To want my baby to have my surname?

[Scaltini]

I am 30+1 with first child, and not yet married to DP - got a bit hijacked by pregnancy!

My DP has two children, he was also not married to their mum at birth of first child - they married three months post birth, but the child had his surname from birth.

Basically he expects the same to happen again, which I am quite against, mostly because I will be the one taking the baby to all of the appts and would be a bit odd for us to have different surnames!! We're not planning to get married until next winter, so it would be a whole year of having a different surname to my baby - although I suppose it's going to happen to one of us either way...

I think his issue stems from fathers having less rights if not married to the mother, although from what I gather rule changes in 2003 mean this is not the case if you register the birth together (I am assuming this literally means you both go to register the birth - who knows!)

Also on a more petty note when my Step-daughters are here, there would be 4 people in the house with DP's name, and just me with mine!! Sounds trivial, but feels important...

So I have pretty much decided that the baby is having my name, which I think is fair - will break it to him in a few weeks I think. Nothing like a bit of procrastination

Why should a child automatically be given his/her father's name?

OP if you want to give your child your name then do so.

Yanbu.

I regret letting XP make me give the DC's his surname. He wouldn't accept them having my surname so I had to give in.

Now me and the dc's have different surnames and I'm weighing up whether to get a solicitor involved to see if he will agree to let me change their names or not. He doesn't see them anymore and we are on good terms with his family but for practical purposes I would feel more comfortable if we had the same name.

Don't let him push you into it.

animula- It's a common misconception but marrying the mother does give the father automatic parental rights.

Depending on when the child was born (and where in the UK) an unmarried father may already have PR from being on the birth cert.

Giving PR to fathers has massive legal consequences which, worryingly, most Mums seem oblivious to.

I say go for it!

If you want a middle way, try the double barrel option, with yours first.

I don't see why you would need to change your name if you get married, I find it strange that we suddenly seize to have our own history and get renamed after our lord husband.

I really think it's a matter of being used to it. Where I come from, women always keep their family name, so it's not considered strange to have a different name to your child...it's only when I came to England that I saw that it's in a lot of women's minds.

foreverastudent - yes, you are right, wrt marriage and rights about shildren, etc. My post was v. unclear. I meant something along the lines of "marriage won't give more than being on the birth certificate".

But, tbh, am I correct in that?

Seems to me, that's the info the OP was needing, so that she could have a proper discussion with her OH.

Also, I'd kind of like to know, because I'm interested now (hint, hint) ... .

"Are you going to take his name when married? If yes, change your name by deedpoll now. Everyone has the same name, everyone wins"

ER no.. how does the OP win, worst comes to worst and the marriage is delayed, then put back, then another PG.. He gets to have a perfect little family with zero legal protection for the DC.

If he wants the right thing, the right appearance the answer is simple, put a ring on her finger. Or at least get it done on paper. The actual party can come later.

I have 4 friends that are not married to the fathers, yet to all outsiders they look as though they would be, big house, big careers, all the trimmings etc, and only one of us kept the DC names as her surname. All of them have issues about the fact that the P never got round to marrying her.

Why on earth SHOULD we move heaven and earth, carry the baby, end up doing the bulk of the caring, keeping house, putting jobs, life etc on hold, and change our names to make HIM look as HE has done the right thing by us?

It IS embarrassing not to have the same surname, it invites questions or comments, and heaven help you if the other name isn't indigenous to the country....

Why SHOULD it be automatically assumed that the DC have HIS surname, even if he hasn't married their mother? Why, when she is the one carrying them, nurturing them and losing the sleep, should she change her name by deed poll, for his reputation? What about hers?

In the past women wouldn't have lived with their P, they would not have had DC with a P, only ever after marriage. Why should men get us to do all the running about when they are not doing any running themselves.

If you register your DC in your name until you get married, once you do so the change is permitted automatically and free IIRC.

It IS a big issue. Once you have DC with men who are like this, you lose all bargaining power.

I really disagree that having a different name is embarrassing, besides, if more women kept theirs then nobody would bat an eyelid.

LilMs - It's embarrassing to not have the same surname as your children and partner? [hmmm]

Does it never occur to anyone that women don't have to change their names on marriage? You can be married and have - gasp - more than one surname in the household. Marriage is about social and legal commitment between two people - it's not about bloody names!

I kept my name when I married. When DD1 was born she was registered with my surname, DD2 has my husbands name. It has never caused any embarrassment or confusion. The only person who raised an eyebrow was my MIL but after nearly 30 years she has become used to the idea. I am surprised that people still worry about this.

If you are planning on getting married at some point, please don't burden your children with having to change their names by deed poll. I had to do mine and it's a fucking nightmare. Now I'm married I have to do an audit trail of surnames every time I fill in a form. It's a right pain in the ass, and it will last my whole life!

But the name is connected to social and legal commitment... it kind of just is.

I'm not naive, I'm old and have lived all over the place. It's not just me that finds the different name thing excruciating, if it were I'd not bother saying anything.

I agree if more women kept their name, it wouldn't be so noticed, but why are the DC automatically assumed that they have to be registered under the father's name?

I kept my own name when I married. DD has both our surnames, hyphenated (because no hyphen, I know from my own name & experience, relegates the middle name to being just that).

I fully expect that when she gets older she may want to drop one of the names to simplify her surname, which is absolutely fine and I'll make sure she knows that we don't mind at all if she does.

I am still gobsmacked that in 2010 it is the default assumption that if parents don't share the same surname then the kids automatically get the fathers name. (and for that matter that so many women still change their name for marriage. My excuse first time round was that I was 19 and naive
)

The name is connected to social and legal commitments ... by a long history of patriarchy.

And it would seem it's not history.

Like sue52, I'm amazed this is still an issue. And that it would appear from this thread that lots of women still change their surnames on marriage.

If I'm not married when I have DC, they will certainly be having my surname. Statistically they are a hell of a lot more likely to end up living with me and without their dad, than with their dad and without me, depressing as that may be.

Plus I will not change my name on marriage, so the difference is for life.

Hyphenating is an ok option, or someone on MN merged her and her DP's name together and (I think) they all took it. E.g. Paterson + Williams = Wilson.

...Sorry my point was, YADNBU, they are your children too, and you are likely to look after them until adulthood, far more likely than your DP is.

Will you change your name when you get married?

I don't think its embarrasing to have a different name to your child, but I think its a very personal thing to each individual.

But I understand the OP niggles about it. Personally I wouldn't have liked it, althought I can't articulate why, I just wouldn't have. DH wouldn't have liked it from his point of view either. Because of this he was very adament we wouldn't be having children until we were married.

Agree with posters who said if more women who kept their name after marriage it wouldn't be so noticed. But I also love that I have DH's name - I'm a traditionalist I think at heart!!

I gave my boys 3.5 and 2.5 there fathers surname, we were engaged and were going to get married when our family was complete and I was going to be taking his name. My fiancée left me for another woman when I was pregnant with our third. our daughter is now 14 weeks old and I have given her his surname too- didn't feel I could do anything different as I was thinking about what the boys would think and how she would feel when she was older.
With hindsight I wish I had given them all my name and then changed it when/ if we did get married. I now wouldn't have to be trying to get the idiot to agree to having my name included in their surnames as I'm never going to share the same name as them otherwise!

:( wheredid - that's what I mean. If there's only going to be one name used, give them the name of the person who will be left holding the babies if the relationship blows up in your face. Do you have to get his permission then?

When dd1 was born she had my surname and once dh and I got married we changed her surname to his.

I wish I'd had a crystal ball when we registered them!
Yes I can't change their names with out his permission. I'd love them to just have my name now but I'm not that mean. Ive asked for my surname to be included he can choose his order of prefrence, allhes said is he'll consider my request!!!!

I simply dont understand why children are automatically expected to be given the Fathers name...it's a completely different world today than it was when that tradition began. In those days it was beause women and children were literally owned...and needed the protection of their mans name. Why do we all have to have the same bloody surname just because we're family?

In my own case, DCs have both names, I have mine and he has his...our DCs know that my name is my identity and their Dad's is his...they get both because they are part of both.

I just don't understand the desire I suppse...to take on your husbands name...what's wrong with keeping your own? Can someone explain?