Surname issue

[roopertbear]

More of a WWYD. Cannot agree on surname for our soon to be born child. Namechanged for this.

DP doesn't believe in marriage- fair enough. We have different surnames.

His surname- Smith- is the same as both his parents, paternal grandfather etc.).

My surname- Jones- is my ex DP's name. I changed it over a decade ago by deedpoll to match my DD. This has been my surname my whole adult life nearly. It's on all my documents and I don't go by my maiden name at all. DD has a very involved father and I can't change her surname. I also don't want to have a different surname to her.

My maiden name (Brown) is my father's name who I am no contact with. My mother has a totally different surname (Green).

I want to double-barrell Smith-Jones. DP wants just Smith. He hates double-barrell so said it can't be both names. I said fine, just Jones then. He is very much against that as it's not my 'real' name and it is essentially another man's name (though aren't they all?). He said if we don't go for Smith, we should go for Brown. But that's not my name and I've no intention to reverting to it. He said we should go for Green then, but it's the same issue. I don't want to have a surname that is not the same (or partly the same in the case of a double barrell) with either of my children, but we totally disagree.

The not getting married is not an issue, although I happily would, but I am not giving my child just DP's name if it's not also partly my surname (I'd become a Smith-Jones if we married- DC would then just be Smith). AIBU? Which name would you pick?

See, the problem with arguments like that is, where does it end? Woman gets to choose the surname... what other decisions can the woman make unilaterally? Where does it end?

Women are more often than not left holding the baby and that's a shame, men should definitely be held accountable. But if we want them to do their share of the parenting and be equal parents (apart from the unfortunate constraints of biology) then we shouldn't be giving them consideration if and when it suits us. If they need to pay and do their share because it's their baby too you can't turn around and say well no, actually the woman can choose the surname because she does all the work. Which of these do you want?

Not disagreeing with OP getting 'more' of a right, her DP is being U not agreeing to a compromise of combined surnames. But PP suggesting that OP should just do as she likes with zero consideration for the DP is not on. If she had such little consideration for his views she shouldn't have chosen to procreate with him in the first place.

FWIW I haven't changed my name upon marrying, DC will have his surname but mainly because my surname isn't even a surname. Had it been, they would have had both, hyphenated. End of discussion.

If you already have a child then personally I think it's more important that both kids share a name. Your name!

Agree, the women-haters have arrived. Bless.

And then she married the partner. You can just read the OP’s posts to see that.

The baby's mother and half-sister both have the surname Jones, so the baby should have the surname Jones, with or without its father's surname. If he wants to share a surname with his partner, child and step-child, he can change his name to Smith-Jones or Jones-Smith or whatever.

There is another possible solution, which does involve a compromise on your part, OP, and I don't think you should feel that you have to compromise at all if you don't want to. But I'll mention it anyway. You say that your mother has a double-barrelled surname... could you pick one of the surnames (whichever goes best with Jones), let's say it's Green, then change your surname to Jones-Green (or Green-Jones). Baby's surname could then be Smith-Green (or Green-Smith). That way you would share a surname with each of your children, and DC2 would have a surname from each parent (which originates from a biological grandparent). DC1 would still be Jones but when she's 16 she could change to Jones-Green (or Green-Jones) or add Green as a middle name if she likes.

My children have my name as a 'middle' name, and their fathers as a last name. They can use either or both, and have both on all official documents including their passports.

If you are not getting married and keeping your own names it's useful for your children to have both names as if you travel alone with them and their last name doesn't match yours it can cause delays at passport checks, and you may be asked for proof that they are your children.

amp.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/womens-blog/2014/may/12/passport-control-border-children-parents-different-surnames

amicable.io/passport-surnames-kids-airport-delay-parents-different-surnames

The children have different fathers.

When I was a child two of my siblings had different last names from the rest of us.

It was no big deal.

People who knew us knew why and those who didn't it wasn't any of their business.

Some of my sisters then changed their name on marriage while others didn't.

I did confuse someone older than me a decade or so ago by giving my brother with a different last name as a contact. (He lives the closest to me.) Now no one bats an eyelid.

The problem with not using a hyphen is that many forms don't recognise a last name with a space or spaces in it.

I have friends and acquaintances whose names start with of e.g "de", "van" whose names are mangled on some systems.

This is a really nice idea and I will consider it. My only issue really is that it's a big hassle (and expensive with passports etc.) to change my name again just for the sake of appeasing DP with this whole thing when I just want to double barrell our current names. But I will consider it!

Appleontherocks I'm afraid you're totally off the mark and to be honest I don't really want to dignify your rather aggressive posts with any more of a response.

Here's the deal- like your ex partner, you are aware men wander off and relationships don't always last. Also you are not married and no plans to be. With that in mind, why the f* would you give the child HIS surname?!

If you ever split, you're gonna be holding the baby, so that baby should have your name. Politely, your DP can get lost. It's gonna be Jones and if it bothers him that deeply, he can either marry you or change his name.

He can’t demon his surname, but I do understand his emotional reaction to all of you sharing a surname with your ex. I think that would run many people the wrong way. I think double barrel would be my choice here.

I think it's hilarious that the one thing your DP doesn't believe in (marriage) is the one thing that would enable him to name his own child whatever he wanted 😂

If you're not married then the child should have your surname OP.

If he can't commit legally to the mother of his DC, then he legally doesn't get to name the child; it's the law (maybe marriage does have some value afterall 🤔 🙄)

I gave my child my partners name. He is still Dad even if we are not married and our names would have been ridiculous double barrelled.
why do you not want your child to have their dads name?

OP is perfectly happy for her DC to have their dads name. If it's double barrelled with hers. He's the one that doesn't want that.

My dc had their dads name when they were born too. It never bothered me that they didn't have mine. It also never caused an issue anywhere, although I've not taken them abroad.

Sadly for them their dad pretty much stopped bothering with them as they got older so they changed their names by deed poll.

Jones.
But if you double-barrel then Jones-Smith, not Smith-Jones. People/nursery/teachers/nhs etc will often drop the second name (verbally) but not the first.

In truth, you hold all the cards here as only you can do the birth certificate as you aren't married. He's going to have to pick one of your options.

Also, it really bothers me how much names are seen as belonging to men and not women. You changed your name as a teenager therefore it's your name. Where it came from is essentially irrelevant.

You've been continually whining that he won't marry you and this is why he doesn't get a say. You realise no court would support you putting a child in another man's name and will view that as a start of your parental alienation, right? You need to think very carefully about how you word this.

He could still challenge this in court and would be supported given that there is no familial attachment to the name she changed to so she appeared married to her ex

Please can one of the "it's another man's name" posters answer my questions about when (if ever) a woman's name becomes hers.

Thank you.

She did marry the ex.

It’s HER name. No familial attachment? She’s the baby’s MOTHER.

They could give the child ANY surname they like. There is no legal requirement for any familial link.

Wow. You’re something else, aren’t you?

it’s not another man’s name. It might be thousands of other men’s names. That isn’t important. Because IT’S HER NAME.

Apparently never.

Even though it’s 2023. FFS.

This is really wierd in my opinion.

There is no way or reason your new child should carry your ex's surname. Not in a million years. People can argue that its yours too, but you gave yourself that name because said yourself you were young, lost and wanted to feel like a family which is fine for that time in life. But you're now years later and just because its inconvenient to do otherwise, a man has to raise a child with your ex's name. No chance would anyone i know allow it and if a man told me our child had to have his ex's name because he'd been 'using it for a few years'... no thank you.

If its 'just a name' as people keep saying as a way to force your partner to use another mans name, pick one out of a hat you all like and thats that. Give it his surname or your maiden. Anything else is very bizarre.