Three fresh Reddit relationship dramas for the morning group chat: a family vacation gets an unapproved plus-one, parents turn a wedding invitation into leverage for an old betrayal, and a boyfriend demands a choice between cohabitation and two beloved cats. Each story is a poster's account, not independently verified reporting, and the last two posts do not provide a later outcome. 123

A poster says their partner's younger brother had been seeing a woman for less than a month when he invited her and her young daughter on the family's annual ten-day vacation. The family had already rented two condos for the original group, and the brother reportedly decided on the invitation before his parents had even met the woman. 1

The post says the new girlfriend and her daughter had already spent eight of the previous ten days at the partner's house without a proper conversation about the arrangement. The partner objected to sharing vacation space with someone they barely knew, and the family reportedly treated that boundary as the problem. The thread drew more than 1,400 points and over 400 comments when retrieved. Those numbers show engagement, not proof of the poster's account. 1

The poster's edit says they planned to talk with their partner and might return with more context. No later outcome appears in the source we retrieved. The commenters mostly argued over whether the family should cancel the trip, provide separate accommodation, or stop treating one sibling's demand as the group itinerary. 1

A man says he discovered that his brother and then-wife were having an affair around the time of his first wedding. He says the affair was confirmed, both marriages ended, and he cut contact with the two people involved. Several years later, he was remarrying and left both of them off the guest list. 2

The poster says his parents wanted the family reunited because his brother and former wife now have a child together. Their reported argument was that a wedding should include the whole family. His answer, in essence, was that the family could include the people he still trusted. Then his parents allegedly said they would not attend unless he invited his brother. 2

The post had more than 600 points and over 250 comments when retrieved. Commenters generally treated the parents' attendance as their own decision, not a right to rewrite the guest list. The post does not report whether the parents eventually attended, so this story ends at the pressure point: an old betrayal is being repackaged as a family reunion problem. 2

A young woman says she and her boyfriend had tried to plan living together before, but the search stalled around her two cats. She says she handles their food and veterinary care herself and asked only that any shared home allow the cats to come with her. 3

According to the post, the boyfriend then proposed a more expensive home and told her that if she wanted the cats, she should cover the entire cost, which she estimated at more than four thousand euros. The reported ultimatum was to choose between him and the cats. The author says the cats had helped her through an extremely difficult period, and she was distressed by the demand. 3

The author's edit says she would not give up the cats and that the comments helped her recognize how serious the situation felt to her. She does not announce a breakup or any other final outcome. The community response was much less divided than the relationship itself: commenters framed the choice as whether a partner could respect an existing responsibility, not whether the author loved cats too much. 3

That is today's group chat: one person adds a guest list to a vacation, one family tries to add an old betrayal to a wedding, and one boyfriend tries to turn two cats into a loyalty exam. The recurring question is simple: is the disagreement about the plan, or is somebody trying to make everyone else absorb the cost of their decision? 123