Baby's surname

[yvanka]

Pregnant with DC1, DP and I are both completely sure that we don't want it get married for various reasons. We are committed to each other but don't want marriage.

The only issue that this has caused is that he wants the baby to have his last name and I want them to have mine. He says that it's "tradition" but I've done some research and it's actually tradition for the baby to have the mum's surname if parents are unmarried, and I just really want to have the same surname as my child.

However, DP also feels strongly that he wants his surname. I would compromise on double barrelling (our last names go well together) but baby going by just his dad's last name at school etc, but DP thinks that double barrelling is common.

He would be happy for me to change my last name if I wanted but won't consider changing his so I don't see why I should. AIBU?

Disclaimer: he is an excellent partner and very loving and kind to me, so no LTB please. Just looking for any words of wisdom as I can understand how he feels and am a bit stuck on how to move forward with this with everyone being happy.

*stand

This comment about things being hilariously emasculating should give you some reason to be concerned. More often than not, men who are so proud of their masculinity will not take anywhere close to half the burden for housework and childcare. Yes, you have written that you will share the costs, but that's just the tip of the iceberg. Who will do the pick ups and drop offs? All the sick days? Doctor, dentist visits? Who will take the mental load of remembering that tomorrow is book day and you need to get a costume and next week you need to bring 2 cardboard tubes and glitter, or whatever. Who remembers to check the child has suitable clothes and shoes, both weather and size-wise? Etc etc. Plus housework - even if you feel you share it equally now (do you?) this often changes when one is home on a maternity leave.

So if you take all those sick days and maybe later go part time to do school pick ups and deal with inevitable sick days, he can continue his career unencumbered, earn more, save more, grow his investments and pensions. But being not married means that while he benefits from the childcare and domestic labour you provide, you don't benefit from his increased income.

Just to be clear, not saying this will always happen. But a little time on Relationships board will show that it's not by any means rare.

Haha DP would never change his last name to mine, he would find it emasculating. One of our friends did and he thought it was hilarious

At least he is being honest about the full currency of patriarchal tradition and what it means to men still entrenched in sexist thinking.

He is both a victim and an ongoing cause of that pressure.

It is seen as common now to have a double barrelled name as instead of being a sign you are aristocracy, its just viewed as a sign your parents aren't married

Or that your parents have both kept their own names in marriage and chosen to give them to their kids.

Despite the sexist pressure exemplified in the attitude of the OP’s DP.

Enabled by having kids with all those women with names that are difficult to spell, pronounce etc

“ Haha DP would never change his last name to mine, he would find it emasculating. One of our friends did and he thought it was hilarious.”

Fucking hell why is the bar so low for men. My fanny would seal shut. Emasculating? Get a fucking grip

Thinking about it more - a lot of men have had it drummed into them that if you get a woman pregnant, you do the "right thing" and marry her. Unmarried men do get looked down on as well, because the assumption is that its his choice. He is chosing not to provide security of marriage etc. That you don't want it, will not be a consideration for many.

The different name or double barrelled name would highlight that.

Is he really happy having a child unmarried, or is this something he's going along with because he wants a child with you and you don't want to be married?

Is he worried he's going to look bad? (Even though noone negatively judges couples who aren't married anymore.)

Parenthood can cause emotional responses to things when logically you know its not a problem.

(But still give the baby your surname, double barrelled is the compromise, have them known by the double barrelled)

"Marriage is harder to get out of so I consider it a bigger commitment. All the paperwork, negotiation, splitting of assets, legal fees, house sale, dozens of random admin bits like changing your name back and closing joint accounts, it all drags on for months before you're finally detangled and sounds very stressful."

I am also confused by your position - happy to have a child with a man but not to marry him, because of the commitment?

You don't have to give up your independence when you get married. I didn't take DH's name (pure laziness - it felt like unnecessary admin changing everything over) and our finances remain predominantly separate. The only account we share is the mortgage. I don't see how being married/not married makes it more or less likely that either of us might have an affair or the relationship breaks down for any other reason, or that being married/not married would make a break up simpler or less stressful. Honestly if our relationship failed the worst thing about it would not be break-up admin.

Our son has myname-hisname. He knows that our names are mummy myname and daddy hisname.

I know you've insisted several times to the contrary but having a child with someone really is a bigger commitment than marriage. Yes, divorce can be a long process but if there are no kids involved then once it's done you never have to see or speak to that person again. If there are kids though, regardless of whether you used to be married, you will have to liaise regularly to facilitate shared custody, coordinate discipline, make decisions about education and healthcare, etc. Even once the children are adults, you'll still regularly see your ex at big occasions involving your child, such as their own weddings, graduations, big birthdays, their children's birthdays... The list goes on. Once you have a child with someone you may well have to see them sporadically until one of you's dead.

To answer your question, yanbu about the name and you should double-barel or pick a wholly new name for both of you. A friend of mine recently married and he and his wife both changed their name to something new which I assume any children would also receive.

The double barrelled surname is really the only way to go in this situation I think. I don’t think he needs to go by just one surname though, but I don’t know the names. Don’t get why people are so bothered about if you’re married or not to be honest, it’s got nothing to do with the original post and you’ve explained yourself very well. You seemed to have covered all bases!

No sorry, but I agree that marriage is a bigger commitment. A baby is a commitment and obligation to the child, not the other adult. That can create an obligation to the other adult through maintenance, but your responsibility is to the child, not them.

Its a time limited obligation and link. As the OP and her DP are planning only 1 dc, in 18 years the obligation will be over.

Dh and I have already been together for 20 years, we are in good health and assuming we both make it to our life expectancy- will be together 45+ years. Out of that, due to the gap between dcs, we'll have spent 21 years as joint parents of children.

Marriage isn't time limited commitment like a baby or a mortgage (the other thing people view as a commitment!). Its until death or divorce.

Having a baby with her DP is not in any way the OP committing to spending the rest of her life with her DP, at most its taking on a shared project for 18 years that they are not obliged to do together.

@MargosKaftan

A divorce takes a lot less time than 18 years, though, and during that time you may have to see or speak to your ex multiple times a week. Even once the child is an adult, you may still have to see your ex for big events involving that child (weddings, big birthdays, etc). Doesn't matter whether you were once married or not.

On the other hand, if you divorce someone you don't have kids with then, once the paperwork is settled, you never have to see them again.

I know you've insisted several times to the contrary but having a child with someone really is a bigger commitment than marriage.

No, it isn't, it really isn't. Not when men can, and frequently do, just walk away.

Just so you know, because you are unmarried you get final say on the babies name, you can register the birth without him but he cannot without you

Urgh don’t give in just because of misogyny, please

I honestly think that if you guys don't want to marry then double-barelling is the best bet. I was engaged to my daughters father and pregnant when he passed. She would have had his surname as we planned to marry but in the end I double-barelled (hisname-myname) as respect to him but also so it wouldn't cause me troubles in anything official. It's a good thing I did as people constantly assume my daughter's surname. Also now when I go abroad with my current partner there is no worry about bringing a birth certificate and looking like we are smuggling a child around (!) Only issue now is what we do with her name if I take my partner's surname when we get married. I may change the double barrel to (dadsname-stepdads name) so we are all linked somehow. Honestly, what you want to do seems sooo much simpler! Hopefully your OH has a think about it and agrees to compromise!

DH and I are married, but I don’t believe in changing surnames so we each have our own.

We decided boys would get his and girls would get mine because double barreling just forces the issue on the next generation and flipping a coin isn’t much of a tradition if the next generation decides to repeat it. If some equal option can’t be agreed upon, the default should be the mother’s name. She is the one who does all the work of creating the child.

And op I don’t think it matters that much if you get married or not. We see so many women on here who get married and still get screwed over financially because they don’t understand the long-term economic impacts of having a child. Just make sure you protect yourself financially and don’t fall into the trap of thinking that 50-50 is fair when you are the one taking the career hit associated with having a child.

@Theshortone

Only issue now is what we do with her name if I take my partner's surname when we get married. I may change the double barrel to (dadsname-stepdads name) so we are all linked somehow.

The obvious answer is for your partner to change his name, or for no one to change their name.

Why should you and your daughter start messing around with your names just because you decide to marry?

My kids have my surname, I’m no longer with their dad and I’m very glad that they have my surname. I think the only way forward would be to use both names, as you are willing to compromise with that. Also him wanting it for tradition isn’t a strong enough reason to give your child his name, especially considering it actually isn’t traditional at all if you aren’t married. And as PP’s have said, you aren’t being traditional by not marrying (no judgement!)

For those people citing the Spanish way as a non-patriarchal way of having both names, although it appears so the patriarchal element kicks in at the next generation. So if the mother's surnames are Suarez Fernandez the first of those names will be her father's and the second is her mother's. When she has her child the name that moves forward onto the next generation is that of her father. Same with the father's name. The child then in effect has its mother's father's name and it's father's father's name and the mothers' names from the previous generation are lost. So not that progressive.

@yvanka

if you were to split up with him and have a child with someone else, I assume you would want you and your children to all have the same surname

I definitely only want one child so this won't be an issue. I also genuinely don't see us splitting up. I am just realistic about the fact that you can never really know someone, as we see so often on MN with husbands cheating and their wives having no idea, so I am not willing to say "no matter how much of an arsehole you become in the next 50 years I will still stick with you, and if not you can have half my stuff"

This is a really interesting take, thank you for the food for thought.

Also, there is no way I would let a child of mine have a different surname to me. I think both your options of your surname or double barrelled are fine and he should pick one of those.

One thing to bear in mind is if your child has a different name to you you will likely need to provide the birth certificate to prove you're the mother in lots of different situations which is perfectly reasonable to safeguard the child but probably inconvenient and not as nice for the child as they get older (I'm thinking taking a minor out fot he country for example? even if just on holiday?)

Also I've always personally been against double barrelling, just because my parents did that to me (mum didnt want to be the last in the line with her name!) and as the age of computers and digitisation came in, I kept getting filed under different names, some places used the first, some the last, some both. I also sometimes used one over the other to prevent a mouthful and therefore socially became known by just one.. In the end, it became a bit of a nightmare and I ended up deed polling my name to the one that came first as that was the one I used most. Some people like it but for me it was a massive ballache and there are 3 differnt variations of my surname and how people know me...

@OhamIreally

For those people citing the Spanish way as a non-patriarchal way of having both names, although it appears so the patriarchal element kicks in at the next generation. So if the mother's surnames are Suarez Fernandez the first of those names will be her father's and the second is her mother's. When she has her child the name that moves forward onto the next generation is that of her father. Same with the father's name. The child then in effect has its mother's father's name and it's father's father's name and the mothers' names from the previous generation are lost. So not that progressive.

It's still much more progressive than the system in the UK and many other countries, for two important reasons: women never change their names and mothers (and fathers) always share a surname each with their children. It's an excellent system and the only flaw is in passing on the men's names only (when the children go on to have children) but this can very easily be fixed by passing on the mother's name from one side instead. Then it would be nicely equal.

Also nowadays in Spain you can also choose which of your 2 names you use for your children.

@KatharinaRosalie

Also nowadays in Spain you can also choose which of your 2 names you use for your children.

Yep, outside of Spain too. It's still traditionally the father's, but more and more people just choose whichever one they like more and/or sounds better with their partner's. It's definitely a better system. I keep my name, my husband keeps his, and our kids have one of mine and one of his. When they grow up and have kids of their own, they can choose to pass on whichever name they want.

I knew someone that combined their last names to make a brand new last name and they both changed it to that. I thought that was an epic idea.

[quote yvanka]@LittleLadyCece Marriage is harder to get out of so I consider it a bigger commitment. All the paperwork, negotiation, splitting of assets, legal fees, house sale, dozens of random admin bits like changing your name back and closing joint accounts, it all drags on for months before you're finally detangled and sounds very stressful.

With a child, the entire commitment to DP would be over as soon as I've packed my stuff and left. Easy. Obviously we'd have to stay in sporadic contact to coordinate DC stuff for the first few years, but it's just necessary interaction not any kind of commitment.[/quote]
very sensible! And I applaud you for not rising to all the shit stirring on this thread