Naming children, I have a revolutionary idea.

[HollyBerryBush]

Lets start off with the fact that I am personally very traditionally orientated with many social aspects.

Some things should be "just so", that is the way of the world and universe and never tampered with (well not in my world)

But!

In this world there is only one thing you can be sure of, a child comes from it's mothers body. If you want to query it's parentage, the mother is never the parent in question. The mother is (usually) the person tasked with upbringing the child.

In the west, why have we not reverted to a matriarchal family name as standard?

disclaimer< I know I'm going to get posts from adoptees, steps, fostered and whole caboodle of funky people who merged their surname to create a new family name.

Matriarchal line, it can't be altered whereas patriarchal can be cuckolded.

It's odd, when you put it like that, I don't know why we have.

I suppose because, given the mother is the parent who's not in question, the father's name sort of proves to the rest of the world that the child is his? I know that's often not in question (!), but it used to be in the past that a man could refuse to acknowledge his child and let that child use his name.

My thoughts exactly, OP.

Well, since a lot of women take their husband's surname when they marry, it would be a little strange for the child to have a different surname from those used by either of its parents.

We went for the Scottish tradition of giving DS my original surname as his last middle name, so he has both family surnames (but his official surname is DHs)

It's an interesting question actually and thinking about it, it should be so. Maybe LRD is right. Has it always been so or was there once another way?

But perhaps women shouldn't be taking their husband's surname?

Have women in this country always taken their husbands name - traditionally at least, because I know quite a few who have not. Wish I hadn't actually but that's by the by. Italian women keep their names - must investigate how they name their children - with their name or the husbands name?

We've done the Scottish thing too AMIS although I didn't know it was Scottish. In Iceland (I think) girls take their mothers' names and boys their fathers' names. So women are all called xxxdottir (daughter of xxx).

Don't know what happens when they marry!

Because lots of mothers don't want to. I didn't, for exactly the same reasons you give for having the mothers name as standard.

No one was ever going to question that my children are mine, but there could be that question over their Dad. We weren't married and are no longer together, but he's a great Dad and deserves his children to have his name just as much as I do. I had other easy ways to bond with my baby, it was nice for my ex to have our children take his name.

I chose a wonderful person to have children with, and in my mind, if he's good enough to make a baby with, then his name is good enough for my children.

Plus his surname was way nicer than mine.

I think I would like it if we adopted the

first name/mothers surname/fathers surname as standard

But that's me as a genealogist.

There are several different patterns across the world; Lithuania Eg where a SM has no father willing to register, she legally has to give the child the alleged fathers first name as a middle name and I have no idea why!

Really I'm just coming at it with a complete arse ache tracing my family tree!

Stase in Iceland both sexes take the father's name as in (e.g.) Johnsson for a boy & Johnsdottir for a girl. I think more unmarried mums are giving their children their own name as in (e.g.) Janesson & Janesdottir

I completely agree, wish we did it that way. I assume that our system is to do with inheritance of land/property, and that if a man acknowledges a child as his, it can be his heir. Sort of overriding any lingering doubts...

I think its to do with what Clouds said, connects the man to the children or comes something.

In Ethiopia (I think) the surname of the child is the first name of the father and you keep that name.

So say DH was called Dave, our son would be Jack Middle Name David.

I am really interested in this. I don't understand why it is conventional to give DCs the fathers surname.

DP and I are not married - and we would not change our names if we were to get married. Neither of us want to follow patriarchal convention by giving DCs his surname. Neither of us are that attached to our own surnames. It would be a strong feminist choice to give DCs my surname, and I would be happy with that. He would be happy too, though he doesn't like my surname (nor I his, nor my own, nor he his either).

So we are thinking of choosing between our names in a fair 50/50 way - ie, tossing a coin.

OR - giving our DC a new surname altogether. Possibly a maiden name somewhere in our family history - and have no basis for choosing this name other than the one we like best.

I'd really like to hear from anyone who has done anything like this. Did people give you stick for it? Did you encounter any problems as a result of giving your DCs a different family name?

Some English surnames have feminine endings suggesting they may be matriarchial. Brewster, for example (and anything else ending -ster). But that might just be because the brewster (it means a woman brewer of beer) in question was widowed or a single mum, rather than anything more deliberate.

I agree with Clouds. You only have to look at my DSs anyway to know who their father is.

HeadsDown If I had my time over I would absolutely definitely do what you're saying there. We have some lovely old names and surnames in the lineage and some really (IMO) cruddy ones now. I don't like my current surname and didn't like my original one growing up although I can see now that it's a much much nicer name than I thought it was. I'd take my paternal grandmother's name I think.

Or how about sons get the father's surname, daughters get the mother's surname?

I have a hyphenated first name. First name- First name + mother's surname-father's surname would just be atrocious.

Plus, when you then have children and so your child has your surname-DP's surname, how do you choose which of your surnames your DC has from you, and which from DP? Or do you go First name maternal grandmother's surname-maternal grandfather's surname-paternal grandmother's surname-paternal grandfather's surname, which could get a bit long and complicated after a few generations

Traditionally children do take their mothers surnames
It's just that for a long time that surname would be the fathers surname because she would ready have taken his name

It's the Unmarried people who have been giving their children their fathers surname that have been getting it 'wrong'

But, re your second post Holly BB wouldn't we then end up with shit loads of surnames generations down the line? 2 names would become 4, then 8, then 16....

Ooh - those naughty unmarried people!

My girls have had my surname from birth (unmarried and no longer with their father). At the time it was completely non-negotiable and there was little discussion about it. Since then some people have commented that it's a bit bold on my part. Totally right in my view (for my circs)

I gave my DD my surname, her father's surname is her middle name. Luckily enough, his surname can also be used as a girl's first name so it fits quite nicely. I would never consider giving my child anything other than my surname, regardless of marital status.

Muslim children usually take their father's first name as their surname and keep it, the women don't take their husband's name when they marry.

They do that in Spain - end up with shedloads of names, I mean. You take a surname from your mum and dad, and all of them going back through the generations. One of the witnesses at my wedding was Spanish and he spent about half an hour writing it out!

I agree.

It would have stopped XP making me give the DC's his surname.