Long engagement or short engagement? Which is better?

Question

I'm interested in some opinions. I think a long engagement ( atleast a year, 2 the most) is better than a 6 month or less engagement. IMO, with a long enagement, not only you have more time to plan your wedding ( if you want it to be big), but you and your partner will also have more time to know eachother and learn alot more about eachother and by the time you get married, your closer than ever. A short engagement on the other hand, they rush into getting married and I've seen plenty of them fail this way. I think people should just give themselves time. My boyfriend and I were together for 3 years. We're thinking about a 2 year engagement that way we'll definately be finshed in college and have a career.

Answer 1

This one's personal, it just depends on you two as a couple, you're the only people who know what's right for you and what will work best. If it's a long engagement, so what? marriage is supposed to be forever anyway, so a long engagement won't make any difference, you'll still be a couple who are commited to each other, the length of the engagement shouldn't make a difference



just don't fall into the trap of listening to other people, do what's right for you two.



@ U Asked, So Why Get Mad: You're welcome, all the best in your relationship and congratulations on the engagement! :)

Answer 2

I think long engagements allow you more time to focus more on the wedding. If you are planning a big wedding you will probably need a full year to plan, mainly so you have enough time out to book a hall and the church. The bad thing about long engagements, they allow you more time to focus on the wedding. I have seen in family and friends this huge obsession with planning every detail of the wedding, reception, honeymoon, the 14 bridal showers, 3 bachelorettte parties and you know one of those has to be a cruise or a trip to Vegas or something! In all that planning, it is easy to forget that when the parties are all over, you are going to be married. After flying on that high that is all that stuff, it is often hard to wake up after the honeymoon and go to work and make dinner and be...............married. It is often a hard transition. My husband and I planned and were married in 3 months. It was wonderful. I just had a friend who I would have expected a huge wedding out of, plan and be married in 3 weeks. She and her husband are both sheriff deputies and they had to burn up some vacation time before the end of the year, so why not get married then! They are planning a big reception for the summer but in the mean time, they are married. There is my 2 cents!! :)

Answer 3

I think it depends entirely upon the two of you as a couple and what would be best for you. I personally would have hated having a long engagement. I don't know how my sister-in-law did it. I think 6 months was perfect for my husband and me, just enough time to get everything planned. Not all people who have short engagements rush into marriages that fail. I know a lot do, but that's when people don't really think about what they are doing. If you really fully understand what you are committing to when you say your vows, I don't think it matters if your engagement was 2 days or 4 years. For me, I think you should be engaged for as long as it takes to plan a wedding as stress free as possible. You can plan a wedding in a day or a month or 2 years, do whatever is best for you and your fiance. Try not to stress during the planning of your wedding so that you aren't completely worn out from stress and excitement by the time it comes you can't enjoy it as much. That's my advice.

Answer 4

It depends. We would have gladly gotten married a month after we got engaged if we could have. We had been together for 3 years (lived together for that long too), so we knew each other inside and out by then. We just needed time to save up money so we could pay for the wedding we wanted. We ended up with a 2 year + 2 month engagement. A long time! But it was worth it because we had plenty of time to plan and we saved enough money to have the wedding we wanted without going into debt. It worked out for us. But if we had the money in the first place, we would have gotten married right away and I'm sure we would have been fine that way too. :)

Answer 5

I think that as long as you know each other before getting engaged, that having a longer engagement does not really matter. I mean, after all, you should know each other well enough before you get engaged, and even after you are married for 10 years you are still learning about the person, so you cannot possibly know everything about them before marriage, therefore, having a long engagement for the sake of having a long engagement is pointless. Now, if you are engaged for a long time because of planning the wedding, or unexpected financial problems, then that is different. But I see no reason to make an engagement longer just to get to know the person better, when if you need to get to know them better, you should not be engaged.

Answer 6

I think a year is ideal.



However, some of us have to go beyond that. I'm getting married tomorrow and our engagement has been 2.5 years long! This is why it happened:

~Got engaged at the end of December 2007.

~ Decided upon a spring wedding and of course spring of 2008 was going to be way too soon. There was no way to pull that off

~ We set a date for June 2009

~ Sat down to do our fiances and realized that in order to be able to have our friends and closest family members there, we would need to save more. We felt it would be stupid of us to put it all on credit cards and go into debt.

~Changed the date to June 5th 2010



We're not doing anything extravagant, but we live in a very expensive area. Also, we're paying a mortgage in said expensive area so it took a bit to save. We have less than 75 guests, cut corners everywhere, did A LOT of do-it-yourself stuff, and it still costs a lot.



Pros to the long engagement: All the money was saved, plenty of time to plan



Cons: The waiting felt like forever. We've been ready to get married for so long and it kinda sucked to wait.

Answer 7

When I get engaged I would like to be married in about a year. I'm with my boyfriend for three years and we're virgins until marriage, so when he proposes, we just need time to prepare a home and a medium size wedding. We probably won't be getting married for another five years, so there is no way that I'm adding an extra 2-6 years onto that! It's hard to abstain and live in different homes!

We'll have been together long enough by that stage, be finished college and have careers of our own. I may sound shallow with the whole sex thing, but I'm just being honest!

Answer 8

I think it varies depending on the couple... I know of couples who got engaged during college and wanted to finish it out before getting married (longer engagements). Some people want the wedding right away, so I say go for it haha.



I decided to do a 1 year because we're inviting a good number of people and I want to have the time to plan. Also, being engaged doesn't last very long and I'm one of those people who wants to savor this time :)

Answer 9

I think that depends on what your circumstances and priorities are. My fiance and I are getting married in September after a two year engagement. We had the choice between saving and planning for a big wedding down the road, or having a small inexpensive wedding quickly. We chose the big wedding. The love and commitment would have been there either way, so we didn't see the necessity of rushing.

Answer 10

I think it depends on the couple. For younger couples still in school, I agree it is good to wait until you are out of school and more financially stable.



If you are older and already have a career, it really shouldn't take two years to plan...unless you are saving for a bigger wedding. My husband and I got married when I was 25 and he was 31. We were engaged for a little over a year and that was more than enough time to plan.



Bottom line, you have to do what best suits you and your relationship. There is no option that is better overall.

Answer 11

You should be 'sure' before getting engaged, and know each other totally well enough BEFORE getting engaged.

I think a couple should be engaged just long enough to plan the wedding. A year is plenty. We were able to book things within a time period of eight months, so that's how long we were engaged for.

Answer 12

Personally, I believe a middle-ish engagement is good. I personally wouldnt want to have a really long relationship, but like you said it does give you time to plan and not rush. If you want a perfect wedding (as im sure you do) then dont go for a short engagement!!

I would say 2 years is good :)



Good luck!!

Answer 13

i think long engagement is better than short.Because first of all my purpose is to know more about my future partner,and also to his family.and also i want to see him on how he aware of planning about family.and having a family is not a race.and also it gives us more time to plan on the wedding,to save more money,and

plan more everything for the future.

Answer 14

My first husband and I dated for 3 years and were engaged for two years before we married....and that did not stop him from walking out on the marriage leaving me with four kids and all the bills.



My current husband and I were on line 'pen pals' for 3 years....phone pals for 7 months, courted (dated) about one year. Our engagement was five weeks long.



Four years and going strong...my 'gut' tells me this marriage will last.

Answer 15

shorter side.

why would you want to get to know each other better?

that is what dating is for,if you don't know each other when you said yes,why would you say yes,then decide if you can get a long with each other.

extending engagement does not make much sense except for a logistic reason,not to get to know each other.

Answer 16

I, personally, prefer a short engagement.