Who's surname to give the baby?

[Kate8790]

Me and my partner are expecting a baby daughter next month and we can't agree on the baby's surname. As we are unmarried and not living together and the relationship is very up and down, I believe it's in our daughters best interests to have my surname as she will live with me. He believes she should have his surname as he thinks it's the right thing to do. He can be very domineering if we disagree on something and is trying to forbid me from giving our daughter my surname. I just don't know what to do for the best 😣

Ah, uncontrollable rage. I bet he manages to control it at work, or when he disagrees with his mates. Strangely, men like this often find that the uncontrollable rage appears when they want to force their wife/ femal partner to comply.

The name is a symptom of a bigger picture- he does not see you as an equal partner, he sees you as his possession and will use his physical threat to make you obey him.

If you are in a relationship where you feel for your safety (and I would, in your shoes) then it’s time to end it. He will become more forceful as you become more vulnerable- I would call the relationship off now.

Please remember that as you are not married he has no automatic rights over your child. He needs permission either from you (by you putting him on the birth certificate - as the registrar can legally only take instruction from you) or from the court after a paternity test to be given parental rights.

You can change the birth certificate afterwards - I believe there is a period where changes can mean reissue of certificates so no palava over deedpole. Once he has rifhts through it is massively more difficult to remove them or indeed change the chikds name - i think you know already that he would not agree to that change no matter what the circumstances.

You already have hour own place I think so you can keep him away. Make sure you have access to support when you need it. Going mad for 2 weeks because he can't get his own way - to the point that you felt it necessary to move out is not a normal relationship.

Yours
No advantage to having his. Plenty in sticking with yours.

If he was so desperate to give this child his surname he could have married you and his name would have had to be on the birth certificate.
As it stands he hadn't and he doesn't have to. Which may turn out to be a blessing.

Having the same name as your mother gives the impression that you are a family unit too. Not that anyone asks or cares. Much easier to get passports etc.

The traditional “right” thing to do is give the baby your name as you’re not married. If that’s his angle (what is socially “correct”), he’s wrong.

If it’s important to you that baby has a social link to father, use his family name as one of baby’s middle names.

“Your surname. If you get married then you can change both name's. Do not compromise.”

If you marry you can keep your own name, your child can keep their own name and the father could change his!

Or you can marry, keep your own surname and add the father’s to the child’s, double barrelled.

There is never any obligation for a woman to change her name to a man’s, and personally I would resist giving a child the message that a woman changes her name to a man’s every time she gets married.

100% yours. If he doesn’t like it tough shot.

*shit

One of the worst options. In my opinion, is the mother’s name as middle name thing. It means nothing. Hyphenate, ladies, hyphenate!

I consider it one of my most magnanimous acts of all time that when DH suggested we drop the hyphen in DS's name, I pointed out to him that as his comes first it would be treated as a middle name and then just disappear. Since his name is horrible and my preferred option was just mine, I think it was very noble of me... But yes, the middle name thing is, in practice, meaningless, and it always makes me roll my eyes when 'dad's name as actual surname, mum's name as middle name' is proposed as a fair and equitable solution rather than a very slight variation on 'baby has dad's name, not mum's'

^^agree on the middle name thing

The great benefit of mum's surname as middle name is that even if your DD changes her name when she marries, she's not likely to change her middle name. It's more likely to stay with her throughout her life. Different argument with a DS of course, since a DD is much more likely to drop her birth name on marriage. For now at least.

But a middle name which isnt a surname has no value, middle names arent even recognised on most forms

You're entitled to think that of course, but personally I can't imagine basing my decision as to what's valuable on 'most forms'. Particularly since the important ones do.

But a middle name which isnt a surname has no value,

Surely that’s subjective.

middle names arent even recognised on most forms

That’s quite a poor measure!

I just don't think that the idea that an invisible gesture is a permanent invisible gesture is that big a selling point. It also seems a bit bizarrely retrograde to not change my own name but then to make decisions on the assumption that a daughter would, and a son wouldn't.

I just don't think that the idea that an invisible gesture is a permanent invisible gesture is that big a selling point.

I don’t see it as an invisible gesture. Every one of DD’s names has meaning. She isn’t just known as her first name and surname. And actually I hope surnames become far less important in the future anyway. I prefer to be known as my first name by everyone.

It's not invisible.

And it's not retrograde to think a daughter stands a much higher chance of changing her surname during her lifetime than a son does. It's just a recognition of the society we live in. An awareness of reality. I'd like that to change, but me wanting it to doesn't really mean shit. All we get to choose is whether we factor unpalatable reality into our decision making.

But by all means, don't be bothered about maximising the chance that a daughter will retain your name for her lifetime. That's ok. Just let's not come up with obviously daft reasons like invisibility and forms. You not wanting to do it is good enough.

You don't live together so definitely yours.

She isn’t just known as her first name and surname

She uses her middle names in daily life? I only use mine when filling in bank/insurance forms.

it always makes me roll my eyes when 'dad's name as actual surname, mum's name as middle name' is proposed as a fair and equitable solution rather than a very slight variation on 'baby has dad's name, not mum's'

I know. Have any men ever found it an excellent idea for their surname to be a middle name? Probably not.

I couldn't tell you the middle name of a single one of my work colleagues, of more than about three of my friends, or of more than a tiny handful of politicians or celebrities. The idea that it's a visible way to use a name is ridiculous.

Register baby yourself in your name, he doesn't need to be there. He cannot register baby without you if you are unmarried.

Yours.

Sorry but I doubt your relationship will last do you really want her having his name when you aren’t even together?

And fuck him for thinking he can “forbid” you to do anything. I would die laughing if my husband thought he could “forbid” me from doing something

Your name. If he's that bothered he can change his surname to match his child's by deed poll.

She uses her middle names in daily life? I only use mine when filling in bank/insurance forms

She’s 7. She writes her name on a couple of maths challenges a week. And yes, she writes all of her names.

I couldn't tell you the middle name of a single one of my work colleagues, of more than about three of my friends, or of more than a tiny handful of politicians or celebrities. The idea that it's a visible way to use a name is ridiculous.

Maybe, just maybe, other people are not the same as you.