, or living together. No, you don’t have to invite live in partners (who could force you?), but you will be violating common etiquette standards and your guests will notice. That’s just one of those basic things like thank you cards.

I wouldn’t have attended a wedding that my then live in boyfriend (now husband) wasn’t invited to. We work hard and we wanted to spend our weekends together (still do). Besides, I couldn’t justify spending our money on a gift and travel for a wedding that only one of us was invited to.

I can definitely understand that perspective. But as far as etiquette goes, people living together before marriage has become common only in the last 30-40 years, so I am not sure that it is an issue of “traditional” etiquette, per se. It is more a matter of attempting to apply traditional etiquette to a non-traditional situation, and it seems to me that one could go either way.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

I can definitely understand that perspective. But as far as etiquette goes, people living together before marriage has become common only in the last 30-40 years, so I am not sure that it is an issue of “traditional” etiquette, per se. It is more a matter of attempting to apply traditional etiquette to a non-traditional situation, and it seems to me that one could go either way.

According to both Miss Manners and Emily Post, it’s a pretty hard and fast rule. Like I said, you certainly can exclude live-ins, but it will get out and people even passingly familiar with etiquette will judge you for the faux pas. It’s your decision, but it is a trade-off.

emilypost.com/weddings/planning-your-wedding/158-wedding-guest-list-faqs

uexpress.com/miss-manners/2004/10/17/is-it-rude-to-exclude

 

[Book_Worm]

It is definitely very rude not to invite both partners of a co-habitating couples to social engagements. This is not a new rule; it has always been assumed that people who are in serious, long-term relationships are invited as a couple. Where they live has no bearing on the issue.

According to etiquette, the correct way to plan a wedding is to create your guest list and then make the arrangements that will accommodate all your guests and fit within your budget.

While I usually agree with Easter Joy’s posts, her estimation of declines is a little high IMO. When we were planning DD’s wedding, the number we were told was “safe” was 10%. Ours was 2%.

 

[truetofaith]

I can definitely understand that perspective. But as far as etiquette goes, people living together before marriage has become common only in the last 30-40 years, so I am not sure that it is an issue of “traditional” etiquette, per se. It is more a matter of attempting to apply traditional etiquette to a non-traditional situation, and it seems to me that one could go either way.

The ‘rule breakers’ are changing everything in our society. They want to have all the benefits of marriage without the responsibility.