DEAR MISS MANNERS: I've been presented a problem in proper address which I would like some assistance with.

A lady friend of mine has borne the child of a sperm donor. The child is recognized by his biological father as his child, and both the birth certificate and the child's christening name is his father's family name. The biological father has waived all paternal rights, though has stated in his will that he wishes the child to be given full acceptance as his child.

The lady in question has on occasion been called Mrs. John Smith or Mrs. Karen Smith, Smith being the father's name as well as the child's, though her name is Karen Jones and she has until recently been a stalwart Miss. There was and will not be any marriage, as the lady is a lesbian and the sperm donor is her 80-year-old stepfather.

I've suggested that it would be correct to use Ms. Karen Jones instead of Miss, and, as there was no marriage, it would be incorrect in any usage, not to mention confusing, to use Mrs. Please advise.

GENTLE READER: You understand, of course, that before Miss Manners makes a definitive ruling here, she has to take into consideration the feelings of untold numbers of people who are in the identical situation.

No, wait. Maybe there aren't so many. Even if everyone can find an 80-year-old sperm donor around the house, his wife might protest against his putting her in the position of having the double responsibilities of being a stepmother and grandmother.

But let us proceed. The surname is the lady's choice; etiquette has no stake in the matter. It is not unusual for a mother to feel that her life will be simpler if she and her child have the same last name, but then again, society is getting used to the fact that many do not. This lady already had a claim on her stepfather's surname if she wished to take it.

In either case, Miss or Ms. would be the conventional honorific, as Mrs. only goes with a husband's full name, which is why its proper use is dying out. Miss Manners doubts that your friend wants to be known as Mrs. Clarence Smith, and her mother may not, either. But honorifics are so sloppily used now, if they are used at all, that while Miss Manners holds on to her own, she does not condemn confused mistakes as ill-intentioned.

Nor should your friend, if the heart of the problem is that others who do not know her history now address her as Mrs.

Not so long ago, it was an insult to assume that a mother was not married; let us not consider it an insult to assume that she is. Or was.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: After reading about who sits at the head of a table, I realized I don't even know which end of the table is the head. My own table is square.

GENTLE READER: Then the head of the table is where you are sitting.

:

DEAR MISS MANNERS: I would appreciate your advice on the appropriate etiquette for flowers or gifts that are received from an anonymous sender. Should one attempt to identify the sender so that appropriate thanks can be expressed?

GENTLE READER: While a thank-you letter cannot reasonably be expected in response to an anonymous gesture, one should attempt to identify the sender for another reason:

One is dying from curiosity.

Mind you, Miss Manners has never considered curiosity an excuse for running around asking embarrassing questions, and any inquiries you make will embarrass anyone who thinks -- or who thinks you think -- that he ought to have made such a gesture. But she promises that if you start shooting bashful little smiles at the likely candidates, one of them will confess. And one or two more may head for the flower shop.

:

DEAR MISS MANNERS: When I was 5 years old, my father was transferred to England and our family lived there for about three years. We all adopted many of the English customs, especially us kids, because we wanted to "fit in."

Well, 40 years later, while cutting meat I still eat with my fork in the left hand, tines pointed down, knife in right hand, and take a bite of food without transferring fork to the right hand or turning it over. My wife thinks that the upside-down fork insertion into the mouth is crude and looks like I'm shoveling food like Jethro Bodine eating his cereal on "The Beverly Hillbillies."

I've tried to explain to her that the English have been using silverware a whole lot longer than Americans and that the American method of cutting a bite, putting down the knife, switching hands with the fork, then taking a bite with the right hand is way less efficient. (I'm an engineer and do tend to overanalyze things!) She should be glad I don't still mix my mashed potatoes and peas together and spread them on the back of the fork.

I would guess that the Brits, on the whole, are way more couth than us Yanks and that the left-handed fork is the preferred method in the etiquette book. There's nothing really riding on this, but a ruling in my favor from a person of your stature would sure help. I don't get to win many arguments.

GENTLE READER: Miss Manners hopes that in your professional life, you obtain the facts of a case before you attempt to analyze it. It helps win arguments.

You have not done so here. Leaving aside the general manners comparison (where do you get your notions about British gentility -- from the goings-on of their royalty?), you are in error about the British method of eating being older than the American method. Early European immigrants brought with them the eating methods prevailing in Europe at the time, and their American descendents have continued to use them. It was the Europeans who streamlined their method -- or, as your wife would observe, made it cruder. Efficiency is not considered a virtue in dining.

Etiquette books do allow the European method to Europeans, although a 3-year stint in childhood is not much of a claim. No self-respecting American would advise others to abandon their perfectly good tradition in an attempt to seem British.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: An acquaintance of mine recently informed me and others, through e-mail, that our children would not be invited to her child's birthday party due to the large number of possible guests. She was very apologetic and hoped that this would not harm our relationship.

I had thought not to invite her child to my own child's party for similar reasons. Should I now inform her so, as she did for me, or am I right in thinking that this approach is a little presumptuous and rude?

GENTLE READER: The announcement that you -- or in this case, your child -- did not make the cut when a guest list was scaled back to only the most desirable guests is not Miss Manners' idea of a charming social form. You did not seem to care for it, either. So why would you consider adopting it?

: