Birthday dinner issues.

[KrisTheGardener]

Scenario: My sister has four children, all in their 20s. DC #3 has a birthday next week and has asked for the family to go out to dinner. DC #3 has said she doesn't want to invite DC #1. My sister (the mother) is paying for the dinner. Is it reasonable to exclude one sibling out of four knowing the sibling will be hurt terribly? My sister isn't sure if she should deny the request for a birthday dinner or not just to avoid the situation. It's their birthday but the mother doesn't like being part of the exclusion, which she is if she throws the dinner and has to not invite someone, knowing their older child will probably ask if there is a dinner. It's over a basic philosophical disagreement between them, not something serious that would make it understandable. How would you handle it?

DC3 is asking for a birthday dinner to be childish/provocative.amd irritate/punish DC1.
They do not want a "family dinner" but an "exclusionary dinner".

That's a hard no from me.
We just do not facilitate/ encourage divisions within the family.

On that basis, i would offer DC3 dinner with parents only in a fancier restaurant that is a bit of an experience.
Or an alternate gift.

A dinner with just the parents could be a good suggestion. Respects DD3's wish while not singling anyone out.

I think that excluding DC1 is supporting DC3's view or at least appearing to do so.DC3 can have a party and invite whom she likes and DM can even give her some money for it if she wishes but she cannot go out for a meal and pay for the occasion whilst excluding one DC in this way. It would be hurtful and perpetuate the issue. The DC are allowed their views and to disagree of course but dragging the whole family in to this and allowing lying is quite wrong imo.Your poor sister having to bear the weight of the sister's disagreement in this way.

@GreatGateauxsby I like this idea .

Is that it!?

There is absolutely no way as a parent I would get involved in their sibling rivalry. It would seem like she was taking sides with child 3 by excluding child 1 from an event she is hosting and could ruin her own relationship with child 1.

If I was paying for family dinner, the family would be invited. DD3 can do her own dinner with who she likes otherwise.

DD1 was set straight by her mother at the time. It's hard to apologise for something you don't even know is a problem for someone. DD1 may have forgotten the passing remark.
Of course it's easy to "forget" something nasty you've said. Or be so oblivious to the underlings that you can't possibly see that what you said is a problem. So, did DD1 apologise only to her mother or did she also apologise to DC3?

She is actually very generous and caring. yet she doesn't seem really caring about her sister does she? Seems more like she's caring about things she cares about and the rest is fair game.

You clearly have some projection going on here. DD3 can give out just as well as DD1 in the reverse direction. DD1 just gets past it. DD1 is making way more effort than DD3 with a relationship. You don't know these people but seem determined that DD3 is a saint and DD1 is just all round mean. Neither are perfect.

Jeez there has to be more to this or this is the stupidest thing I've heard as a reason to hold a grudge for 3 years. Your sister does need to get involved as it's her children, her family. Why has she not told dd3 to grow up and tell her sister she's upset with her? How can dd1 put things right if dd3 won't tell her what's wrong. Yeah dd1 gave an opinion that wasn't liked but it's excessive in response. If I was your sister I would tell dd3 that I wouldn't be pulled into her argument and that she pays for everyone or noone. I would also say Iif she does go ahead then dd2 needs to be told so she can decide to not go if she feels like she's picking sides. I would be fuming to be thrown into the middle of that without knowing as it's definitely going to highlight and enforce the rift. Also dd1 will think her mum's taking sides

DD1 is making way more effort than DD3 with a relationship.

Leaving aside the meal issue, I don't think DD3 is really doing anything wrong here. It sounds like she doesn't want a relationship with her sibling. That's fine, why push it, why must people be close just because they're siblings? I'm not close to mine - no falling out, just very different people who don't enjoy each other's company.

It's harder when DD3 is trying to drag their mother into it with the birthday dinner. But in general, no one should feel obligated to carry on a sibling relationship if they don't want to.

I do agree and I think that's why it's a dilemma. Siblings have a right to not have a relationship with their siblings. Just because they have the same parent doesn't mean they have anything in common and they have the right to choose that. The problem is the way they are going about it and the position they are putting their mother in. It's fine to not want your sibling at your birthday. It's not fine to ask someone to lie to one of their other children. If you're paying for it it's easier to make that decision and you have to own it. If your mother is paying for it, you're asking her to exclude one of her children and interfering in their relationship.

It's almost certainly not just about this. Not saying that one is right and one is wrong, just sounds like the straw that broke the camel's back. Dp's siblings didn't speak for a few years over the portion size at a dinner. Of course the real disagreement had been going on for years before that.

Your sister should absolutely not take sides or exclude one. She will lose her own relationship with her daughters that way. Silence hasn't made anything better so far, so she might want to consider it now being her place to say something to dd1 and have it out in the open. It is then up to dd1 what she does with the information.

From what I've seen over the years, both sides have very strong and set opinions on a range of things. DD1 has just been better at letting it go when they don't agree. The comment on the course of study was just what came up when the general topic came up. It was the issue nominated by DD3 but I suspect it's more to do with their strong opposing positions on a range of things. DD1 is more likely to laugh it off. DD3 can be like a dog with a bone.

Absolutely not what the mum should do. What kind if mother would willingly exclude her one child to appease the other acting like a brat. Esp if mum is paying for it. She needs to say to dc 3 either dc1 comes or to cancel the meal.