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?

Yes the tradition was rooted in sexism and misogyny. The woman took her husband’s name as a symbol of accepting his authority over her and ownership of all her property. So her babies then also got her husband’s name.

The tradition for illegitimate babies was different and more varied. We don’t even have the concept of illegitimate babies today.

I agree, it isn’t 1853, but it’s silly to pretend that we never had a traditionally patrilineal society that we still feel the echoes of today.

I'm quite torn here.
On one hand it's perfectly valid to give your kid YOUR surname, if he doesn't believe in marriage why does he believe in patriarchal naming traditions?
OTOH you have had two children with two men you didn't marry. Gave the first their father's name and changed yours to match.
You're not extending the same courtesy to the second... yes Jones is now your name but it's because of the mistake you made with the first. You should have just given them your maiden name.

I have a double barrelled (well, not two surnames, it's a long story) name and it's an absolute PITA. Some online forms don't accept the dash and mangle my name, post/medicines/whatever constantly get stored in the first or last cubby hole (depending on which bit of my name they pick) and more importantly. Your kids are not going to be able to triple barrel... or whatever.

Seriously. Just... i don't know... flip a coin or something.

if he doesn’t believe in the tradition of marriage then he doesn’t get to be all traditional re surnames. He can’t pick and choose traditions which suit him. You’re carrying and birthing baby, it’s your decision. I would double barrel but like you say, if he’s so against double barrelling then it’ll be just your name

The 'tradition' has always been until recent years that the child of an unmarried mother takes the mothers surname.

You need to tell him you understand it's an uncomfortable connection with the ex but it's yours and your daughters surname and that's why you're choosing it for the new ds baby. The siblings and children's feelings are most important.

Also remember he has no legal right to name this child at all as you're not married only you can register the birth

Yes

The 'tradition' has always been until recent years that the child of an unmarried mother takes the mothers surname.

It was tradition in cases where the father refused to acknowledge the child as his. That’s not the OP’s situation.

We all get to pick and choose what traditions we like to keep or discard. I don’t think it’s fair to say it’s all or nothing to any man or woman.

If 'legitimate'. That's part of the stigma of being born out of wedlock - you weren't entitled to your father's name.

Were you married to your ex DP? Or did you just change your name to his independently?

usually, I’m all about choosing the woman’s name. But in this case…. I’m seeing your partner’s perspective. It IS weird to give your new child your ex DP’s surname.

I think the only way forward here is a totally new surname that you invent. You and partner can both DB your own names with that surname. Convoluted I know!

tbh, this is why women should always DB in the first place…..

Very early in the OP…..

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.

If legitimate, the child had the legal right to the father’s surname.
If illegitimate, the father could acknowledge the child as his by giving the child his surname.
If the woman had no idea who the father might be or the father refused to acknowledge the child, the child often got the mother’s surname.
If the woman gave up the baby or had to conceal the baby’s parentage, the baby was often given a different surname entirely.

There are a few good reasons why some surnames shouldn't be double-barrelled. Too long / unwieldy (not sure where I'd put the limit). Risky initials. Sound bad together - for example, we'd never double barrel our names, both ones that can lead to teasing, but together they make a phrase that no schoolchild should be subjected to (my children know that they can choose to use both if they ever wish to, one of them might be able to carry it off rather well as the adult he's grown into).

OP, if your proposed combination of names works then I'd go for it. But like others have already agreed, your surname of choice is fine otherwise. All the best for a safe delivery!

You are an unmarried woman. Baby gets your current surname.

In your last paragraph you say:

“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)”

If you would happily do this if you were married, then why wouldn’t you just do that and change your name without being married? You did it the first time without being married, and that time you didn’t keep any of your previous name.

I’m not saying that’s necessarily the right thing to do but it is logically consistent at least.

See it from your future child's POV when she is older.
Why does she have to be connected by name to your ex, her sister's dad, who she doesn't see, doesn't know etc. (Especially if big sister has a Disney Dad and she doesn't have the benefit of that)
Why does she not have her real dad's surname?

I can see a lot of future teenage angst.

Nope otherwise there would be a lot of unregistered babies and adulta

A mother has the right to register her child.

I totally see why it feels weird to him. It is a bit weird. However, you can't take a time machine and change your DD's name to yours, so you're stuck.

I wouldn't change DD's name now. Not because her father would complain (which is what you insinuated) but because it's garbage to force her to change her name just because of some man her mother is dating. You and her father gave her a name, and it should be her decision if she ever changes it.

I think your new child should have your surname, potentially with your DP's surname as a middle name if it lends itself to that. (Some surnames sound stupid as middle names.) So, not double-barrelling, but acknowledging the link.

DD remains DD Jones.
You remain OP Jones.
New baby is DC Smith Jones.
DP is DP Smith. If he wants, he can change his surname, keeping Smith as a middle name, so he becomes DP Smith Jones, just like new baby.

That's where I'm torn. She was perfectly happy to use her ex partners name for her first child and then change her name by deed poll to match. So OP herself set the precedent here.

Very good point

Why doesn't he change his name to Jones? No need to be legally married to do it and then you can all have the same family name!

Why does connection to dad trump connection to mum? 🤯

I can see two sides of this. My default opinion is that a man that “doesn’t believe in marriage” doesn’t get a say in the child’s surname and it should be mothers.

But in this case, I can see why he might be offended that the previous father didn’t want to marry either but he gets to not only have his child take his surname but the woman he didn’t marry took his surname as well! And there is an issue of it looking like both children are the children of the ex and he is step dad to both.

So I suppose Smith-Jones or Jones-Smith are the best options, although I am with him on not liking double barrelled surnames.

I'm with him on double barrelling, it's awful.
Normally I would agree that the baby should have your name but it feels really weird to give the baby your ex's name. I'd go with Smith.

IT’S HER NAME.

If unmarried, mother can register birth on her own. But if she wants father to be registered as the father, then he has to attend the appointment and consent