ZOMBIE THREAD ALERT: This thread hasn't been posted on for a while.
AIBU to be surprised that in 2013 people are up in arms about a woman keeping her surname on marriage?(239 Posts)
For clarity's sake, it is worth stating that I am a gentleman mumsnetter who is due to get married in the spring.
My fiancée is keeping her surname after the marriage. It wasn't something we'd discussed, it was just something both of us assumed that we would both keep our surnames on marriage.
Anyway over the last few weeks I've been shocked at some people's reaction to this.
My fiancée met her Aunt who was over from Australia who asked her what her surname would be after marriage, to which she responded 'same as it is now.' her Aunt was a bit dumbfounded and her Aunt's husband who is a bit of a stereotypical unreconstructed Aussie male, starting going on about 'what sort of bloke would stand for that' I'm amazed he hasn't put his foot down' etc etc.
A male friend of my parents had a similar reaction. He asked my mum how she felt about there being another Mrs Hat in the family and when she explained there wouldn't be, he was beside himself.
Am I really surprised that people have such definite opinions on such things and feel entitled to express them to us in quite vehement terms?
I got married last year and kept my name. I too was surprised how many people this seemed to seriously rile. Mostly people my age (under 30), funnily enough!
It was irritating that so many people seemed to think that I would like to be referred to just once as "Mrs DHname", so did things like post wedding pictures on Facebook with that caption. I really couldn't get them to understand that not changing your name was a bloody step forward for women, not something to be pitied. People saying "it's such a shame you need your maiden name for work". I did, but I wouldn't have changed it even if I had no job and never intended to work again. Got sick of trying to explain this though.
5madthings my DDs are double barraled and choose to wear odd socks, at age 11 I've clearly raised raving lunatics
you don't have to re-register the births if you get married!
what a loads of crap.
it doesn't say on the baby's birth certificate if you're married or not, and the only difference would be if you changed your name - which, for legal reasons has to be the same as it was when you first registered it.
Actually you do having spent some time googling!
Only in england and wales but if you don't do it I am not sure how they will know or what they will do about it?
re-registering is only done if the father isn't on the original birth certificate
if the father was on the original certificate, you don't need to do anything, it's only if he wasn't on it.
I thought I'd said this before but have found that I ommited to do so
Congrats on your up coming wedding Compo
i noticed some LA seem to go "ooh, yes, you have to re-register if you marry" but fail to put "if the father isn't on the original certificate"
it took ages to find the reference in the .gov's pages.
in fact, even that's NI, and the rest-of-Britain .giov site doesn't even mention re-registering!
Its a requirement u dear law of the legitimacy act 1976 and the info is on the direct gov website.
s you have subsequently married your childrens natural father after their births there is a requirement in law for you to apply for their births to be re-registered. This is under the Legitimacy Act 1976.
The re-registrations would overwrite the original birth entries and the children would have completely new birth entries to show them as a children of your marriage.
You can find further information concerning re-registration together with the application form LA1 which you will need to complete.
You may also obtain the LA1 application form from any register office in England or Wales.
So, there's the offcial line - didn't bother asking why!
No it doesn't seem to matter if the father is on the birth certificate or not. Our registry office was quite quite stroppy about this when we questioned it.
I don't really care what surname someone has.
If I need to know, for whatever reason, I just ask.
It never astonishes me when a woman says Ms X as opposed to Mrs Y.
Some people are living in the dark ages.
well i never.
i agree with you mad - it does seem odd re-writing history.
I would be happier if there were some kind of amendment to the certificate stating "name's parents <named here> married on dd/mm/yyyy" instead.
Yes its mad and I can't see what can be done if you dont re register the births?
My parents didn't re-register me & it has yet to make any difference to my life that I have my original birth certificate, not one from 10 years later when they married...
ooohhh Limited, practising on word document sounds promising, sounds worthy of a thread, put it in chat, then it will disappear anyway.
goes off to try to grow own backbone to enable starting thread about own bossy sister
Sorry OP, for mini-hijack.
My parents didn't re-register me & it has yet to make any difference to my life
Thanks once again for your kind wishes everyone.
I can't see what possible difference it would make either.
If the children were born after 2003 and the father's name is on the birth certificate then the father automatically has parental responsibility. If the children were born before this time, is it the re-registering that grants the father parental responsibility? That's my best guess.
There's no difference in terms of inheretence between children born inside or outside the marriage. Anyway if you've made a will you may choose to leave no money to any of your children or leave it all to one of your children as you see fit.
Not sure about the parental responsibility. I was born before 2003 (!), to unmarried parents, & although my dad was on the birth certificate he didn't have parental responsibility without my mum doing this "accusing him of fathering a bastard child" thing - not sure what the legal term was but I've seen the document wherein my mum accused my dad of fathering me & my dad pleaded guilty to fathering "said bastard child Katherine"...
child" thing - not sure what the legal term was but I've seen the document wherein my mum accused my dad of fathering me & my dad pleaded guilty to fathering "said bastard child Katherine"...
The conversation before we got married went like this:
Mr Slug "Are you going to change your name when we get married?"
Slug: "Why? Are you?"
Thus ended the conversation. I offered him the far more aristocratic Slug surname but he declined the offer.
Well we got married 30 years ago and I kept my name. We had planned that DH would change his name to mine because I was bothered about it and he wasn't, but his parents threw a huge wobbly when he told them.
We were Ms X and Mr Y for 2 years until we had DC1 at which point he changed his name by deed poll to double barrel X-Y. The first solicitor he tried - a young Miss - looked down her nose at me and said she would be proud to take her husband's name . The second insisted on interviewing DH on his own to ensure he wasn't being coerced .
For about 10 years we got cards from the PIL and BILs addressed to Mr & Mrs Y, and I got birthday cards addressed to Mrs Y. Now the only one who consistently does that is MILs sister.
The dc are all X-Y. They all get stuff addressed to Mr/ Miss Y, which really riles my DD who calls herself Miss X. They are all over 20 and all have different ideas on what they plan to be called when/ if they marry. AFAIAC it is their choice and I will do them the courtesy of addressing them and their partners the way they choose to be addressed, rather than demanding they do things my way.
The conversation before I got married went something like:
Me: Thank fuck I can finally get rid of my dumb rhyming name.
I'm sure had I been marrying Mr Wankbadger I may have thought differently.
OP - give them something to really rattle their knickers.
Say "So If I had married my former boyfriend, you'd have expected me to take his name then?"
Congratulations and good luck.
But seriously, I get exasperated at some of the things that get said and the passive aggressive reactions to the set up over names in my family, and I think 'this is nothing to what it must be like coming out in some of these narrow minded families'.
I reregisteted ds1 when we were registering ds2 (had married in the interim). It's the same certificate (and names have stayed the same) just with the date of our wedding in one of the boxes. It is still obvious we weren't married originally as (obviously) the date of birth is earlier.
I just wanted their certificates to look the same really and so they can learn more if some descendants are doing our family tree in the future! But we were never told we "had" to do it, you don't have to.
Say "So If I had married my former boyfriend, you'd have expected me to take his name then?
What do you mean my disabled, black Polish boyfriend who is claiming benefits and has a massive flatscreen TV?
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.