Active discussions

Help protect children from gaming harms.

Take our survey

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Baby names

Find baby name inspiration and advice on the Mumsnet Baby Names forum.

Original poster

Is it really wrong to name a new baby after someone that died?

40 replies

sockmonster · 02/06/2009 16:25

Slightly odd question I know, my instinct is that it's a bit odd and not a great idea-
BUT just wondering what the general consensus is? For example- naming a baby after an older sibling that died?

Is that disrespectful to the older sibling, is it honouring them, or is it just plain weird for the new child?

Thanks

OP posts:
Are your children’s vaccines up to date?
Set a reminder
Bucharest · 02/06/2009 16:49

Grandparents/parents/friends is OK.
Siblings is weird. Not for the parent, but the child would probably end up with massive complex. (sorry!)

suwoo · 02/06/2009 16:48

Someone I know had a stillborn baby and they gave her name to the next daughter as a middle name.

I think it would be strange (sorry if thats a bit harsh) to name a sibling after a child that had lived for a few years and had already 'owned' the name.

Original poster
sockmonster · 02/06/2009 16:47

Shame though! I think I need more people to talk me out of it!

OP posts:
Original poster
sockmonster · 02/06/2009 16:46

othermarypoppins- I do worry that the child may grow up to have serious mental health issues and after extensive therapy will ring me one day and say it was all my fault for using the same name..!!

OP posts:
Original poster
sockmonster · 02/06/2009 16:44

Eyeballs- see I'm guessing that as it was so common, it was less that parents sought to replace the child and more that they wanted to honour them and use the name again?

OP posts:
TheOtherMaryPoppinsDiets · 02/06/2009 16:43

Hmmm I think it's odd, sorry. Middle name at a push but not the first name.

I do know of someone who wanted to do the same and it was poohpoohed by one and all. Not sure if they ended up doing it in the end or not.

EyeballsintheSky · 02/06/2009 16:41

It's only relatively recently we've stopped doing this. In doing our family tree we only have to go back to the 1920's to find families where the 3rd son was called Peter or something after the eldest son called Peter had died in infancy.

TwoScrambled · 02/06/2009 16:39

Middle name is a good alternative, espeically good if two middle names and both are family names. Dont know why, it just sits well with me that way

Original poster
sockmonster · 02/06/2009 16:37

I mean the person not the name- but in using the name again it would honour their memory in a way...

Hmm

OK I think I would be met with rather disapproving comments from both sides of the family!

OP posts:
Original poster
sockmonster · 02/06/2009 16:35

Hmm I think it's because it's my favourite name!! I want the name to be remembered, if that makes sense. I wouldn't want everyone to think I am completely nuts though!

Middle name a better alternative?

OP posts:
fucksticks · 02/06/2009 16:33

dpends on the relative tbh.
I think most relatives would be fine, only a sibling would be a bit odd as it might look as though you were trying to replace them seeing as you chose the name both times iyswim. Anything else would come under 'honouring' them I'd say

Northernlurker · 02/06/2009 16:32

I think actually most people don't tend to do this with siblings - the parents know better than anybody that what was lost cannot be replaced so why would you use the same name?

As a way of honouring other relatives though I think it's a lovely thing to do. Had any of my girls been boys they would have had my uncle's name as a middle name and I know another little girl with her aunts name as a middle name, aunt having died three months before the birth.

Original poster
sockmonster · 02/06/2009 16:31

See I was kind of thinking maybe naming the child after an older relative like grandparents isn't too weird.. but that naming them after an immediate relative is?

I'd want to do it- but I don't want to do that if it would have serious psychological effects on the new baby when it grows up and finds out the background.

OP posts:
RealityIsMyOnlyDelusion · 02/06/2009 16:27

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

steamedtreaclesponge · 02/06/2009 16:27

I think it would be a bit odd naming a baby after a dead sibling - a bit like you were trying to replace them IYKWIM

If you were naming them after a grandmother/aunt or something, fine