Why are people so anti-sibling when not drop off parties?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When you bring uninvited guests, you're saying that your convenience outweighs the plans of the host. You wouldn't expect them to reschedule it if you can't make that date, would you? Sometimes you can't make it. If you can't make it without bringing an extra guest, this is one of those times.

+1. The entitlement of some PPs is truly appalling. Especially the ones trying to couch it as ungracious on the host's part, to not want uninvited siblings. Unbelievable.

It's incredible to me that in one or two generations manners have devolved so greatly and entitlement has become so significant. When we fortysomethings were kids, our parents understood that birthday parties were for invited guests. They didn't expect to foist off their extra kids on the hosts. Now parents view a party invitation for one child as an invitation to bring all their (sometimes poorly behaved) kids for free entertainment, food and drink, and goodie bags. When that's not the case, they label hosts as rude or ungracious. Perhaps worse, they inadvertently teach kids that they're always invited everywhere and always should be.

Funny, I would say that the entitled person is the one who thinks that their 2 or 3 year old needs a birthday party with goodie bags, and expensive entertainment.

We never took siblings to birthday parties when I was a kid because parties were little things you had in the backyard when you were old enough to stay without your parents. The only parties I would have gone to with my parents in tow would have been for family or family friends and then of course the whole family would have come.

I think that expecting parents to provide childcare at your party, and not accommodating their other children is ridiculous. I also think the argument that "we'd have 20 extra kids" is ridiculous. In my circle of friends the norm was to invite siblings. Older siblings rarely came as they usually had their own weekend engagements, so at a toddler birthday party you would have some babies in arms (who generally, in my experience, don't need to pay or put up a fuss about goodie bags), and maybe a couple of close in age siblings.

Sure, I can agree with your first bolded point. No kid needs these parties. But that's not up to the parents of the invited guest, right? So as the parent of an invited child, all you can own is your part of it : do you read the invitation to include siblings when that's really not the host's intent, and get huffy and both on DCUM when it doesn't? If so, the entitlement is yours.

From your second bolded point it's clear that you understand it's rude to expect siblings to be invited. Your own parents didn't do it. Now, however, many parents do expect it.

My point is that these things didn't exist when I was a kid, so no my parents didn't send me to them along with my siblings. They also didn't take my siblings without me. When something new comes along, like non drop off birthday parties, you need new etiquette rules. Saying "Well my parents didn't bring siblings to non drop off parties" is like saying "Well, my parents didn't wear clothing to non drop off parties". It is technically true, but not exactly a compelling argument for showing up naked.

I happen to be the parent of an only child, so my decisions were easy. I always invited siblings if the kids were too young to be dropped off, and I never once brought a sibling with me. If I had another child, we'd respect the parents wishes, but might do so by not showing up at all. However, I'd also think it sad that their intent in having the party was to spoil their child rather than to build community, and it would impact my interest in being friends with them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody says that you aren't entitled to exclude siblings if you want to - it is a free country. But describing parents who say it's maybe, not nice to do that, are not "getting up in a huff on DCUM." They're calling out your own bad manners, and the irony of posting all over the place as if you've cornered the market on shaming others for their bad manners. LOL. Miss Manners would crack up at you. One of the cardinal rules of good manners is overlooking someone else's bad manners and abstaining from shaming them for it. It's about the social graces, not capital punishment for manners breakers. You people are the opposite of class. Are you guys the nouveau riche?

When you were growing up did your parents assume birthday parties automatically included siblings? I'm betting not.

When I was growing up there weren't parties that included parents. So the childcare issue didn't exit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why? Because your siblings cost the host money. And your presumption that they should be included is incredibly rude. The party isn't for your convenience.

If you can't afford a few extra 2 year olds, maybe you shouldn't be hosting a party.

If you can't figure out how to take care of your uninvited children, then don't have so many. FYI, it is rude to crash parties, no matter the reason why it age of invited guest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Also, please continue to put "no siblings, please" on your invitations so I can tell who you people are in real life and avoid you. And this is coming from a person with one child.

I've never put "no siblings" on an invitation. Why would I? Most people have the good sense to realize the invitation is for the birthday kid's friend. If my DC is friendly with a pair of siblings, we invite them both.

I suspect some of the most insistent sibling-includers here are the types who discourage any kind of social involvement or friendship that doesn't involve both kids. We all know mothers like that.

[Anonymous]

When DD turned three, she had a home party (not drop off) for four of her friends. Parents of two of those guests asked, at the last minute, if they could bring siblings. Things happen, spouses flake out, fine. But I hadn't planned activities to keep younger siblings entertained. Had not thought to create extra goodie bags. I did have enough food and cupcakes, luckily. It would have been rotten if I'd had to tell the kids, sorry, you can't have a cupcake. Not the kid's fault that they were there uninvited.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody says that you aren't entitled to exclude siblings if you want to - it is a free country. But describing parents who say it's maybe, not nice to do that, are not "getting up in a huff on DCUM." They're calling out your own bad manners, and the irony of posting all over the place as if you've cornered the market on shaming others for their bad manners. LOL. Miss Manners would crack up at you. One of the cardinal rules of good manners is overlooking someone else's bad manners and abstaining from shaming them for it. It's about the social graces, not capital punishment for manners breakers. You people are the opposite of class. Are you guys the nouveau riche?

When you were growing up did your parents assume birthday parties automatically included siblings? I'm betting not.

I hope you did not bet much. I am the poster who NEVER went to a party where siblings weren't included. I was an only child, but I'm talking about other people's siblings. and siblings were always at my parties. Then again, I never went to a single overblown birthday party during my childhood. Not one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When you bring uninvited guests, you're saying that your convenience outweighs the plans of the host. You wouldn't expect them to reschedule it if you can't make that date, would you? Sometimes you can't make it. If you can't make it without bringing an extra guest, this is one of those times.

+1. The entitlement of some PPs is truly appalling. Especially the ones trying to couch it as ungracious on the host's part, to not want uninvited siblings. Unbelievable.

It's incredible to me that in one or two generations manners have devolved so greatly and entitlement has become so significant. When we fortysomethings were kids, our parents understood that birthday parties were for invited guests. They didn't expect to foist off their extra kids on the hosts. Now parents view a party invitation for one child as an invitation to bring all their (sometimes poorly behaved) kids for free entertainment, food and drink, and goodie bags. When that's not the case, they label hosts as rude or ungracious. Perhaps worse, they inadvertently teach kids that they're always invited everywhere and always should be.

Funny, I would say that the entitled person is the one who thinks that their 2 or 3 year old needs a birthday party with goodie bags, and expensive entertainment.

We never took siblings to birthday parties when I was a kid because parties were little things you had in the backyard when you were old enough to stay without your parents. The only parties I would have gone to with my parents in tow would have been for family or family friends and then of course the whole family would have come.

I think that expecting parents to provide childcare at your party, and not accommodating their other children is ridiculous. I also think the argument that "we'd have 20 extra kids" is ridiculous. In my circle of friends the norm was to invite siblings. Older siblings rarely came as they usually had their own weekend engagements, so at a toddler birthday party you would have some babies in arms (who generally, in my experience, don't need to pay or put up a fuss about goodie bags), and maybe a couple of close in age siblings.

Sure, I can agree with your first bolded point. No kid needs these parties. But that's not up to the parents of the invited guest, right? So as the parent of an invited child, all you can own is your part of it : do you read the invitation to include siblings when that's really not the host's intent, and get huffy and both on DCUM when it doesn't? If so, the entitlement is yours.

From your second bolded point it's clear that you understand it's rude to expect siblings to be invited. Your own parents didn't do it. Now, however, many parents do expect it.

My point is that these things didn't exist when I was a kid, so no my parents didn't send me to them along with my siblings. They also didn't take my siblings without me. When something new comes along, like non drop off birthday parties, you need new etiquette rules. Saying "Well my parents didn't bring siblings to non drop off parties" is like saying "Well, my parents didn't wear clothing to non drop off parties". It is technically true, but not exactly a compelling argument for showing up naked.

I happen to be the parent of an only child, so my decisions were easy. I always invited siblings if the kids were too young to be dropped off, and I never once brought a sibling with me. If I had another child, we'd respect the parents wishes, but might do so by not showing up at all. However, I'd also think it sad that their intent in having the party was to spoil their child rather than to build community, and it would impact my interest in being friends with them.

You think having a smaller birthday party with only guests that the child actually knows is "spoiling" a kid? And you think the point of a birthday party is for the parents to develop a friendship with you and build community? I guess we will agree to disagree, then.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody says that you aren't entitled to exclude siblings if you want to - it is a free country. But describing parents who say it's maybe, not nice to do that, are not "getting up in a huff on DCUM." They're calling out your own bad manners, and the irony of posting all over the place as if you've cornered the market on shaming others for their bad manners. LOL. Miss Manners would crack up at you. One of the cardinal rules of good manners is overlooking someone else's bad manners and abstaining from shaming them for it. It's about the social graces, not capital punishment for manners breakers. You people are the opposite of class. Are you guys the nouveau riche?

When you were growing up did your parents assume birthday parties automatically included siblings? I'm betting not.

I hope you did not bet much. I am the poster who NEVER went to a party where siblings weren't included. I was an only child, but I'm talking about other people's siblings. and siblings were always at my parties. Then again, I never went to a single overblown birthday party during my childhood. Not one.

I'm asking if your parents always assumed an invitation for you was an invitation for your siblings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody says that you aren't entitled to exclude siblings if you want to - it is a free country. But describing parents who say it's maybe, not nice to do that, are not "getting up in a huff on DCUM." They're calling out your own bad manners, and the irony of posting all over the place as if you've cornered the market on shaming others for their bad manners. LOL. Miss Manners would crack up at you. One of the cardinal rules of good manners is overlooking someone else's bad manners and abstaining from shaming them for it. It's about the social graces, not capital punishment for manners breakers. You people are the opposite of class. Are you guys the nouveau riche?

When you were growing up did your parents assume birthday parties automatically included siblings? I'm betting not.

I hope you did not bet much. I am the poster who NEVER went to a party where siblings weren't included. I was an only child, but I'm talking about other people's siblings. and siblings were always at my parties. Then again, I never went to a single overblown birthday party during my childhood. Not one.

I'm asking if your parents always assumed an invitation for you was an invitation for your siblings.

My parents never received such an invitation, so they both NEVER assumed it was an invitation for siblings, and ALWAYS assumed it was an invitation for siblings. Or, in other words, their experiences are completely irrelevant to this discussion since the situation we are discussing did not exist then.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When you bring uninvited guests, you're saying that your convenience outweighs the plans of the host. You wouldn't expect them to reschedule it if you can't make that date, would you? Sometimes you can't make it. If you can't make it without bringing an extra guest, this is one of those times.

+1. The entitlement of some PPs is truly appalling. Especially the ones trying to couch it as ungracious on the host's part, to not want uninvited siblings. Unbelievable.

It's incredible to me that in one or two generations manners have devolved so greatly and entitlement has become so significant. When we fortysomethings were kids, our parents understood that birthday parties were for invited guests. They didn't expect to foist off their extra kids on the hosts. Now parents view a party invitation for one child as an invitation to bring all their (sometimes poorly behaved) kids for free entertainment, food and drink, and goodie bags. When that's not the case, they label hosts as rude or ungracious. Perhaps worse, they inadvertently teach kids that they're always invited everywhere and always should be.

Funny, I would say that the entitled person is the one who thinks that their 2 or 3 year old needs a birthday party with goodie bags, and expensive entertainment.

We never took siblings to birthday parties when I was a kid because parties were little things you had in the backyard when you were old enough to stay without your parents. The only parties I would have gone to with my parents in tow would have been for family or family friends and then of course the whole family would have come.

I think that expecting parents to provide childcare at your party, and not accommodating their other children is ridiculous. I also think the argument that "we'd have 20 extra kids" is ridiculous. In my circle of friends the norm was to invite siblings. Older siblings rarely came as they usually had their own weekend engagements, so at a toddler birthday party you would have some babies in arms (who generally, in my experience, don't need to pay or put up a fuss about goodie bags), and maybe a couple of close in age siblings.

Sure, I can agree with your first bolded point. No kid needs these parties. But that's not up to the parents of the invited guest, right? So as the parent of an invited child, all you can own is your part of it : do you read the invitation to include siblings when that's really not the host's intent, and get huffy and both on DCUM when it doesn't? If so, the entitlement is yours.

From your second bolded point it's clear that you understand it's rude to expect siblings to be invited. Your own parents didn't do it. Now, however, many parents do expect it.

My point is that these things didn't exist when I was a kid, so no my parents didn't send me to them along with my siblings. They also didn't take my siblings without me. When something new comes along, like non drop off birthday parties, you need new etiquette rules. Saying "Well my parents didn't bring siblings to non drop off parties" is like saying "Well, my parents didn't wear clothing to non drop off parties". It is technically true, but not exactly a compelling argument for showing up naked.

I happen to be the parent of an only child, so my decisions were easy. I always invited siblings if the kids were too young to be dropped off, and I never once brought a sibling with me. If I had another child, we'd respect the parents wishes, but might do so by not showing up at all. However, I'd also think it sad that their intent in having the party was to spoil their child rather than to build community, and it would impact my interest in being friends with them.

You think having a smaller birthday party with only guests that the child actually knows is "spoiling" a kid? And you think the point of a birthday party is for the parents to develop a friendship with you and build community? I guess we will agree to disagree, then.

If it's a small birthday party, then you shouldn't need parents to stay. Invite the number of children you can manage on your own.

Yes, I think that toddler birthday parties are about building community. Or rather I think they should be. What do you think is the purpose of a toddler birthday party?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:


I happen to be the parent of an only child, so my decisions were easy. I always invited siblings if the kids were too young to be dropped off, and I never once brought a sibling with me. If I had another child, we'd respect the parents wishes, but might do so by not showing up at all. However, I'd also think it sad that their intent in having the party was to spoil their child rather than to build community, and it would impact my interest in being friends with them.

We don't invite siblings PRECISELY because we don't have big parties. We live in an apartment. We don't do big venue parties--we invite a few friends over for cake and ice cream. We simply do not have room to accomodate more kids than we invite. It's nice that you have a big house and a yard that can easily hold a big group. We don't. I understand why some parents have a big venue party if they don't have the space for a home party--it actually allows them to be more inclusive. But it also comes with its own set of limitations and trade-offs. Frankly, I'd rather not be friends with someone who judges people she doesn't really know for making choices that differ from the choices she would make. So it's really for the best that you wouldn't want to be friends with me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When you bring uninvited guests, you're saying that your convenience outweighs the plans of the host. You wouldn't expect them to reschedule it if you can't make that date, would you? Sometimes you can't make it. If you can't make it without bringing an extra guest, this is one of those times.

+1. The entitlement of some PPs is truly appalling. Especially the ones trying to couch it as ungracious on the host's part, to not want uninvited siblings. Unbelievable.

It's incredible to me that in one or two generations manners have devolved so greatly and entitlement has become so significant. When we fortysomethings were kids, our parents understood that birthday parties were for invited guests. They didn't expect to foist off their extra kids on the hosts. Now parents view a party invitation for one child as an invitation to bring all their (sometimes poorly behaved) kids for free entertainment, food and drink, and goodie bags. When that's not the case, they label hosts as rude or ungracious. Perhaps worse, they inadvertently teach kids that they're always invited everywhere and always should be.

Funny, I would say that the entitled person is the one who thinks that their 2 or 3 year old needs a birthday party with goodie bags, and expensive entertainment.

We never took siblings to birthday parties when I was a kid because parties were little things you had in the backyard when you were old enough to stay without your parents. The only parties I would have gone to with my parents in tow would have been for family or family friends and then of course the whole family would have come.

I think that expecting parents to provide childcare at your party, and not accommodating their other children is ridiculous. I also think the argument that "we'd have 20 extra kids" is ridiculous. In my circle of friends the norm was to invite siblings. Older siblings rarely came as they usually had their own weekend engagements, so at a toddler birthday party you would have some babies in arms (who generally, in my experience, don't need to pay or put up a fuss about goodie bags), and maybe a couple of close in age siblings.

Sure, I can agree with your first bolded point. No kid needs these parties. But that's not up to the parents of the invited guest, right? So as the parent of an invited child, all you can own is your part of it : do you read the invitation to include siblings when that's really not the host's intent, and get huffy and both on DCUM when it doesn't? If so, the entitlement is yours.

From your second bolded point it's clear that you understand it's rude to expect siblings to be invited. Your own parents didn't do it. Now, however, many parents do expect it.

My point is that these things didn't exist when I was a kid, so no my parents didn't send me to them along with my siblings. They also didn't take my siblings without me. When something new comes along, like non drop off birthday parties, you need new etiquette rules. Saying "Well my parents didn't bring siblings to non drop off parties" is like saying "Well, my parents didn't wear clothing to non drop off parties". It is technically true, but not exactly a compelling argument for showing up naked.

I happen to be the parent of an only child, so my decisions were easy. I always invited siblings if the kids were too young to be dropped off, and I never once brought a sibling with me. If I had another child, we'd respect the parents wishes, but might do so by not showing up at all. However, I'd also think it sad that their intent in having the party was to spoil their child rather than to build community, and it would impact my interest in being friends with them.

You think having a smaller birthday party with only guests that the child actually knows is "spoiling" a kid? And you think the point of a birthday party is for the parents to develop a friendship with you and build community? I guess we will agree to disagree, then.

If it's a small birthday party, then you shouldn't need parents to stay. Invite the number of children you can manage on your own.

Yes, I think that toddler birthday parties are about building community. Or rather I think they should be. What do you think is the purpose of a toddler birthday party?

I agree that at a small toddler party parents shouldn't need to stay unless the point is to celebrate with other families. I know some parents, though, who will never drop off their kids until they are much older. They're usually the same ones who expect to bring other kids too. I've not had it happen to me, but I've seen it at other kids' parties.

I think the purpose of a toddler birthday party is for a group of 2 YOs to have fun playing and eating cake.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


I happen to be the parent of an only child, so my decisions were easy. I always invited siblings if the kids were too young to be dropped off, and I never once brought a sibling with me. If I had another child, we'd respect the parents wishes, but might do so by not showing up at all. However, I'd also think it sad that their intent in having the party was to spoil their child rather than to build community, and it would impact my interest in being friends with them.

We don't invite siblings PRECISELY because we don't have big parties. We live in an apartment. We don't do big venue parties--we invite a few friends over for cake and ice cream. We simply do not have room to accomodate more kids than we invite. It's nice that you have a big house and a yard that can easily hold a big group. We don't. I understand why some parents have a big venue party if they don't have the space for a home party--it actually allows them to be more inclusive. But it also comes with its own set of limitations and trade-offs. Frankly, I'd rather not be friends with someone who judges people she doesn't really know for making choices that differ from the choices she would make. So it's really for the best that you wouldn't want to be friends with me.

I also live in a small apartment.

If you're just inviting a few friends over for cake and ice cream, why do you need parents to stay? This is about parties where parents aren't allowed to drop off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When you bring uninvited guests, you're saying that your convenience outweighs the plans of the host. You wouldn't expect them to reschedule it if you can't make that date, would you? Sometimes you can't make it. If you can't make it without bringing an extra guest, this is one of those times.

+1. The entitlement of some PPs is truly appalling. Especially the ones trying to couch it as ungracious on the host's part, to not want uninvited siblings. Unbelievable.

It's incredible to me that in one or two generations manners have devolved so greatly and entitlement has become so significant. When we fortysomethings were kids, our parents understood that birthday parties were for invited guests. They didn't expect to foist off their extra kids on the hosts. Now parents view a party invitation for one child as an invitation to bring all their (sometimes poorly behaved) kids for free entertainment, food and drink, and goodie bags. When that's not the case, they label hosts as rude or ungracious. Perhaps worse, they inadvertently teach kids that they're always invited everywhere and always should be.

Funny, I would say that the entitled person is the one who thinks that their 2 or 3 year old needs a birthday party with goodie bags, and expensive entertainment.

We never took siblings to birthday parties when I was a kid because parties were little things you had in the backyard when you were old enough to stay without your parents. The only parties I would have gone to with my parents in tow would have been for family or family friends and then of course the whole family would have come.

I think that expecting parents to provide childcare at your party, and not accommodating their other children is ridiculous. I also think the argument that "we'd have 20 extra kids" is ridiculous. In my circle of friends the norm was to invite siblings. Older siblings rarely came as they usually had their own weekend engagements, so at a toddler birthday party you would have some babies in arms (who generally, in my experience, don't need to pay or put up a fuss about goodie bags), and maybe a couple of close in age siblings.

Sure, I can agree with your first bolded point. No kid needs these parties. But that's not up to the parents of the invited guest, right? So as the parent of an invited child, all you can own is your part of it : do you read the invitation to include siblings when that's really not the host's intent, and get huffy and both on DCUM when it doesn't? If so, the entitlement is yours.

From your second bolded point it's clear that you understand it's rude to expect siblings to be invited. Your own parents didn't do it. Now, however, many parents do expect it.

My point is that these things didn't exist when I was a kid, so no my parents didn't send me to them along with my siblings. They also didn't take my siblings without me. When something new comes along, like non drop off birthday parties, you need new etiquette rules. Saying "Well my parents didn't bring siblings to non drop off parties" is like saying "Well, my parents didn't wear clothing to non drop off parties". It is technically true, but not exactly a compelling argument for showing up naked.

I happen to be the parent of an only child, so my decisions were easy. I always invited siblings if the kids were too young to be dropped off, and I never once brought a sibling with me. If I had another child, we'd respect the parents wishes, but might do so by not showing up at all. However, I'd also think it sad that their intent in having the party was to spoil their child rather than to build community, and it would impact my interest in being friends with them.

You think having a smaller birthday party with only guests that the child actually knows is "spoiling" a kid? And you think the point of a birthday party is for the parents to develop a friendship with you and build community? I guess we will agree to disagree, then.

If it's a small birthday party, then you shouldn't need parents to stay. Invite the number of children you can manage on your own.

Yes, I think that toddler birthday parties are about building community. Or rather I think they should be. What do you think is the purpose of a toddler birthday party?

I agree that at a small toddler party parents shouldn't need to stay unless the point is to celebrate with other families. I know some parents, though, who will never drop off their kids until they are much older. They're usually the same ones who expect to bring other kids too. I've not had it happen to me, but I've seen it at other kids' parties.

I think the purpose of a toddler birthday party is for a group of 2 YOs to have fun playing and eating cake.

And let me add this: the absolute worst is the parents who bring two or three uninvited siblings and then completely ignore their kids so they can talk to other parents. Then the birthday kid's parents have to redirect and manage a bunch of other kids' behavior at their own child's party.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When you bring uninvited guests, you're saying that your convenience outweighs the plans of the host. You wouldn't expect them to reschedule it if you can't make that date, would you? Sometimes you can't make it. If you can't make it without bringing an extra guest, this is one of those times.

+1. The entitlement of some PPs is truly appalling. Especially the ones trying to couch it as ungracious on the host's part, to not want uninvited siblings. Unbelievable.

It's incredible to me that in one or two generations manners have devolved so greatly and entitlement has become so significant. When we fortysomethings were kids, our parents understood that birthday parties were for invited guests. They didn't expect to foist off their extra kids on the hosts. Now parents view a party invitation for one child as an invitation to bring all their (sometimes poorly behaved) kids for free entertainment, food and drink, and goodie bags. When that's not the case, they label hosts as rude or ungracious. Perhaps worse, they inadvertently teach kids that they're always invited everywhere and always should be.

Funny, I would say that the entitled person is the one who thinks that their 2 or 3 year old needs a birthday party with goodie bags, and expensive entertainment.

We never took siblings to birthday parties when I was a kid because parties were little things you had in the backyard when you were old enough to stay without your parents. The only parties I would have gone to with my parents in tow would have been for family or family friends and then of course the whole family would have come.

I think that expecting parents to provide childcare at your party, and not accommodating their other children is ridiculous. I also think the argument that "we'd have 20 extra kids" is ridiculous. In my circle of friends the norm was to invite siblings. Older siblings rarely came as they usually had their own weekend engagements, so at a toddler birthday party you would have some babies in arms (who generally, in my experience, don't need to pay or put up a fuss about goodie bags), and maybe a couple of close in age siblings.

Sure, I can agree with your first bolded point. No kid needs these parties. But that's not up to the parents of the invited guest, right? So as the parent of an invited child, all you can own is your part of it : do you read the invitation to include siblings when that's really not the host's intent, and get huffy and both on DCUM when it doesn't? If so, the entitlement is yours.

From your second bolded point it's clear that you understand it's rude to expect siblings to be invited. Your own parents didn't do it. Now, however, many parents do expect it.

My point is that these things didn't exist when I was a kid, so no my parents didn't send me to them along with my siblings. They also didn't take my siblings without me. When something new comes along, like non drop off birthday parties, you need new etiquette rules. Saying "Well my parents didn't bring siblings to non drop off parties" is like saying "Well, my parents didn't wear clothing to non drop off parties". It is technically true, but not exactly a compelling argument for showing up naked.

I happen to be the parent of an only child, so my decisions were easy. I always invited siblings if the kids were too young to be dropped off, and I never once brought a sibling with me. If I had another child, we'd respect the parents wishes, but might do so by not showing up at all. However, I'd also think it sad that their intent in having the party was to spoil their child rather than to build community, and it would impact my interest in being friends with them.

You think having a smaller birthday party with only guests that the child actually knows is "spoiling" a kid? And you think the point of a birthday party is for the parents to develop a friendship with you and build community? I guess we will agree to disagree, then.

If it's a small birthday party, then you shouldn't need parents to stay. Invite the number of children you can manage on your own.

Yes, I think that toddler birthday parties are about building community. Or rather I think they should be. What do you think is the purpose of a toddler birthday party?

I agree that at a small toddler party parents shouldn't need to stay unless the point is to celebrate with other families. I know some parents, though, who will never drop off their kids until they are much older. They're usually the same ones who expect to bring other kids too. I've not had it happen to me, but I've seen it at other kids' parties.

I think the purpose of a toddler birthday party is for a group of 2 YOs to have fun playing and eating cake.

I think that in this circumstance it's fine to say "I'm afraid we can't accommodate an extra child, but please feel free to drop Joey off". Unless there's a special circumstance (e.g. a kid with a seizure disorder) then I think that's fine.