That old unmarried surname dilemma...

I think if you are going to change your LOs name, do it sooner rather than later.

Seeker, it is a sad fact that some women view a father figure is of no importance, find a gullible man, have a child then cut all ties, knowing that as 'egg donor' daddy will never get custody unless mum is a risk.

Bluestocking I have two dss with their mum's surname for exactly the same reason - would prefer no involvement from their dad at all. I know not all mums do it for this reason but it's sad isn't it. Oldest dss had dp's surname registered, mum then unofficially changed it, and registered youngest dss in her surname.

DS has DP's surname for this reason, and also I hate my own surnme and can't wait to get rid of it myself!! Sometimes I get called mrsDP/DS, but I don't mind.

But if giving a baby the mother's name only relegating the man to the role of sperm donor, isn't giving it the father's name equally relegating the woman to the status of egg donor?

But if giving a baby the mother's name only relegating the man to the role of sperm donor, isn't giving it the father's name equally relegating the woman to the status of egg donor?

I double barrelled my sons name and although i'm glad he has both surnames on I hate the pretentiousness of the double barrell. In hindsight I wish I'd just put my surname on.

Re. creating a new surname, you could join your two surnames together, i.e. Johnson and Tomkinson could be Johnkinson or similar.

As regards to what happens on subsequent marriage, I am told traditionally it is usual to drop the first part of the barrell. So Miss Johnson-Tomkinson marrying Mr Doolally would be Mrs Tomkinson-Doolally.

Having said that though I think people can do pretty much whatever they like nowadays!

I love the idea of creating a new family name for all of you. Then you can choose anything you want.
My DP would never have considered this so DSs took his name. I got so fed up of having a different name to them that I changed mine by deed poll. We'll probably get married at some point so I would have changed eventually anyway.
btw, I hated my surname and DP's was better so I didn't mind changing. If I'd loved my surname I might not have been happy to surrender it so easily.

Oranges, my DS has my DP's surname. I was not and am not bothered about him having a different surname to me. Also, DP's older son has his mother's surname, and DP suspects that this was because he was little more than a sperm donor to her - she kicked him out when DSS was a toddler. So it was important to him that our DS had his name. I can't speak for anyone else but that's why this woman did it.

My children are double-barrelled - what they do when they start their own families is their problem!

I suspect they will drop dp's name because it only needs one letter changed to make it something embarrassing!

I like Montague, Montgomery, Gillespie, Winstanley......A few nice sexy sur names for you all

I am not married and I have split from my ex and my two children have their Dad's sur name. It's not the end of the World I guess, at least it shows that their Dad was in their lives to start with. Maybe I'm too sensitive about that though.

you can actually change your names to anything you want. Maybe it's time to start new traditions!

It's a long story, but essentially, it's part of dh's name, which meant a lot to both of us.

Speculating about Partandlemon's potential double barrel. Ruby-Port? Tawny-Port?

Mexican men and women always double barrel their names, then when they get married, they keep one of the names and adds one of the new partners names. You don't have to keep extending the name for ever!

portandlemon - that makes sense - we kind of had that reasoning too - both dh and I have long convoluted surnames so it was a relief to just pick a shorter one!

I know the feeling of dilemma with names. I kept my surname when I married, but later, after ds was born, both dh and I changed our names and gave ds that surname, so it was like creating our own little unit, not bound by a patriarchal line, iyswim. And I still keep my unmarried name for professional reasons, so feel I didn't subsume my identity.

Interestingly, if you were to get married then you could re-register the birth and change the surname to yours or to a combination of the two names if you wanted.

oranges -- I am married but have my own name; DS has DH's name because our names sound ridiculous double-barrelled (one name is a noun and one an adjective), and of the two names I prefer DH's aesthetically. It's virtually impossible to come up with first names that sound good with my last name AND it's a pain to spell. It's no contest on which one to saddle someone with for life. Had my parents given me my mother's original surname as all or part of mine then it would have been a different story. It doesn't bother me at all to have a different name from DS. Anyway, cant speak for why women (plural) do it, but that's why one woman did.

Why not hyphenate? That's what we did. Never been a problem. Told them as they get older that they can choose either name or both if they want. Haven't wanted to yet.

I know of a couple of who have taken a novel approach: they both have long names (one foreign) which there was no way they could double barrel. So their children have a different name to either of them! . It does have a hisotrical connection to them, bit it is certainly a different way of apporachong the issue.

Ds has dh's name, while I still use my own (foreign and unsual) name. I have to admit to regretting slightly that we didn't put my name into ds' in some way, as it looks like the Scottish "branch" will die out (at least name-wise) as my db doesn't look like he is going to produce any offspring.