Birthday party dilema - what to do with multiples?

[Brooke]

Rebekah goes to school with a set of quads (Amber, Ashley, Braden, Bradley) and a set of twins (Gabby and Bella).

When I asked her who she wants to invite to her party, she lists 4 kids in her class - Kelli, Cole, David, and Amber.

We're thinking of having a Build-a-Bear party so it will be priced per kid and the minimum is 6 kids. I was trying to keep it to Rebekah and 5 others.

So the question is - If Rebekah wants to invite Amber (one of the quads), I should probably invite all 4, right?

[Jayne]

No. I don't think so. My friend has twins and she is one of those people that won't let one go if the other isn't invited. That really upsets me. They are 10 and this is still the case. To me you invite who Rebekah is friends with. Let the mother make the decision but to me children have their own personalities and their own friends. You wouldn't invite the brother and sister of a child so why the twin to me that is the same.

Jayne

[Bev]

I agree with Jayne.

You can always tell the Mom that you have to limit guests and that when you asked Rebekah she said she wants Amber to be one of the children to come but not the rest and you aren't sure how the Mom feels about excluding the others but that you would understand if she doesn't want Amber to go alone. You can also say Ashley can come but you don't think the boys would enjoy themselves, then you would have 6 and Amber and Ashley would both be able to go if you don't want to split the girls up.

[JustJen]

I don't think so either. I think it is perfectly fine to invite just the one that Rebekah is closest to.


I think Bev's idea is a good one. Just being very direct and honest about it is how I'd go about it.

[Girlo]

I agree....those kids are individuals, not a singular unit. :) Let Rebekah decide who the 5th person wil be. I think it would be easier for the quads to deal with if only 1 of them were invited (if that's your concern), rather than half of them being left out, KWIM?

[Brooke]

I guess I feel like the kids won't understand why they weren't all invited at this age (3-4 years).

Once they are older and make their own friends, then I could see only inviting one. But right now, if Rebekah were a twin and the other was invited and came home with a new toy and she didn't, then she would be pretty upset.

[Alyssa]

I agree that the kids are individuals and that you just have to invite just the one(s) Rebekah wants. But even still, I would run it past the mom first and explain the situation. She very well might love letting one of them do something special like this. Or she might not like it because it might cause resentment among the kids. I do think it's a different situation at this age versus when they're older and more able to understand selective invitations.

[MrsPeacefrog]

I guess I feel like the kids won't understand why they weren't all invited at this age (3-4 years).

Once they are older and make their own friends, then I could see only inviting one. But right now, if Rebekah were a twin and the other was invited and came home with a new toy and she didn't, then she would be pretty upset.

Well that comes down to how you as a parent deals with the situation, Aiden is 3 and Riley is 2, Aiden was invited to a party and Riley wasn't, so I went with
Aiden, Tony stayed with Riley and made a really big fuss about how Riley and Daddy where having a "day" together and they went riding on there bikes, and dug up the garden, Riley had such a great day with daddy he didn't care that Aiden went to a party and had a lolly bag (which of course i made aiden share with him)....

Same applies to multiples!! they arent the same person they are brothers and sisters and individuals!

[Karri]

I am agreeing with the majority here. They are definately individuals...not a singular unit. I would never expect both Norah & Elliott to be invited to something. I certainly don't expect them to have the same friends ...even in preschool. They have totally different personalities.
I think if you explain it to the mom -- simply that you let Rebekah pick the invitee list and that you need to limit it -- she can explain it to her other children and do something else with them that day. In my min, its really no different than one of my children being invited for a playdate and not the other (which I would jump on in a heartbeat!!!!!!!!)

[Julie]

I have to dissent here. If they are all in the same class, then I would say you need to invite them all.
In Jordans school, they will not pass out party invitations unless the whole class is invited to avoid hurt feelings. This goes a step further. These kids are only 3 and 4 years old, I am sure they probably all consider Rebekah their friend, as she is their classmate. Once they get older, ie. grade school, then they will be able to tell the difference between friends and classmates, but for now they are just little kids.

[Bev]

I disagree Julie, having just invited only 5 kids from Mason's class (which he only goes half days 3x week). How can anyone invite a whole class to a party? There are 32 kids in Mason's class although he may not know some of them as he goes PT. And how will all the kids know who is invited and who isn't if you do it privately and not in front of the class? I just stuck an invitation in the kid's cubby so none of the kids probably even knew it was there, just their parents.

[Dennis]

Our school is the same as Julie's - if you are going to pass out invitations at school you have to invite the entire class. I suppose you could try to sneak them into just a few cubbies if you want to. The classes only have 20 kids at most, I could see with 32 kids that it would be a bit much to invite them all.

The kids do talk aobut the parties and even at 4 years old, they'll know if they were left out. Joe came home one day asking if he could go to someone's party and his parents hadn't even given out the invitations yet. They talk about that stuff.

Anyway, as for the original question, I agree that you don't need to invite all the siblings. They are all individuals and should be treated as such.