to not use his surname for baby

[notenoughtimeagain]

When me and DP met we both discussed our wants for the future. I knew he wanted another child and he knew I wanted to get married, have the big day etc. 2 years down the line and we are pregnant. DP has started to say he doesn't want a big day and has shown no interest in asking me to marry him anytime soon. I feel a little bit like he is getting his own way and I've been tricked. DP has a child from a previous relationship who has his surname. I have two DC who have mine and my ex partners surnames double barrelled. We never married. TBH if I had known what a pain double barrelled names are I would have thought twice. Filling in forms and there is never enough room , searching for appts, prescriptions etc. Both DC tend to just be known as my surname at school as it is easier. Their choice and both me and EXP don't mind as it genuinely is a mouthful of a name and a pain. They use the full name for official stuff obviously.
With the new arrival I am seriously thinking about only using my surname. I really don't want to have a different name to the baby and my experience of double barrelled is not great ( although it wouldn't be quite as long as my other children's). Of course DP will be on the birth certificate but just not using his surname. And if he ever gets around to marrying me we could change babies name to our married name. DP is adamant that we should use his surname, double barrelled as a minimum but preferably just his name. AIBU to want to use just my surname? If he is that traditional he should be marrying me. He surely can't pick and choose the bits he wants to do properly?!

The surname of your baby is the least of your worries, but in YOUR position, I would bow down, give the baby his name so he knows you are serious about him, and stop blackmailing him over that wedding day, using your baby and baby's name as a bargaining chip.

Ha ha. I think OP has already demonstrated that she is serious about him by wanting to marry him in the first place. If anything her DP is the one who needs to show evidence of "being serious". Whilst I agree the surname shouldn't be used as blackmail, I think in situations where the woman is unsure about whether the partnership will last (which I think is the case here), it is reasonable to use her name rather than the fathers.

Oh, come off the WTFs, if you had read and understood my entire post, you might not have frothed so.

But let me explain my position in more detail here then:
Because it seems to me that her main concern is getting back at him. Because he does not want The Big Day. I cant see anywhere that he really does not want to be married to her. That is not really what she is complaining about. He does not want a big wedding.
By insisting baby does not get his name, she is signalling that she does not believe in the relationship, because she is thinking ahead to a life without him. She is signalling that she sees herself and her kids as her KEY unit, not him in it. He might as well be a sperm donor or a marionette to her wedding plans only.

If she really is serious about him and their future together, she needs to look closely at what she wants, as I suspect she also wanted a baby. People dont just go and get babies to appease their partners, or as bargaining chips. I assume she wanted the baby too. So, if she wanted a baby, and he wanted a baby, they both want to be together, it is not smart to sulk over a Party that is not happening and make points about babys surname. She needs to meet him in the middle, and discuss their future, the name of the baby, without discussing the Wedding Day, as that is besides the point.

OP, there will be lots of people who will tell you what is right, in their opinion. It is not so simple as "my baby my name" and "i pushed so I chose", not when you are two people who love eachother and want to be together. Seeing the other persons perspective, and look out for olive branches, and look for the best in your partner may serve you better than sulking and frothing. Even if MN is frothing with you and telling you that you are right to kick up fusses. In real life, in real relationships, it is not that simple. They dont know all the ins and outs.

At the end of the day, it is you, your partner and your children, finding a way that works for your unit together. Who cares what MN thinks of your decisions? Nothing is straight forward.

MN is like a wave of opinions, for and against, if you listen long enough to everybody you might end up more confused than you were before, and likely MORE angry and agitated with your partner. MN does that to you. The group mentality is strong. Think of it as a mass of people standing around you egging you in one direction, then the next, and in the end you dont know what you think anymore, and you just go with the loudest voices, straight to your partner, and kick up arguments that could have been solved by some quiet reflections and honest conversation - with the person that matters.

But that is just my opinion. You dont need to listen. The masses will swear and froth and pick me apart, I bet. Just you see!

Oh, come off the WTFs, if you had read and understood my entire post, you might not have frothed so.

It is rather patronising to suggest that the reason people disagree with you is that they haven't read your post properly. Many people (including me) have said not to use the wedding as a bargaining chip. How does "compromising and meeting in the middle" from your new post mean the same thing as "bowing down and giving the baby is surname"?

Perhaps. But I disagree. It is so typical to skim-read a long post, and then take objection to the final sentence, and start frothing.

Think about it, if a group of people are chatting, and one person says something the other disagree with, do people usually scream out WTF?

No, because people are a lot more polite in real life. Bolding out WTF as a reply to somebodys opinion is rude and insulting.

So, my tone in reply may have been a little patronizing, as I dont really hold much respect for people who shout WTF to all and sundry.

But come on, derail the thread and pick arguments if you must.

" Many people (including me) have said not to use the wedding as a bargaining chip. How does "compromising and meeting in the middle" from your new post mean the same thing as "bowing down and giving the baby is surname"?

To me it is quite similar. Bow down, wind your neck in, in a context when she is sulking, I think bow down is quite apt.

Not sure she can use the wedding as a bargaining chip as he does not want one. Did you mean the baby?

Anyway, I will leave you to it.

Good luck, op!

Ops DP is doing what he wants by not getting married.
Seeing that her DP is happy to put what he wants first, OP decides it OK for her to do the same and give the baby her surname.
Sounds fair enough to me.

Why should OPs DP have his cake and eat it?

If he wants the baby to have his name, he knows what he needs to do.

Again with the patronising. Having a different opinion to you is "frothing".

Your first post said that the op should "bow down" to her partner and give the baby his name. Can you not see how people would find that objectionable? Women should not be forced to bow down to anyone. It wasn't a wtf to all and sundry, it was wtf to you (and it wasn't even me).

Because it seems to me that her main concern is getting back at him. Because he does not want The Big Day. I cant see anywhere that he really does not want to be married to her. That is not really what she is complaining about. He does not want a big wedding.

OP also said that her DP has shown no interest in marrying her anytime soon. I think if the issue was just that he didn't want a big ceremony he would have suggested they just have a small one rather than saying that he isn't bothered about getting married.

Completely irrelevant if he doesn't want a big wedding or doesn't want the marriage. He AGREED to getting married and having a wedding. Ofcourse op is going to feel tricked. Hes getting exactly what he wants whilst op gets nothing. Op, you do what you need to do.

The masses will swear and froth and pick me apart, I bet. Just you see!

Some people really have a flair for the overblown dramatics.

How about you use your name as the babies last name and use his surname as the last middle name? Acknowledgement on both parts without the parlaver of double barrelling

just say that you would like to be married before the baby comes and see what he says. I get what you mean, he is having his cake and eating it. seems like he is backtracking etc, however he has made a commitment to you by having this baby, if there is never to be a marriage will you be able to deal with the resentment? does he know this? really by now at this stage in the relationship you need to be able to tell him exactly how you feel. it may result in a wedding, but not necessarily the big romantic proposal that you hoped for but at the end of the day what is it that is more important, the big wedding / proposal etc or actually being married, work this out for yourself then sit him down and tell him what you want, otherwise you face a future of disappointment and resentfulness.

Mmmm
Or maybe OP gets the feeling this guy may not be as dedicated as he makes out...
The child having his name may be just a claim of ownership thing... One of my uncles had 26 children with his name by the time I was a teen :/ he didn't give a turd about any of them and it was all about control of women and ownership of children.
The child should have her name... and if they marry, set aside an extra £100 to change the child's name to theirs.

Quintessential. You sound bitter about your wedding day? And maybe a little suppressed in your marriage. A suggestion to just "bow down" makes me ! I am under no illusions that fab day doesn't necessarily mean fab marriage. BUT, it's my choice and what I have always wanted. I'm aghast you think I should just give up on that dream because it's out of his comfort zone. This is not the 1950's and I am allowed to ask for what I want from a relationship. If you read the full thread you will see he doesn't seem bothered about being married in general as well as not wanting a big day. As marriage and commitment is what I was looking for
When I entered this relationship, and this was no secret, I cannot see it lasting without this. The resentment would be too much. And if that is the likely outcome wouldn't it be easier if all My children have the same
Surname. I understand it looks like a bargaining chip but the reality is we are by likely to last under the current circumstances. If we married in the future baby could then take his name. If we don't I have done the right thing. Thanks to everyone who commented. I think I am decided now.

I was clear with my dh that if we had a child before marriage then it would have my surname and he accepted that.

As it is, we're expecting our first and I took his name when we married so no issues.

I wouldn't choose to have a dc with a different surname to me though.

He can change his name to your surname.

Might your older 2 children not feel a bit rejected if on marriage you changed your own name and the baby's, but not theirs? It's a bit selective isn't it? Or would you give them the option to change their names too?

Good on you OP. I'm sorry you feel that your relationship won't survive this but it's better no father in the picture than a flaky one. You don't even have to put him on the birth certificate if you don't want to - then he will have absolutely no parental responsibility. Try to be clear and strong now before you have the baby as you may feel vulnerable afterwards. Good luck with the rest of your pregnancy and your new baby xx

Oh dear . What a sad thread. It's such a shame you went ahead and got pregnant without resolving this beforehand.

We are not married yet, much to my annoyance. Our son has OH's surname although I do sometimes jokingly threaten to change it to mine. I love OH's surname and as it''s double barreled we couldn't add mine on, nor did we want it as a middle name, he already has two of those and we actually dropped a family name (that goes back to Henry VIII) because the name was just getting silly long!

Yanbu. Dc are given the father's name all the time. If that is not unreasonable then giving them the mother's name shouldn't be either. (We've gone for using both names, Spanish style, not had any form filling problems yet and both of us happy for her to choose to use one or the other informally if she prefers when she's old enough to care).

Why not double barrel your name with one of his Bails? That's how it works in Spanish speaking countries and seems so sensible to me.