Changing first name

[mollymollymoo]

Hi
It's looking really likely that we've been matched with a little girl - very excited! However - her current name is so identifying and ridiculous that even our social worker has said they can work with us to change it.
She'll be nearly 2 when she comes home.

Does anyone have any experience of this, the practicalities etc?

This is our 2nd adoption and we would have been more than happy to keep her name otherwise.. but really it is awful and not fair on her to have to grow up with it!!

The baby is 15 weeks old and still with biological parents, Kristina.

The mother could still change the name on the birth certificate under law.

There is no comparison.

All the adoptees who had their names changed who have said that it is an issue for them, and those who have said it impacted on their identity issues - surely you are not saying that they are all wrong about their feelings, or that their feelings are wrong?

If the child in the thread you linked were older than 12 months, then yes a court order would still be needed and yes psychologists would say there may be identity issues, as per the 2 quotes in my post up thread.

Brightsunshine

There is no empirical evidence I can see that suggests changing a name is harmful. Of course, there are those who say the loss of a name has affected them, but there are also lots of people who have not suffered any ill effects from a name change and in adoptions from 40+ years ago, most names were changed. I’m not trying to negate feelings of those who say they have been affected by this. We have to take the view seriously and as every single person on this thread has said, we have to consider the needs of the individual child and base our decision on this.
I find it hugely frustrating that you keep saying that psychologists view changes are harmful, as though this is a fact. It is not fact. The two quotations you provided are opinions, not facts. You could just easily find two psychologists who say that changing an adopted child’s name won’t have a negative effect. The paper you linked to does not focus on name changes in adoption, so it doesn’t support your argument. Yes, it claims names are linked with identity, but identity is much more complex than just names. Identity is formed through a complex ecological system in which many factors contribute to the formation of one’s sense of self. A name is merely one part of this, and its relative importance will depend on the individual and their circumstances.

It is misleading to make claims that cannot be substantiated with rigourous, relevant, academic research. The reality is that any research done into this is likely to yield mixed results, with some in favour of name changes, others against - rather like this thread

All the adoptees who had their names changed who have said that it is an issue for them, and those who have said it impacted on their identity issues - surely you are not saying that they are all wrong about their feelings, or that their feelings are wrong?

No I 100% believe that all adoptees who have said it is an issue for them are telling the truth .

And I 100% that those who said it is not an issue for them are telling the truth .

And I 100% believe that those whose name wasn’t changed and they wish it had been are telling the truth .

(And I wonder why you don’t talk about these latter two groups).

But I’m not sure what that proves, because the plural of anecdote isn’t data.

Same as “ I read a blog about it “ isn’t a RCT.

But I didn’t say anyone’s feeling were wrong and I wonder why you would suggest that I did.

You seem to range between misinformation about the legal process on this subject, misinformation about the research evidence , emotional appeals and setting up a straw man.

I didn’t post about peoples feelings being wrong and that’s not what that link is about.

The thread is about a mother wishing to change a name and how that is, or is not, linked to IDENTITY.

It’s about my observation that no one posting on that thread thinks that the baby’s name is it’s identity. And I wondered why .

Your answer seems to be that it’s because it’s the biological parent who wishes to change the name. Which is what I thought you would say, as it neatly discloses your thinking. Which seem to be that a biological parent has more rights than an adoptive parent ( to change a name ).

Which of course is entirely wrong. And as a student social worker you should know this .

Or, in the alternative, you are more concerned about the views of the BP than the welfare of the child. Again you should know that this is wrong .

I fail to see how the age of the child is relevant. If it’s about identity and feelings then they will be the same if the chid is 15 hours, 15 days or 15 weeks.

Many of the the adoptees you speak of ( who have regrets ) had their names changed at much younger than 15 weeks, sometimes at birth or less than 6 weeks.

If it’s so self evident that changing a child’s name is wrong ( at any time for any reason in any circumstance ) , why are you not on that thread ( and others like it ) telling the parents how wrong they are ?

I understand that it just be frustrating for you when people ask for evidence. Especially if you are used to thinking that “ because I say so “ and “ everyone knows this “ and “ it’s stands to reason “ are proof.

And “ do what I say or you won’t get what you want” is collaborative working .

But most professions used evidence based practice whereever possible and try to work in a client focussed manner. So the regular posters on these boards are likely to ask you to evidence things that you state as fact, especially if they conflict with a more nuanced , person centred approach.

dontbuymesocks I think the fact that there is almost no research is the point. There needs to be more research. But that all the evidence points to there being issues with changing in relation to adoption. There is no research saying there is no harm, and nothing points in that direction. Research to do with the bio/non bio relationship in relation to adoption is hugely lacking and is needed.

kristina that is a very, very long post. I will read it when I get a chance.

I think the fact that there is almost no research is the point. There needs to be more research

I think we are all agreed on this point, yes ?

But that all the evidence points to there being issues with changing in relation to adoption. There is no research saying there is no harm, and nothing points in that direction

I thought there was no evidence ? Which one is it - there is scientific evidence or there isn’t?

How can the non existent evidence point to something ?

And even if there was proof of harm, how do we balance benefit and harm?

Eg There’s lots of evidence that cars cause harm. 1.25 million people die in the world each year as a result of car accidents.

1,800 people were killed in the Uk in 2016.

researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/CBP-7615

That’s not even counting those who died because of pollution.

So why do we still drive cars in the uk , when we have hard evidence that they are harmful ?

Because as a society we decide that the benefits to some people / society are worth the Harm to others.

Brightsunshine
You clearly have strongly held beliefs about changing and adopted child‘s name. However, beliefs are not facts and you have provided no real evidence to support your views. If, as Kr1stina suggests, you are a trainee social worker, I sincerely hope that you do not present your own views as canon when dealing with adopters and children.

kristina did you originally post as Orlaith? I think in a nutshell your posts under the name Kristina have been saying "changing names doesn't matter" and that you are minimising the feelings of people who have explained to the world how they feel about their names being changed, you have done it on this thread and on others.

No I am not a trainee social worker and no I have not given wrong information (other than the badly worded post which I then corrected). I have given really clear, objective information, in fact.

There is no research about name changing in adoption but there is a lot of information about name changing generally and all of it points towards there being issues with a parent changing the name of a child at a certain age. Adoptive adds another layer of complexity on top. The information I provided earlier and the links are all really clear to me, to anyone objective reading this.

I am a specialist with years of experience in a wholly different area, and trying to understand the name changing issue better. And as a specialist in a different area I would like to explain dontbuymesocks that when professionals offer opinions in an area of their expertise, they aren't "just" opinions - they are informed, they have weight and I am pretty sure the psychologists referred to would be able to come on and give you chapter and verse about how they formed their judgement, and what is judgement and what is based on hard research.

I think it is the minimising, the dismissing of what evidence there is, the trying to discredit people who disagree with you all points towards the fact that no, adopters should not change the name of children without checks and balances.

I will post again about the research because as I said earlier in the thread I think it is key to this whole debate.

kristina and dontbuy I wrote earlier in the thread that the bio factor was important and orlaith wrote Gosh, that’s news to me. And I’m sure it’s never occurred to any of the adoptive parents here either. You’d think that there would be books or research into this, wouldn’t you ? Oh no, wait......... but I think she was referring to books about attachment (which is just one part of the jigsaw in relation to developmental trauma) and therapeutic parenting for children who have suffered early trauma.

I was referring to the fact that there appears to be either no or not nearly enough research (ie high level peer reviewed by psychologist/psychiatrists in the English language) on:

• psychological affects of being brought up away from bio family, with/without contact, rejected/not by bio family, psychological impact of adoption itself
• following on from this how best to help children for whom there is no option but to be brought up away from bio family
• psychological impact of letterbox how it is organised now and recommendations in relation to contact, more research about face to face
• name changing as per this thread

In all honesty, yes I think the bio factor is of huge importance for the many adoptees who object to name changes, and it is an area not well understood at all. I think it will one day be a bit of a national scandal in fact, just how little research there has been and just how little expertise and guidance there is.

There is research on the continent but it is very difficult to access.

If either of you think I am wrong then please do provide links. I am aware of the permanency report. I would prefer it if you just kept to facts and opinions on what is written, rather than trying to discredit people or make personal comments.

Please tell me where I said that changing names doesn’t matter ?

Please tell me where I have minimised peoples views ?

Please tell me where I have dismissed evidence ?

And even if I did do all these things , why ON EARTH would what I have done or said “ point to the fact that adopters should not change the name of children “?

You can criticise me all you like and accuse me of saying things I didn’t say. But none of that will prove anything about the matter in question,

If you are indeed a specialist in a “wholly different area” then you are not doing a very good job of listening to others who are specialists in this area.

Most professionals are very careful not to opine on matters that are not within their own field. I wonder why you feel differently.

And you seem to be struggling to understand the difference between fact and opinion, as many others on this thread have pointed out. Which is unusually say the least for a professional .

I look forward to reading the evidence that you are relying on, especially as you said about 2 hours ago that there was no research on this.

And I think you will find that dontbuymesocks doesn’t need you to explain to her what a professional opinion is.

brightsunshineatlast are you telling to explore the reasons why adoptive patents might feel a name change is the right decision for their child? Can you see that some circumstances may mean it is best for the child?

What about situations where the child themselves asks for it?

willing not telling. Sorry phone has mind of it's own!

kristina you say If you are indeed a specialist in a “wholly different area” then you are not doing a very good job of listening to others who are specialists in this area but we don't have any specialists in this area on this thread, and I have in fact quoted real specialists to back up what I have said and more than one poster has said they think the real specialist is wrong. I haven't confused opinion with fact, I start opinion with "I think..." and I explain where the thinking comes from.

I am concerned about the lack of research and the impact that has on children who are currently adopted and who will be adopted in future - do you not agree?

Re minimising, every post you have written is basically saying "name changing is fine" - you give example after example of where name changes have been fine, you say no experts needed or good reasons, and adoption should be no different. Do you not? I would say that is minimising.

italian

brightsunshineatlast are you [willing] to explore the reasons why adoptive patents might feel a name change is the right decision for their child? Can you see that some circumstances may mean it is best for the child? If you go back and read my posts you will see that I have said in my posts that there are sometimes good reasons for changing names.

What about situations where the child themselves asks for it? I don't think it is appropriate for a child to have that responsibility, no. children don't always mean what they say. It is appropriate for adoptive parents to make the decision together with other professionals involved and the court, I think.

*I am a specialist with years of experience in a wholly different area, and trying to understand the name changing issue better. And as a specialist in a different area I would like to explain dontbuymesocks that when professionals offer opinions in an area of their expertise, they aren't "just" opinions - they are informed, they have weight and I am pretty sure the psychologists referred to would be able to come on and give you chapter and verse about how they formed their judgement, and what is judgement and what is based on hard research.

A specialist in what? Adoption? Psychology? Flower arranging? This means nothing as you aren’t prepared to say what your interest in adoption is. I’m not asking you again, you’ve made it clear you don’t want to answer this, but it’s a fairly meaningless comment. Sorry.

Please don’t patronise me. I have already said that I’m an academic working at a university, so I’m quite aware of how opinions and judgements are informed, and how knowledge is created. If you want to start a discussion on epistemology, bring it on. The are very few, if any, incontrovertible truths in a discussion on identity. We are not talking about science, where a hypothesis can be proved or disproved in a lab. Because of this, academics don’t always agree. You will find that highly qualified, well-respected researchers regularly disagree on topics, and each will have some evidence to support their view. Why? Because there isn’t ONE truth on this - we are dealing with the lived experiences of individuals (adopters and adopters) who all have different life stories, perceptions and beliefs. A single, provable truth does not exist in relation to this topic. Research on this topic is yield to different results based on the participants, and the methodology and methods chosen. For example, one research project might have a purposive sample of participants chosen because they have expressed unhappiness about their name change, another might have a convenience sample and include a wider range of views. The research would, therefore, be likely to come to different conclusions.

As I have said multiple times, it is a complex issue and each child’s circumstances must be considered on its own merits. However, the reason I challenged your post is not because I disagree with everything you say, but because you are making unsupported generalisations and misrepresenting research, without acknowledging the limitations of your sources.

I’m going to bow out of this now because we are just going round in circles. I’m not sure this is helpful to anyone now.

I have already said that I’m an academic working at a university, so I’m quite aware of how opinions and judgements are informed, and how knowledge is created I assumed that you weren't aware because you had dismissed the opinions of the psychologists as mere random opinions.

You are right and wrong about what you say about research. In my area of expertise and at my level there are differing views, yes, and the same is true of all areas of expertise. But what I am saying here is that more research in the areas I have referred to would have monumental affects on the lives of adopted children. That the research we have at the moment about therapy for trauma, about how to help violent children, about how to help children who are struggling to learn means that we can do things that completely turn around the lives of the children - more so now than ever before. We have guidance in those areas and information about therapies which really work. I know because I have seen it work.

And that yet we are totally lacking in this sort of research and guidance in relation to adoption, and the bio/non bio relationship and all the areas of hot dispute on this forum.

because you are making unsupported generalisations and misrepresenting research, without acknowledging the limitations of your sources but no I am not. I have been crystal clear about the information, the sources, what has not been checked and what has been checked, I have been clear about the limitations and that what I am saying is simply what I think - based on the info which is available and otherwise based merely my life experiences - and clear about the limits of the evidence I have referred to.

brightsunshine you’ve been asked previously and preferred not to share your connection with the adoption triangle - I think your ducking of this point reveals quite a large issue. You are coming at this from s theoretical position and ignoring the reality unless it’s from cherry picked anecdotes that back an opinion you already hold.

Your references to research are not conclusive and haven’t taken into consideration the longer term issues of names that can impact a child and the wider family.

I changed my sons name because i judged it the right thing to do. It wasn’t the ideal, perfect thing to do but as a parent, my decision had to be based on a number of balances - identity and security, early unprepared contact versus a familial link, the ongoing identification of being adopted by others outside the family versus birth mothers wants. I assessed all of them and like lots of adoption decisions made the choice based on the realities of life with what tools I have available to me.

There is no current research that balances the identity issue with the issues around internet security for example. Or the issue of 2 children being placed in the family with exactly the same name, or the impact of a birth name that’s based on the birth families drug dealer, or the child’s name being from the domineering rapist that abused the birth parent. And when you theorise around these things in a black and white manner while refusing to give an insight into what skin you have in this game, it’s very irritating for those of us who live with the enormous complexity of adoption every single day and have to make imperfect choices over and over again.

My parents renamed me as a way to disconnect me from my birth family, they also threw away all the clothes and toys my birth mum had sent with me. I was also separated from my siblings. I think they thought they were doing what was best for me as if taking away everything from my life pre them was a way to protect me from the pain, intact my Mum said the first thing we did was get rid of all those clothes she sent with you. What it actually did was give me a tremendous sense of shame that I carry with me to this day. Unless the name is ridiculous why take it away when people have lost so much anyway? Surnames change so tracing isn’t an issue and every other adopted person I know has as an adult traced their birth families anyway.

Playingcatch I am so sorry you had that experienced.

Adopters are now told very clearly to keep belongs etc and how important they can be.

We are also very open about the child wanting to find birth family when they are adults. It's the approaches that may be make before a child is an adult that could be an issue, especially with very unusual names.

I can't speak for why your adoptive parents did what they did but I would imagine they thought they were doing the right thing, as you say. I am so sorry this has not been good for you and really hope that there will be a chance for you to get past this at some point and feel secure in yourself as who you are, whatever name that is.

Playingcatch you make your point very clearly. I think that the name change issue is a long term one.
Names can carry a lot of information about the people who chose them. They can be indicators of education, ethnicity, class or even religion. If a Chardonnay is changed to a Charlotte, or a Mary Theresa to a Miriam for example, it can carry the message unintended or otherwise that the class or religion of the original family is unacceptable in the new family. I can see how that creates shame and damages the sense of belonging eventually in either family. I wish you all the best.

Kristina I like the car analogy. I think that most of us on this thread have been living with the enormous complexity of adoption every single day for a number of years. I speak on this thread very occasionally and never with the intention of causing hurt or disrespect to anyone. I'm here to listen and learn and have built up some experience over the decades. Cars provide benefits as well as presenting dangers, but if you saw someone driving with a child in the front seat with no seat belt, should you say something? Intervention may well meet with denial, defiance or irritation. The most likely scenario is that the child will survive the journey uninjured and the driver may feel vindicated. However, the severity of the other outcome makes it important to intervene. Its not about the statistical probability of a negative outcome. Its about avoiding an entirely avoidable catastrophe.
When you repeatedly hear adopted people describe the same experiences and feelings, its very difficult not to speak up. Its not intended to be criticism, its supposed to be helpful. If my opinions can't be accepted as valid, then there is nothing I can do about that, but at least I've tried to raise awareness.

I'm a NC regular who rarely posts these days. I've stayed out of this because these discussions always go round in circles, as this one has.... But....

I think part of the reason this is causing such confusion is that the name changing can be split into two different camps:

Situation A: changing child A's name from Karen to Jane, mainly because the adopting family want to choose the name of their child (understandably), and/or they don't like the original name. I suspect this situation is probably one that occurred with more frequency when babies of unmarried mothers were routinely adopted, rather than today's adoption of children removed from birth families.

Situation B: changing child B's name from Chardonnay to Charlotte. Or changing siblings names from Kellee and Jaimmiee to Kayleigh and James. Adopting family are worried about the traceability of the original names AND about how they fit into their existing family (birth siblings Olivia and William). It's an unfortunate fact that there are (for want of a better word) class connotations with names and a child named Chardonnay growing up in a middle class family will stand out. It would be clear who the adopted child was. So even if there aren't any safety fears regarding traceability, there will be concerns about the child feeling (more?) different. So, the decision is made to change Chardonnay to Charlotte. Charlotte isn't a name the adopters would pick, but it's better than Chardonnay for the reasons stated above.

I would hazard a guess that the vast majority of modern adopters who change names are doing so because Situation B applies. I'd also hazard a guess that the majority of adoptees who dislike that their name was changed grew up in Situation A (very few adoptees forcibly removed from birth families will be old enough to be posting on MN?). Whilst the subject matter is the same, the context surrounding those decisions is entirely different. I'm in no way criticising adopters in Situation A - at the time, it was the accepted thing to do, no one was aware about the long term consequences etc. Situation B though, is a perfect example of the balancing act that current adopters have to do - it's a never ending series of decisions, neither of which is a clear cut winner. But, keeping children safe is obviously the priority - and that means minimising the chance of them being found online/in person.

I'd be interested to know if the people who have railed against name changes feel the same about them in both situations and understand why perhaps the adopters on this board feel that in Situation B, a name change is the least bad solution?

henrik I agree totally. Add in the negative emotional issues around some names in scenario B too (eg child named after abuser). There are really valid, necessary reasons to change a child’s name. And I agree, at present the research is still based predominantly around scenario A

Henrik - I also agree. I note that the adoptees from group A are almost always those who were unhappy with their adoption in general and the change of name as part of that. And often, as we have seen, they refuse to acknowledge any of the issues that are very real for the adoptees in group B.

Being traced on social media aged 14?

“Not a problem for me”, they reply “because I chose to trace when I was 30. And that’s totally the same thing. “

Your birth mother stalked you and put recent photos all over social media appealing for the return of her stolen child ?

“I don’t believe that happens, my BM is a teacher now and she’s lovely, she would never do anything like that. And my experience is generalisable to all adoptees ever.”

Facing death threats from your AC family and have to move house ?

“Just report it to the police and they will fix it. Because in my cosy middle class world, the police are a real threat because people have something to lose. And I assume it’s exactly the same for people who have been in and out of prison all their lives . They will totally stop their campaign if a nice social worker goes round to their house for a cup of tea and a chat.”

Your child is upset because they can’t be in school photos, take leading parts in schools plays , be named in concert programmes, have a social media account or have their winning sports results published on the web or online ? Your child gets bullied because she’s called Princess Heaven - Lee?

“Well they shouldn’t be upset because dogma”.

My child doesn’t want to be reminded daily of his mothers rapist / pimp/ dealer ?

Well he’s wrong because rape, abuse and drugs are his identity and you can’t take that away from him.

They are stuck in a time warp, unwilling to acknowledge the issues that face children and teenagers now rather than their own issues as a 50 year old.

They are stuck in a time warp, unwilling to acknowledge the issues that face children and teenagers now rather than their own issues as a 50 year old

I think that you are unwilling to acknowledge the long term mental health issues that people adopted as children face in adulthood. I think that you underestimate the pain that is caused to adoptees by tensions between the families. Having said that, I feel that it is incumbent on both families to work on that, rather than placing the burden on the adoptee, who certainly never had any say in the matter of the adoption. Prioritising the best interests of the child shouldn't evaporate when she reaches 18.

I don't understand the suggestion that adoptees who were relinquished as babies decades ago are 'stuck in a time warp' around name and identity issues. I was one of those relinquished babies, given a completely new name by my adoptive family. This is 'me' and I've never known any different. When I eventually found out my birth name, it meant nothing to me at all. I'm glad I wasn't called that as I don't particularly like the name. Yes I traced my birth family, more out of curiosity than anything else, and they are 'lovely people'. But they're not my family. My family are the ones who brought me up and loved me to bits.
I now have an adopted grandchild- their first name has stayed the same, but middle name now links with our family. I understand absolutely, the dilemmas facing adoptive parents and am well aware how different things are now, compared to when I was adopted. You'd have to be a bit slow not to appreciate how very sensitive the issues are today. If my DD and SIL had wanted to change their child's first name, I would have supported that decision 100%, knowing something of the birth family's background. Just saying... But I can see this discussion going round and round as there are so many viewpoints and probably we'll never all agree.