Every Party Needs a Pooper....

DEAR ABBY: Our family, consisting of our three children, their spouses, our grandchildren and great-grandchildren, have occasional gatherings to celebrate special events. My husband's 90th birthday is this summer, and the immediate family will come here, some from faraway locations.

My daughter-in-law, "Janie," who lives 2,000 miles away, has felt for years that her children from previous marriages (who don't know us) should be included at these events. They live within 100 miles of our home and could attend if invited. Our relationship with Janie has been generally cordial and affectionate. She will be visiting her children at their homes the week of the birthday. If we exclude her kids from our celebration, she will feel insulted and resentful.

How obligated should we feel to bow to Janie's demands and include four additional adults and a young child to our party? My husband becomes upset and confused by large groups and noisy children. -- CORNERED ON THE EASTERN SHORE

DEAR CORNERED: Your husband's comfort and sense of well-being must come first. If he becomes agitated by large groups and noisy children, you must explain to Janie that no "strangers" can be introduced into the mix and why. Do not allow anyone to lay a guilt trip on you for advocating for him. When Janie sees your husband, I am sure she will understand.

Hm. I agree with Abby that the birthday boy's "comfort and sense of well-being must come first." But I have my doubts about the hostess' motives. If her husband "becomes upset and confused by large groups and noisy children," why in God's name would they choose to celebrate HIS birthday with "three children, their spouses, our grandchildren and great-grandchildren," each generation presumably larger than the one before it (3 children, 9 grandchildren, 27 great-grandchildren, etc.)?

To me it seems thoughtless, and it also shows that this woman is less interested in her husband's comfort than she is in explicitly EXCLUDING some folks she doesn't care to invite. Or it just hasn't occurred to her (but should) that "family" still counts as "people." When my grandpa was in his later years, ONE small child, or several adults, was more than enough: he was happy to see everyone, but an afternoon of visiting was way too much for him. Reason enough not to invite 5 strangers? Yes. But also reason enough not to have a "party" at all. The hostess seems oblivious to her husband's comfort, except when it is convenient for her.

When the party is likely 20+, it seems really petty to look for reasons NOT to include an additional 5, especially since most likely they'd keep to themselves and spend time with their mom.

If the party is lavish enough that adding 4.5 heads would really be a hardship, then I think the whole idea is ill-conceived. If it's an informal gathering I can't see how it would possibly make any difference. Unless everyone at the party is going to sit in a circle around great-grandpa and have him count heads over and over, the persnickety hostess is the only one who's even going to notice the extra guests--except for their mom, who probably sees her kids once a year (or less), and will be thrilled. I say let 'em come on over. But only after seriously re-thinking the entire party.

As a postscript, I think it's kind of lame that "for years" their daughter-in-law, with whom they have a "cordial and affectionate relationship" has wanted to invite her children, who live nearby, to these events, and yet still they "do not know any of us." Why does this woman need advice when clearly she's been adept at keeping these people out of her parties for years? If they'd been warmer and more welcoming to their STEP-GRANDCHILDREN in the past, this party wouldn't even be an issue--they'd be family.

F-O-B knows best?

Carolyn's column from yesterday felt remarkably familiar to me.......:

Hi, Carolyn:

My brother's daughter is getting married. He called me last night to "get my thoughts" on whether my stepdaughters should be invited to the wedding, because he "didn't want them to feel obligated." I was stunned and my husband was incredulous.

Lots of history here, but I'm going to condense it. I have been happily married to their dad for almost 20 years, and while they didn't live with us, I love my stepdaughters as my own children. When the older daughter married, my brother and all of his adult children attended except one.

We live in a different state and are not close, but have a superficial "friendly" brother/sister relationship that has been contentious at times.

I totally get that wedding guest lists are maddening. But I feel my brother put me on the spot. His "obligation" reasoning sounds more like, "Will you give me permission to not invite them?"

Flustered, I told him I thought my stepdaughters' feelings would be hurt if they weren't invited.

I want to tell him that I thought he was insensitive. Or do I let it lie and not create more wedding stress? I can't help feeling that my brother doesn't see my stepdaughters as true family. Whew. I'm in paralysis here.

S.

Clearly, there's history. But the surest way to keep half-century-old grudges alive is to make them the lens through which you view everything your brother says or does.

Guest lists for weddings are maddening: Inclusion costs are prohibitive; exclusion costs are wrenching. Exploring whether farther-flung relatives care about being invited is one logical, if not quite mannerly, approach. So, Brother calls Sister to feel out her family's interest.

This, at least, is how someone without your history views your brother's question. And flustered as you were, your response was exactly what the situation demanded: honest and clear. "They care." A successful transaction completed.

Your stepdaughters are your real family, regardless of what (you think) your brother thinks. It may not come naturally to drop your dukes and just take people's words at face value, but that kind of stress reduction is worth practicing until you've got it down.

I think Carolyn's right that this woman (though her reaction is certainly understandable), will save everyone (including herself) a lot of grief if she does her best NOT to see this as evidence that her brother doesn't and never has and never will truly consider her stepddaughters "real" family. I seriously doubt that's the case.

I'm working through the "maddening" experience of wedding guest lists myself, and recently went through this exact scenario. Both of my parents included their first cousins on the guest list. I know and love a couple of these folks, and certainly want to include them. Others, I can count the times I've met them in my life on one hand. One, in particular, I don't think I would know if I saw him on the street. When our guest list needed to be cut by 50+ people, I was hesitant to just make cuts and announce that I was making them. I sent the list and the numbers to my parents and sort of assumed they'd come to the same conclusions I came to.

Instead, my dad got on the phone, calling his aunt and uncle to see whether their son (the cousin I haven't seen in 15 years, and hadn't even seriously put on my list) and his girlfriend would be likely to make the trek from out of state to the wedding. They called HIM and he said he'd be DELIGHTED. So now what would have been an understandable decision on my part--I don't know this person from Adam--would now be a snub, and instead of reducing the guest list, we increased it. By two. Not to mention I was mortified that it would look like I sent my dad out to pre-un-invite obscure relatives.

In short, this isn't about the dad trying to exclude the stepdaughters. On the contrary, it's likely about him trying to INCLUDE them in a strange, too-logical-for-comfort-or-etiquette way (is this why women do most wedding and party planning?)

My guess is the bride doesn't feel close to her aunt's stepdaughters. If they never lived with her aunt, and the aunt and FOB aren't close anyway, they likely weren't raised as cousins. If they're adults, they're likely to have serious partners...depending on how many of them there are, this could mean inviting anywhere from 4 to 8 or more extra people. I've found the generational divide to be a fairly reasonable way of limiting the guest list (i.e., inviting my parents' friends, but not their children). Bride probably wanted to cut the stepdaughters not because they're steps, but because she doesn't know them well and because the generational boundary is a natural one. FOB probably didn't feel comfortable with that and wanted to feel it out.

Still uncomfortable for everyone, and the bride, if she knows about the phone call, is probably embarrassed. But I don't think it's a slight from the FOB--instead, it's probably an indicator that he cares and DOESN'T want to slight anyone. Although I don't think this is the best way to handle it, his intentions were most likely good. I agree with Carolyn: the sister gave a straightforward answer, and I think that's the best thing she could do in this situation. Bringing it up again as a bone to pick with the brother doesn't seem useful, and I think reads more into the phone call than was meant to be implied.

Eloquent Amy: Wordsmith of the Awkward Moment

I've written before about how one concrete and vital way that advice columnists can give real help to people they don't know, and don't know much about, is to use their knack for the vernacular to provide a script--a neutral, polite, and effective one--for the painful and awkward moments that leave many of us speechless. Amy had a great one today.

The issue is a grandmother who obviously favors her biological grandchildren over her step-grandchilren and shows it with the number and type of gifts she gives. This is an issue that Carolyn encounters all the time. I've seen it addressed less by Amy, but the words she gives today for explaining to the kids are, I think, resonant and just right. (I should note that this issue may be of particular importance to Amy these days: this summer she re-married, building a fairly large blended family with her daughter and her husband's several children).

Amy's response also speaks to another issue Carolyn has addressed a lot lately: what to do when a grandparent shows their imperfections, to the detriment of children or family? Carolyn recommends that, except in situations of abuse, it is valuable for children to know even their most "difficult" family members, to appreciate people as complex, multi-faceted beings, and to be loved by as many people as possible--even those who may clash with mom and dad or show their love in atypical ways. I appreciate that Amy doesn't say "tell Grandma to treat the kids equally or she'll never see them again because you can't trust her to respect your family's rules."

Rather, she gives the mom the tools to equip her kids to recognize and adjust to unfairness in the world, without losing their sense of self and self confidence:

Dear Disappointed: You and your husband have already tried to deal with this in a straightforward and honest way by talking directly to his mother about this. That's the best response to her behavior.

Your kids are old enough to discuss this with you, so, in advance of the next gift-giving occasion your husband should take the lead by saying, "Grandma seems to enjoy giving lopsided gifts. I'm sure you've noticed this. I am not happy that she doesn't treat you all the same and have asked her to change, but she refuses. I guess she's really set in her ways. This embarrasses me, but it shouldn't embarrass you. Please try not to feel bad about what you do — or don't — receive, and always remember that we love you equally.

Grandma just can't seem to adjust to our new family as well as you all have."

To the point, neutral, supportive of the kids, and acknowledging grandma's bad behavior without criminalizing her. Go Amy!

**Reading again....I guess it does criminalize Grandma a bit: she "enjoys" giving lopsided gifts and "refuses" to change. I think it's right to let your kids know that you're aware of and don't agree with or support the disparity--but what do you think about the tone? Is something like "Grandma can't seem to understand" or "Grandma doesn't get why this is so important to us..." just as functional, or do we go with the blunter but harsher "grandma refuses to do anything about it"?