Yes, whoever is dumped keeps the ring unless it's an heirloom.

The engagement ring represents a contract. The groom is saying to the bride, "I promise to marry you, and in the meantime here's this ring." The bride may have turned down other offers of marriage during her engagement. So if he then dumps her, she gets to keep the ring.

A friend of mine who is divorced had the stone from her engagement ring made into another piece of jewelry.

The couple must also return any wedding gifts they might have received if they split up. This is why you shouldn't use any of your wedding gifts until after the wedding.

I kept my engagement ring because he broke it off. I had a lot of tourment about what to do with it - give it back, keep it, sell it.
After a year of having it on my right hand I finally had it turned into a pendant. Now a year and a half later, I'm thinking of selling it. The diamond is beautiful but I'm to the point that the money it would bring me would help more than the accessory it is.

Besides, I'm sure I'll get another beautiful diamond someday!

What kind of jewelry?

I guess I could see earrings but you'd have to have at least a 2 diamond engagement ring for that. Pendant maybe?

I don't like to think of an engagement ring as a contract -- it makes the bride seem like a piece of property to me. And if that was true, wouldn't women get horribly upset if the ring was small (or nonexistant?)

My mom didn't have an engagement ring either. She still pinches dad's rear end when she walks by him. Ewwww.

HotDamn, my friend had a pendant made.

I'm not all that fond of the "engagement ring as contract" idea either - but not so long ago, women were viewed almost as property. Women were supposed to get married - if you weren't married by a certain age, you became a spinster and a burden to your family. :rolleyes: An engagement ring was a way for a groom to say to his intended, "I want to marry you, and I'm serious" - so the bride would feel secure in telling other suitors that she was unavailable. If her fiance then bailed, at least she had the ring.

Interesting tidbit along these lines: In Judaism you are supposed to have a plain wedding band, no gemstones. This is so that there can be no misrepresentation of the value of the ring (diamonds vs. CZs etc). The rabbi who performed my wedding took this one step further and forbade us from even wearing our engagement rings during the ceremony.

That's really interesting -- but confusing. The ring is SUPPOSED to be valuable, or not valuable? (the wedding ring, I mean. In Judaism.)

[somewhat of a hijack]

So, I have my wedding ring & engagement ring (complete with minature diamonds) from my first marriage. How tacky would it be to have something new made from them? Or, should I just take the whole lot and trade up?

[/hijack]

Honey, I don't think you could be tacky if you TRIED.

what did you have in mind, either way?

The ring is supposed to be valuable, but the idea is that the groom shouldn't be able to misrepresent the value of the ring to the bride or her family. He shouldn't be able to go to some random jewelry store and drop a couple hundred dollars on a ring with a CZ and go to his fiancee and tell her it's a diamond and he spent $5000 on it. If it's a plain gold band, then there's little room for misrepresentation.

Uhm....I've always understood it to be that an engament ring is given in contemplation of marriage. That is, the ring is a part of a contract. If the engagement is broken, for whatever reason by the bride or groom, the ring goes back to whoever purchased it.


At least, that's how it's worked out on all the years of People's Court, Judge Judy, Judge Joe Brown and so on....


However, I did a search on the 'net and found this:


California's law on the matter is found in Civil Code § 1590, which states that
"Where either party to a contemplated marriage in this State makes a gift of money or property to the other on the basis or assumption that the marriage will take place, in the event that the donee refuses to enter into the marriage as contemplated or that it is given up by mutual consent, the donor may recover such gift or such part of its value as may, under all of the circumstances of the case, be found by a court or jury to be just."


Basically, if a man gives a woman a ring, and she breaks off the engagement, he can demand the ring back. If he breaks off the engagement, he is not entitled to demand the ring back.


This too:

http://family-law.freeadvice.com/eng...eakup_ring.htm


Interesting.


.....Kelly :)

Ok I break up with my fiancee (dump her) because she is banging Enrico the Cabana Boy on our celebatory vacation . . . I am supposed to just be ok with her keeping the ring?

Remind me to keep the bill of sale and insure it in my name.

or not date a hooker?

Nooooooo, that's not tacky. My mom did the same thing with jewelry from her first marriage! Of course, it's up to you...if you want to trade them in for something new that you pick out yourself, by all means, do it. :D

For the fellas...

A few people said "why would you want to keep the ring?"

If you dumped her but she didn't want to keep the ring and offered it back, would you take it back? Or would you insist that she keep it and do something else with it?

I feel like I would probably offer the ring back because it seems like a polite thing to do, but I'd secretly hope he'd insist I keep it:p