DEAR MISS MANNERS: I am expecting my first child, but I have been informed by a knowledgeable acquaintance that because I am an unmarried woman I should not send out birth announcements when the baby arrives. This is because, I guess, my situation is too shameful to be broadcast to my friends and family. Many of them already know, but perhaps they've been too kind to say anything.

This acquaintance also let me know that women in my condition do not get baby showers (really, I wasn't expecting a shower -- a relative with small children has generously given me more baby things than I need).

I replied, "That's very interesting. Thank you."

I live in a liberal area, so my condition doesn't seem all that exceptional to me. Am I out of touch with the rest of the country's mores? Have I utterly disgraced myself? (I admit that part of me is looking for approval here, but part of me genuinely wants to know, so I can start working on the appropriate facial expressions.)

May I send out birth announcements when the baby arrives (it will be soon), or do I truly risk offending people with my brazen unmarried-motherhood? As a side question, more than one person has commented on my future child's "illegitimacy." I have responded with a joking "Hey, if anyone is illegitimate here, it's me; let's not insult the baby!" Do you have a better response?

GENTLE READER: As there are two parts of you, Miss Manners will address them separately. One part might be happier about that than the other.

The purpose of birth announcements is to announce the birth. (That needs to be said because there are those who believe that the purpose -- probably of the birth, as well as of the announcement -- is to extract presents.) So of course you should announce the birth to anyone you think will be interested. Or perhaps to anyone you think will be not just interested, but pleased.

That brings us to the part of you looking for approval. Don't.

To do so is to acknowledge that others are invited to give their opinions -- and you have already answered your question about whether mores have changed to the point that you can expect everyone's opinion to be favorable.

What you should expect is tolerance, and you are quite right to be insulted when you are the target of mean remarks.

The reply to such is a frosty "How kind of you to point that out."

DEAR MISS MANNERS: Could you please tell me if wedding veils are appropriate only under certain circumstances? There seem to be two extreme rules of thought on this issue. One is that it's "my day" and I should do and wear whatever I want, and the other is that a veil is a traditional garment suggestive of the bride's purity. I fear that if I honor either of those philosophies in full, I will look foolish.

GENTLE READER: As brides who believe that they can do whatever they want are pure nuisances, these rules cancel each other out. Miss Manners only recognizes the rule that wedding veils must be worn with wedding dresses. They look silly with blue jeans.

:

DEAR MISS MANNERS: Not long ago, I was dining with a friend in a restaurant that caters mainly to a gay clientele. A gentleman of our acquaintance entered, accompanied by a much younger man. They stopped at our table briefly to exchange greetings, but our acquaintance did not introduce his companion.

Because of a combination of factors (differences in age and ethnicity, the young man's rather provocative choice of clothing, and, above all, the lack of an introduction), my friend and I formed the opinion that our acquaintance was with a paid escort. There is nothing wrong with that, in my opinion (he was not cheating on a spouse), but not introducing him gave it away.

I think that the young man, whatever his occupation, should be entitled to the same courtesy as anyone else. (My friend and I also considered the possibility that it was us the gentleman was ashamed of and not his companion.)

When one is out on the town with someone whose company has been engaged for a monetary consideration, and one encounters acquaintances, what is the proper way of dealing with the situation? I assume one does not go into detail about finances, but for the sake of appearances, isn't it correct to at least pretend that the companion is a friend?

GENTLE READER: Why is Miss Manners having such a hard time finding tradition to quote in this case? It is not as though going about with a paid companion is a recent development.

Wait -- here it is:

A young person whose appearance and behavior are not of a gentleman's customary social circle is properly introduced as his nephew or niece.

But this is only necessary on social occasions when introductions are required. A chance encounter involving only a brief exchange of greetings does not require introducing one's companions, either in the past or now. While you are free to speculate on the relationship, the gentleman is not required to help you out.

What has changed, Miss Manners cautions, is that it has become perfectly plausible for a respectable person to have a provocatively dressed nephew or niece of an apparently different ethnicity.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: I have always lived in a house and been on friendly terms with my neighbors, chitchatting over backyard fences, walking to the mailbox together or borrowing the occasional thing from one another.

Now that I have moved into an apartment building for the first time in my adult life, I have to fight the urge to knock on the nearby closed doors and talk to my neighbors. I don't want to seem pushy or nosy, but no one has ever welcomed me to the building. I also resist opening my door when someone is heard in the hall as I don't want to be rude, but I am curious as to whom I live with in this building. I'm assuming people want privacy, but maybe I don't know the rules of neighboring in a shared building. What should I do?

GENTLE READER: Your laundry.

:

Schools want to punish parents for not doing their homework.

The assignment not being performed is child rearing, a task for which the parents can be said to have implicitly volunteered. At a few American schools and in England's government education department, the hope is to make parents legally responsible for the misbehavior of their children.

In many cases, Miss Manners is shocked to learn, parents don't even "turn in" the results of whatever desultory work they may have been doing at home. Failure to enforce the child's showing up at school runs afoul of truancy laws, providing a case for bringing legal action. But current thinking goes beyond that to the notion that the parent must produce the child in a state and attitude conducive to learning.

Nobody stoops to call the training involved etiquette, for fear of setting off uncontrollable childish giggles, but that is what it is. The ability to sit still for short periods of time, listen to what other people say and refrain from hitting as a first line of argument are manners that must be learned before one is in a state to learn anything else.

The presumption Miss Manners hears is that parents who neglect this homework have the same excuses as students who don't do theirs: They forgot, they had too much else to do, they didn't feel well, they had personal troubles, they didn't understand the assignment, they thought they had more time left in which to do it.

Yet she has noticed another reason. Some parents are doing other people's homework instead.

These parents would be outraged if they were considered neglectful. Why, there isn't anything they don't do for their children, including the children's homework.

That is to say, they help with the homework, as a good parent should. But sometimes this goes beyond curtailing other activities so there is plenty of time for the child to get the work done, discussing ideas, explaining principles and insisting that the child go back and check or redo it.

Sometimes it means showing by example, which is to say actually doing the examples or the writing, or at least correcting what has been done before it is handed in.

If the purpose is to educate the child, this does teach the convenience of passing off someone else's work as your own. So, if the purpose is also to improve the child's chances of getting into college, it had better not be a school with a strict code of honor. Or one in which the child will need the skills that lower schoolteachers failed to stress because the homework demonstrated he had already mastered them.

Worse, it may distract the parent from doing the parental homework of teaching the behavior needed to get along in school and elsewhere in the outside world. That's a harder task, and Miss Manners understands why they are shirking it or expecting it to be taught entirely in school, but sympathizes with the schools' determination not to let them get away with it.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: What is the proper time period for the cashing of gift checks?

Should the recipient cash the check immediately, thus keeping the gift giver's records in order? Or hold onto the check until a time when the money can be spent as desired and not lost in a checking account to bills or other household expenditures?

GENTLE READER: You should cash the check with the same immediacy that you write your letter of thanks to your benefactor. That is to say, directly after receiving the present.

Just as you want to save your benefactor annoyance, Miss Manners is trying to save you annoyance. As it is unthinkable that you would totally ignore the present until you happen to have a successful shopping trip, you would be obliged to write a second letter to explain the use of the check when it is cashed.

: