Would you give back a $73,000 engagement ring? (proposal, ceremony, party)

[Opsimathia]

I see it the same way. Unless its was something like a family heirloom piece. I couldn't keep that even as a gift. But really that law to me is just made for the man. So if a girl gets cheated on while engaged and she dumps him: she loses him, her projected future with him and the ring but the man gets everything he wants.

I just don't think thats fair or ethical especially when women have a breeding window much smaller than a guys.

[NorCal Dude]

I think the types of women who hold onto a ring when its done are the types that need therapy and pills and what not

[Braunwyn]

Originally Posted by Opsimathia

I see it the same way. Unless its was something like a family heirloom piece. I couldn't keep that even as a gift. But really that law to me is just made for the man. So if a girl gets cheated on while engaged and she dumps him: she loses him, her projected future with him and the ring but the man gets everything he wants.

I just don't think thats fair or ethical especially when women have a breeding window much smaller than a guys.

Well, does he get to keep the ring you gave him?

[crabman1]

I'm going to do a little copy paste from wikipedia, source here... Engagement ring - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Cut and paste....

One reason for the increased popularity of expensive engagement rings is its relationship to human sexuality and the woman's marriage prospects.[5] Until the Great Depression, a man who broke off a marriage engagement could be sued for breach of promise. Monetary damages included actual expenses incurred in preparing for the wedding, plus damages for emotional distress and loss of other marriage prospects. Damages were greatly increased if the woman—like half of engaged women between World War I and World War II—had engaged in sexual intercourse with her fiancé.[5] Beginning in 1935, these laws were repealed or limited. However, the social and financial cost of a broken engagement was no less: marriage was the only financially sound option for most women, and if she was no longer a virgin, her prospects for a suitable future marriage were greatly decreased. The diamond engagement ring thus became a source of financial security for the woman.[5]

Another cut and paste from the same page....

In most states of the United States, engagement rings are considered "conditional gifts" under the legal rules of property. This is an exception to the general rule that gifts cannot be revoked once properly given. See, for example, the case of Meyer v. Mitnick, 625 N.W.2d 136 (Michigan, 2001), whose ruling found the following reasoning persuasive: "the so-called 'modern trend' holds that because an engagement ring is an inherently conditional gift, once the engagement has been broken, the ring should be returned to the donor. Thus, the question of who broke the engagement and why, or who was 'at fault,' is irrelevant. This is the no-fault line of cases."

End cut and paste

I had never read the history of engagement rings and found it somewhat interesting as I had thought they were a more modern convention but actually go back quite a ways.

[Dollydo]

There is a fool born everyday, possibly, he has learned an expensive lesson, to think with his big head not his little head.

[Cindy_Jole]

This is the woman's side of the story. LOL I wonder what the truth is.

A prominent Houston surgeon refused to pick up a $73,000 engagement ring from his ex-fiancee after he broke up with her, then tried to woo her back by offering her lavish gifts, the woman's attorney said Thursday.

Surgeon refused to pick up ring after breakup, attorney says - Houston Chronicle (http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Surgeon-refused-to-pick-up-ring-after-breakup-2195536.php - broken link)

[sweetdreamerx0]

Originally Posted by Cindy_Jole

This is the woman's side of the story. LOL I wonder what the truth is.



Surgeon refused to pick up ring after breakup, attorney says - Houston Chronicle (http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Surgeon-refused-to-pick-up-ring-after-breakup-2195536.php - broken link)

I kinda believe that he seems like the type the way he was talking about her in the other article

[Braunwyn]

Originally Posted by crabman1

I had never read the history of engagement rings and found it somewhat interesting as I had thought they were a more modern convention but actually go back quite a ways.

Very interesting crabman. It further shows that keeping it, when it's wanted back, is whacky thinking.

[sweetdreamerx0]

Originally Posted by Dollydo

There is a fool born everyday, possibly, he has learned an expensive lesson, to think with his big head not his little head.

exactly.

[ans57]

Originally Posted by Djuna

I would absolutely give it back. An engagement ring is not a gift like say, a bunch of flowers or French perfume. It is a promise and expectation of a soon to be contractual agreement. The agreement is now off, give the thing back.

When my first husband I divorced we had shared property. I refused to take any part of that property because it was given to him by his parents. I was within my legal right to take a share but I felt it was ethically wrong. I also gave back the engagement ring because it had belonged to his Mother and I felt it would be in poor taste to keep it.

Key word, "ethically" wrong.
Sadly, most people will insist on being "technically" right rather than keep their integrity.