Any mental health people? Can a child remaining unnamed for 9 weeks have some affects?

I agree that those things are necessary from birth. At no point have I said they were not, despite you and a couple of others seemingly reading it in my post.
What isn't necessary, and what won't cause trauma, is the lack of a proper name for 9 weeks. Which is what the OP asked.

If you are looking for root causes for any mental health issues you currently have a look at ACE. Adverse childhood experiences and see how many resonate. As other posters have said it’s not the lack of name it’s what was going on around that. Wishing you the best

Are you a seriously saying a baby isn't affected by the first 9 weeks? So it makes no difference if a baby is loved and cuddled and talked to and given affection? I don't think you've thought that through.

Just because you don’t “start laying diwn” long term memories before 4-5 doesn’t mean your experiences before then—kindness, cruelty, chaos, love don’t affect you. Hell language learning has taken place, all your emotional griwth and education on intimacy has already taken olace. Don’t be so dismissive of this poster’s question.

I think it's part of a bigger picture.

A baby in a loving, caring family who just couldn't decide on a name and used a cute nickname...no.

A baby who didn't have that secure attachment in those first few weeks...which if you ended up in the care of your gf at such an early age it sounds like you didn't...I can see how. It's not the name per se, but the lack of attachement

Unless you have been given a name that causes you unkind comments or a lifetime of correcting spelling, I cannot see why not. And in any case, you could be given what I would call an unkind name when only a few hours old, so timing makes no difference.

I agree with this. We all need to feel fully loved and taken care of from birth, if you feel this didn't happen, of course you can feel upset.

A nine week old baby doesn't have a sense of self, an identity, an ego. They know absolutely nothing whatsoever about anything!
They don't even actually even know they exist?!
So of course it wouldn't affect someone negatively. If you hadn't been told you'd never know or feel any different so it's not a big thing.

OP, sorry some people have been unpleasant. It's a reasonable question. As others have said, the lack of name alone would not harm the baby, but it sounds like it may have been part of a wider picture of neglect and that may well have done some damage.

Please seek real life support if you feel issues from your childhood are causing difficulties for you now. It is definitely possible to heal these early wounds, but many need help to do so.

Remember that if you don't quote the post or mention the OP a tiny comment can make it look like you are dissing the post above yours

Bizzaree post

I have 2 memories from 2.5 - I had pneumonia. The first is vague - feeling ill in white place. It manifested as dream for years before I mentioned it to my parents and the association with me going down with pneumonia whilst visiting a church with a striking white interior was made. The second was waking whist sleeping downstairs in the living room with my Dad - we had no upstairs heating in those days so I slept downstairs when I was ill - was a memory I identified myself.

Don’tyou have to register within 6 weeks ?

Yes, probably. The main reason being the lack of care/interest from your parents in that crucial early period. The lack of a name is a symptom of the problem.

The first few minutes/hours/days/weeks are crucial for a baby's development. That's why babies who had to spend time in an incubator in the 70s/80s are more likely to grow up lonely and find it difficult to interact with others - because it that critical period after birth, they were isolated and alone.

People often seem to think that because a person can't remember much before the age of 2 or 3 that a baby doesn't take their experiences in. That's not true. For good or bad, the earliest periods are the most influential on their subsequent development and character.

As others have said it's the reason for no name and the level of care received which is critical.

Our youngest had a name from birth but for months was always called "baby" or " bundle" (which became "bunny" and is still her nickname 11 years later).

Some friends of ours named their babies at the very last moment before compulsory registration. They are real faffers and agonized over finding ideal names that suited the baby.

I also know two people whose parents changed their name in the first few weeks. One because they decided they liked the middle name better and one because they found out the original name was the same as next doors cat!

In all cases the babies were loved and wanted though and no suffering occurred.

It sounds like your start in life was difficult OP. I hope you are OK.

Mine were registered on the last day given to attend the registrars office and have no psychological issues.

Registered yes, named no.

@DenholmElliot11 babies have to be registered within 6 weeks but not named. They can just be boy or girl.

Not having a name.on it's own isn't a problem but whatever happened before you were taken in by your grandfather, and the separation from your mother, would definitely have an impact.

Sounds like life has been quite tricky for you.
Don’t actively look for reasons to be traumatised. Dig deep for resilience and see this as a quirky tale that is a part of your story but not something that affects you in your strong adulthood.

Of course not. In my country babies aren't usually named until around 2 months old, when they get christened (or in my case naming party), for my oldest it wasn't until she was 10 weeks old.

And neither of my children were called by their name much at all in the first few years, instead they were called baby. My 7 year old is still called baby more than he is his name.

Whre I'm from the child's name is registered within 3 months and that's usually when the name is announced. And parents till debate the name in the morning. So a child having a name when it is born is not usual for me and I can't say that most people form back are eternally damaged by not having a name when they were born...or maybe that doe explain why they are the way they are.

OP, whether or not you had an overall loving and secure childhood, I can see that discovering you had no name for so long might make you feel weird when seen in conjunction with the fact that you ended up going to your grandfather. Like you had a lost 9 weeks. But as others say I don't think not having a name per se at that young age is what's affecting you now, it's just a symptom of the bigger situation.

My sister and I were not named until 6 weeks but this is because my dad seems to regard that cut-off date as the point to aim for and not the absolute maximum. My brother got his name immediately because my mother pre-emptively blurted it out when he was born. I don't think it's done us harm as we had loving and competent parents. I am affected by my parents' ongoing disagreement and resentment over my name, but that's a different issue.

@MiniCountrymandreams “before being taken in by my grandfather” ….this is the question to be asking , the naming itself is irrelevant, it’s the circumstances as to why you had to be taken in, isn’t it? You may well have had a name given to you by your mother but she wasn’t in a position to make it formal or register it due to eg.her mental health.

Like what? What kind of ramifications could it possibly have?