Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

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

62 replies

MiniCountrymandreams · 23/04/2025 07:35

I’ve just found out this morning, before being taken in by my grandfather, I had remained unnamed for 9 weeks.

I am curious to learn what ramifications that may have, or if any of those may be lasting.

Is it psychologically important for a child to have a name early on?

OP posts:
TheCountofMountingCrispBags · 23/04/2025 07:47

MiniCountrymandreams · 23/04/2025 07:35

I’ve just found out this morning, before being taken in by my grandfather, I had remained unnamed for 9 weeks.

I am curious to learn what ramifications that may have, or if any of those may be lasting.

Is it psychologically important for a child to have a name early on?

Really? Do you honestly think, given we don't start laying down real memories until about 4 years old, that a newborn not having a given name for a paltrey 9 weeks, is going to affect its mental health??
I despair.

LavenderFields7 · 23/04/2025 07:45

Purely speculative: I think it’s a case of chicken and egg. The fact you were not named indicates a possibility that your parents struggled to bond with you and see you as a small human (as opposed to an object), which could have potentially caused you harm (less cuddles, less care etc). So I think the lack of attachment is what did the damage (lack of name was a symptom).

But then again, it might just be really indecisive parents, family arguments about names, grandparents wanting an input, there could be things you don’t know that went on.

Ohmeohmygoodness · 23/04/2025 07:45

It wouldn't have any adverse effects at the time.
But I think finding out about this when you are old enough to worry about it would be very upsetting.

Merryoldgoat · 23/04/2025 07:44

No. My youngest sister had about 4 names for two months until my mum liked a name enough.

My two sons were named in the hospital but I don’t think I called the oldest anything other than ‘gigantor’ or ‘seal pup’ for weeks. The youngest was ‘piglet’ for months.

woodlandstream · 23/04/2025 07:43

I would imagine the REASON you were unnamed would have more of an impact then the unnaming itself

I work in mental health and agree with this. Also, the reason why you were taken in by your grandfather is very relevant here.

Dhxusksgxuks · 23/04/2025 07:42

No, being unnamed for nine weeks would not have a negative impact on a baby who was being loved, cherished, cuddled, cared for and provided for. However, the fact that you were taken in by your grandfather at nine weeks suggests you weren’t receiving that love and care in your first weeks, and that might have had a lasting impact ❤️

AliBaliBee1234 · 23/04/2025 07:41

At the time no, you wouldn't know you had a name obviously. But now, I can imagine that would be quite hurtful under the circumstances.

DenholmElliot11 · 23/04/2025 07:40

No it won't affect someone like that

How were you un-named for 9 weeks when births have to be registered within 6 weeks by law?

MrsBennetsPoorNerves · 23/04/2025 07:40

I would imagine the REASON you were unnamed would have more of an impact then the unnaming itself.

This.

Tespondent · 23/04/2025 07:38

9 years yes, 9 weeks no.

Cerialkiller · 23/04/2025 07:38

I doubt it. We didn't name D's for four weeks (stuck in NICU) and after that rarely used his name anyway, it was more 'baby' 'tiny face' etc.

I would imagine the REASON you were unnamed would have more of an impact then the unnaming itself.

Sodesperatelysad · 23/04/2025 07:37

No, of course not.