How to politely inform parent that sibling is not invited?

[ConstantlyConfusedMama]

Hi everyone,

Possibly a bit of a contentious topic, but here goes…

We sent out invites for our youngest’s birthday party and on the invites we wrote each child’s name.

One of the parents replied to me quoting both of their children’s names and saying “they” had received the invitation and “they” would love to come to the party.
I found it a bit rude as it wasn’t even like they asked whether they could bring the other child. Also, I am aware that the other child is disruptive and honestly, I just don’t want them spoiling my child’s party.

So, I now have to think of a polite (but assertive) way to reply stating that the sibling is not invited - any idea how to word it?!

“I am sorry for the misunderstanding. The invitation was for the named child only.”

That’s perfect.

As above, short and simple and not sugar coated.

It'd be a different matter if they'd asked, but just inviting the other child is very cheeky and rude imo, so no need to be overly polite in your response to them.

Unfortunately we can't include siblings for this party but we're looking forward to [named child] joining us.

Are they twins?

Thank you.

Yes exactly @VeridicalVagabond, I would have taken a different view if asked. But it just felt very rude!

@SayingwhatIreallythink - no, not twins. The sibling is a year older.

Are any other siblings invited? If not, use Pragmatic’s message. If so, use send’s.

Just be careful of anything that seems to single out this child because of them being disruptive- a bit like ‘no children at weddings’ that turns out to mean ‘not YOUR child, but x,yandz’s are of course welcome’. Something simple and generic and universally true - only named child or only children of a particular age or no siblings.

This, and perhaps add 'if childcare is a problem please feel free to drop and leave invited child if it makes things easier'

Oh if the sibling is older then you needn't feel the slightest. I wouldn't even say "sorry for the misunderstanding" because there was no misunderstanding at all, just cheek.

"Hi Cheekymum - that's great that Named can come. It's a small party though, and she has chosen the guest list herself, so no siblings this time. Hope to see NotNamed another time though!"

We had this with a pair of twins in primary and the other twin would always be dragged along and cause mayhem. (Boy/girl pair so girl dragged to all-boys parties and vice versa - neither enjoyed it.)

Missing the point, but why would the sibling not be invited? What difference does it make?

Budget? Space? Number of children to look after safely? Use your noggin.

Many venues charge per child. Siblings could double the cost of a party.

No need to be rude.

I can think of lots of reasons!

The main one being that the party is limited to a specific amount of children because of space and/or cost.

My DD's birthday party was made better by siblings of her friends attending. The more the merrier - but we didn't have a venue, we just held it in our back garden.

What? You'd expect all siblings of all the invited children to be included by default? That's madness.
If parents choose an open house policy that's up to them - but it's not the norm.
Parents set the parameters and birthday children chooses who to invite within those parameters. Only CFs would expect to bring siblings.

Let them eat cake

Unfortunately we can't include siblings for this party but we're looking forward to [named child] joining us.
This is perfect. Short and to the point.

No need to be rude.

Hardly rude. More like concise. Plus noggin is an adorable word

That's genuinely lovely.

But surely you can see that pattern doesn't fit the majority of situations because of cost, space, planning etc.

SunnyCornishCove Op did say that the sibling child is known for being disruptive - which was quite rude of you to overlook? Use your noggin is an entirely appropriate response to your comment imo.

Why should anyone be expected to include siblings? If you have a party for yourself do people turn up with people you've never met before? Do they assume they can invite extras?

Missing the point, but why would the sibling not be invited?

Because s/he isn't a friend of the birthday child?

Just reply that the invite is for named child only and that siblings are not included. You hope that the parent understands and that you look forward to just the named child attending.

Did you actually read the OP or just the title? It clearly states that the other child is disruptive and she doesn’t want them there. That itself is enough of a reason.

Good for you. This is obviously a completely different scenario… 🤦‍♀️😬🙄