What surname for the baby?

Hi @JamesJames my husband and I also have our own surnames. I had no desire to change mine.

Our son has my husbands surname. no mention of mine. My logic (I say mine, because my husband wasn’t bothered which name he had at all) is that whilst i think the world is ready for women not to take men’s names, I don’t think the world is ready for children to take mum’s. If I am Smith, husband is jones, I didn’t want our son to be Baby Smith, because there would be a danger that people might not realise my husband is the father (they might think he’s just my partner, unrelated to the child. This is simply because it hasn’t happened yet, or rather hasn’t boomed yet. Double barrel names are messy.

could you honour your side by ensuring the middle name (or even first name) is from your side only
?

Do what the Spanish do ....

Spaniards have a personal name(s) followed by two surnames – the father's paternal family name and then the mother's paternal family name. For example: Hector Marίa GONZALEZ LÓPEZ.

You could just pick a new surname for you all completely!

Yes, I already have an unbreakable bond with them, a name doesn't add anything for me.

Rather than the mother who grew and birthed them?!

Maybe pick the nicer surname?

I didn't change my name on marriage but I did automatically give my children their father's surname. 25 years on, both DH and I wonder why we did that and probably wouldn't today. I do have a great surname though. If we had used it at the time I suspect both my in laws and my own parents would have been shocked. But they'd have gotten over it.

The only thing I do think is that my son probably likes having the same name as his dad. But he is a great dad and close to all of them.

I do think that whatever surname is used, then that is an acknowledgement of that side of the family and it gives the other person a bit more weight for chosing family middle names etc.

Just double barrel the surname and save yourself the stress

They are his children and its a nice way to acknowledge that.

If you've kept your own surnames then the baby should have the mother's name.

I agree with a previous poster - men are more likely to walk away from a family.

Your dad will get over it. Or, he won't. But it doesn't matter.

Same situation here.

DD has my surname and DH’s as her second middle name. She loves having a clear link to both sides of her family. She sometimes uses both names.

Why did it seem right?

We have ours my DH's name. I feel like no one ever questions a mother's deep connection to her DC, so it's nice to give the father than acknowledgement. Middle names were from beloved family members on my side of the family though.

I thought this was always the way and seemed right to me

Where are people getting this from? The child always takes the father’s name unless there is a reason not to. If the father is on the birth certificate, traditionally, ie 100 years ago, the child has his surname.

Traditionally, babies have their mother’s surname. (Also traditionally, the mother marries the father and takes his name, but that’s a separate tradition.). My kids are DHsurname because I am Mrs DHsurname. If I weren’t, then they wouldn’t be.

I thought long and hard about this. I didn't change my name when we got married. My kids have my surname as a second middle name. I thought this would be good enough.

My 10yo today asked what my surname was. It's in his name! It's an afterthought.

This is not true, except in cases where the child was born out of wedlock and unacknowledged by the father. In parts of the British isles it was common until fairly recently for women to keep their surname, which is how we have done it, and our kids have their father’s surname.
I understand the reaction to the patriarchal tradition of kids having their father’s surname, but it’s so widespread and tbh I believe it’s a matter of convenience and also a courtesy to your children to give them the obvious choice rather than go with burdensome double barrelled names.
Also if I met a family where the kids had a different surname to their father id assume, wrongly or rightly, that he was the step dad.

I have my mums as a middle name and my dad's as a surname and I did the same with my daughter. And as my dad only had girls I also gave my daughter my paternal grandads first name as a middle name. So as a couple we choose first name together, ex got his surname and I took middle names

Sorry but no. If I’m going to the trouble and pains of growing this whole human inside me, I’m giving it my name in some capacity. In our case, we’ll double barrel the baby’s name and s/he will have my surname first and then my husband’s. People only used to put fathers’ surnames on birth certificates because once a man claimed the child and gave them his name, they were essentially his property. Ditto for wives.

We created a portmanteau name for both parents and all the kids. It's been great.

Also, we have no plans for marriage, we've been together 19 years and have a 4 year old and a 8 month old and if we do get married in the future then I'd most likely take his name so we'd all have the same surname, but if we don't I'm not really fussed about having the same names.

I've always known children to have the father's surname, married or not, so I'm very surprised to see so many people saying traditionally the mother's surname.
Our child is having its father's surname, I hate my maiden name & still use my late husband's name.

TBH I just felt right to me, that they are his children so should have his surname. They are deeply connected to me as I carried them and nourished them in my womb so it felt right that he should get some kind of connection too.

How come? Not a trite question, I'm genuinely asking why you felt that was more important than them having your name even though you aren't married?

This