Unmarried parents - new baby's surname?

[MusicIsMedicine]

New daughter is here and still choosing her name. We are not married but would all like to have same surname. We are engaged but can't afford a wedding currently.

What's the pros and cons of giving baby her dad's surname? I don't like the idea of it being different to mine really.

[VioletBam]

Double barrel. My husband and I each have our own name and the DC have both.

Eg. He's Mr Smith, I'm Ms Browne. The children are Tom Smith-Browne.

You all have sort of the same name then.

[Kemet]

Double barrel

[NapQueen]

Isn't an actual wedding (registry office) quite cheap? You could always do the "whole shebang" in the future.

I'd want the legal stability of an official marriage with a baby; especially if you are intending to stop work.

[hownottofuckup]

Once you're married you'll have to reregister her anyway, so knowing what I know now I'd give her your name and change it along with yours when you get married.

[Flisspaps]

Why would she need to re-register the birth when she's married?

Why not just give DD the father's name now and then get married (a marriage ceremony is cheap - a wedding can get expensive) or change your name by deed poll for now?

[RhubarbAndMustard]

I don't think it is a legal requirement to re register.

[Emus]

Fliss, she will have to re-register because her name will be different on the birth certificate.

[ToffeePenny]

Mum's name for now, double barrel all three of you when/if you get married.

Pros - chances are you'll have to prove relationship (doc appointments, school calls, travel etc) than dad will anyway.
When/if you get hitched nobody will lose their identity in favour of anyone else's, you'll all be equal in changing. If you give her dad's name I guarantee you'll end up changing yours and doing all the crappy admin alone.

Con - if dad does these in the meantime he'll need a copy of birth certificate.

Double barrelling when neither of you are means you'll both need bc.

[Emus]

http://www.ukdp.co.uk/name-change-birth-certificate-england-and-wales/

[Boogers]

Babies do not need to be re-registered if either parent gets married. If you change their name that's different, but if you don't want/need to do that then you do not need to re-register anything. That's bollocks.

[meditrina]

"I don't think it is a legal requirement to re register."

It is. But as the fine is something like One Guinea most people ignore it.

OP: give the DC your name, with DP's as a middle name.

And do look in to the implications of cohabitation v marriage and make sure you are happy with your legal/financial position.

[Flisspaps]

I've learned something new there meditrina - the form to do it's there one www.gov.uk with the wording to say you must do it - every day is a school day!

[Flisspaps]

www.gov.uk/government/publications/application-to-re-register-a-childs-birth-following-marriage-of-natural-parents here

[PeppasNanna]

4 of my dc have a different surname from me. I've never had to prove I'm their mum.

We didn't marry in the end & I don't want to change my surname...

[LetItGlow]

Just give baby your DP's surname? Surely if you're getting married and you're changing yours anyway, so what does it matter if she has a different surname for now?

[Boogers]

Meditrina can you provide the legal advice that states that? DCs took H's surname when they were born so it didn't need changing when we were married. I'm interested to know why the registry office they were registered in and in which we were married failed to notify us that we were breaking the law by not re-registering them. What would be gained by re-registering them anyway?

[meditrina]

It's the Births and Deaths Registration Act 1953.

[Boogers]

Well I've seen the link Flisspaps posted and it implies registering the father on the birth certificate after the marriage of natural parents. DC's father is on both birth certificates, so we don't need to re-register, yes?

[fulltothebrimwithloveliness]

Just a slight derailment, hope you don't mind op

Our children have double barrelled surnames, and dp and I have kept our own names. I don't intend to take his name when we get married.

What I was wondering is, when dd and ds grow up, what happens to their surname if they get married, particularly if they meet someone who also has a double barrelled surname? Are there any conventions or would they just have to maybe take one name from each surname (how to decide?!) Or choose a different surname entirely?! It just seems like a bit of a minefield! Has anyone had any experience of this?

[fakenamefornow]

Both keep your own names, double barrel any children. Best and easiest long term solution for everyone.

[fakenamefornow]

fulltothebrimwithloveliness

I always figured both parents keep their own name, hand down one name each, whichever ones go best together.

[thrillhouse]

Give her your name. You carried and gave birth to her!

Then if you do get married and change your name you can change hers if you like.

[thrillhouse]

full DD is double barrelled. She can do what the fuck she likes if she gets married as an adult. It's her name!

[ChilliMum]

I would double barrel. We have names that can't be double barrelled so dc have dhs name (it was something that was important to him and I wasn't overly bothered). However dd is bothered. We are much closer to my family than dhs and by the time she was 5 she realised that most of her family share a name except her dh and ds. It's caused a bit of upset over the years. If I could go back in time I would give both names maybe not as a double but just so that my surname is in there somewhere.

[BoGrainger]

Girl has mother's name as surname and father's as a middle name. Boy has the opposite