To think I can live with a name I hate because it means a lot to dh?

[lovingthespring]

We're expecting a boy, dh has lost his brother and his dad in recent years and wants to call our son his dads name and brothers name as first and middle, I get why this means so much to him but the names are old fashioned and I really don't know if I could learn to like them.
Do I just try and accept the names that I'll never like or just understand and respect why he wants to choose them.
I have suggested he use the names as double middle names but he doesn't want to.
There are so many gorgeous modern names that I want to choose but I also know this means a lot to do for his dad and brother.

(I should add that DS likes his name, if he didn't that would be another matter.)

I would be very wary of the impact on a child, intentional or otherwise, of bearing the burden of a dead relatives name and perhaps living in their shadow. Your child won’t know these relatives, and therefore the names won’t have the significance they hold for other family members.

Contradicting yourself there.

You don't say how old your DHs brother was when he died, but I am assuming he died young. This to me, would feel like bad luck to name your baby after someone who was so unlucky. A bit like tempting fate.

But yes, it's also vital that this baby has his own identity. And naming him after dead relatives, is only going to serve as a reminder every single day, of the people who are dead. Very unhealthy, imo.

And where does it end? If you have a girl after this, will she have to be named after his Grandma Dot?

In 20 years time, you might not even be with your DH, which would make you even more resentful.

When I was pregnant, my (then) H wanted to give the children Irish names that were very old fashioned, and also impossible to spell. Purely because his parents were born in Ireland (they left when they were children). I put my foot down and said No.

Trying to decide between two different, meaningful names is difficult, but I'd say mum gets final say. Doubly so if taking dad's surname.

But vetoing a meaningful name that would mean a lot to a grieving spouse just becuse you want an as yet to be decided but more instagrammable "modern" name is awful.

I'm sorry for your DH's losses, but it doesn't mean you should be pushed out of the pleasure of naming your baby.

You are the person who will carry the baby for 9 months, will give birth, will feed and largely care for the child in the early months. Frankly he's not doing any of the hard work, you are.

You have generously agreed to have names you don't like as middle names, but he's essentially saying that you have no say in the naming of your child. You are not a baby making machine to provide him with a way to honour his dead family members. That sounds harsh, but he is using you and your child as a way of dealing with his grief. Naming the baby after them won't make his grief go away, only time can help it subside.

His intransigence and refusal to consider your feelings is disrespectful to you as the person who is actually bringing this baby into the world.

It's not in any way weird to name a child after a relative, dead or not. It's becomes their name FFS. People who name kids after celebrities, now that is weird.

It's your body. You are the one growing this baby. Your baby deserves to be hus own person too and not a reminder of the dead.
Middle names is an acceptable compromise. An alternative would finding out the meaning of their names and seeing if you can find names with similar meanings.

I don't think it's weird. My ds has my grandfathers name.... Very luckily it's my favourite name anyway and I'd have used it regardless!

This. Double middle names will have to do.

Huh? What?

What in the world has Instagram got to do with anything?

The OP wants to give her baby a name she actually likes.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with that.

Her husband doesn't get to choose the first, middle and last name of the baby she is carrying and override her feelings, no matter how many of his family members have died.

I didn’t say it was weird to name a child in that way. Lots of people have the view that it isn’t something they want for their child and the child should have their own first name. You said that view was weird, I pointed out that it was likely a majority view so not at all weird.

This

Your new baby deserves his own name, that you both like and are happy with.

I think your husband should be centring your son in his thoughts, not his brother and father.

How is his son going to feel about his names, once he is old enough to understand that his names are not his own, but 'belong' to other people?

Middle names only. Your son is entitled to be his own person, neither a tribute nor a shrine to the dead.

It's not in any way weird to name a child after a relative, dead or not.
I agree and am also suprised that people find it odd. Maybe times are changing? My son has his (living) grandad's middle name, which is also his (dead) great-grandad's first name, and one that's run in the family for several generations before that.

vetoing a meaningful name that would mean a lot to a grieving spouse just becuse you want an as yet to be decided but more instagrammable "modern" name is awful
Gosh, yes, that WOULD be awful. Fortunately that's not what OP is doing in any way or form :D

I completely agree. Your child is his own person, not some kind of echo of a dead relative.

This. I’ll never understand the tradition of naming children after dead relatives they will never know. It feels like putting a burden on an innocent child.

But the original poster, (@MistyGreenAndBlue ) DIDN'T say it was weird, just that they didn't like it - it was YOU that first brought weirdness into the conversation!

I agree with the majority - OP is carrying the child but he will have his grandfather's first name, uncle's middle name and father's surname, how is that fair?

Besides which, OP's family members will die at some point, if the DH thinks it's so important to name children after them why does his side get the 'honour' just because they died first?

If you said 'Okay fine but our next child we are naming
my grandmother's first name, my great aunt's middle name, my father's surname (i.e. your old surname if you've changed yours to his), what would he say?
(and the equivalent if your next dc was a boy).

I actually think it is wrong to saddle a child with a first name in memoriam. Let the child have it’s own name with no history shackled to it.

A middle name (or double middle name) still honours them but is kinder to the child.

My dd has 2 middle names, one being her dads mums name, it’s an old fashioned name that’s not really used anymore so I wouldn’t want it as a first name. I think using the names as middle names is a good enough compromise especially if the names something like “Garry or Graham” 😬

What are the names? Could they be a variation of them?

For example Tommy if the day was Thomas etc.

Here in Ireland sometimes people use the Irish version of the name to honour it but give the child their own identity. Don't know where you're but might be an option or the Welsh version or whatever?

When the poster said about Frank, my thoughts turned to Frank Spencer.

But back to the op. No, it would be a heavy burden on your ds and very inconsiderate of his need to be an individual in his own right.

It’s not fair to your baby. He’s a person in his own right, not a replacement for or tribute to a dead person. 2 middle names has got to be the way to go.

That. I'm in my late 60s and still resent not having 'my own' name. I have three names and they were all chosen to 'honour' someone else.

Your baby is going to be his own person, and he deserves his own name. Brother and dad can be middle names.

Other way round for me! I’d have no problem naming a child Arthur but over my dead body would I name them David!

Middle names is fair, op.

No. Your feelings count too.