Fathers surname - AIBU

[NC566]

Name change for this one.

I'm pregnant and due in a couple of months.
Father of the child has long-standing drink and drug issues (cocaine). This was kept hidden from me at the beginning of the relationship. By the time I found out, I was already in too deep. Had tried to walk away many times but hadn't been able to. Have tried to help and believed too many times that he could change. He was very neglected as a child and I have a lot of sympathy for his upbringing.

However, now that I'm pregnant, my maternal instincts are overriding any empathy I have for him and his situation. I have ended the relationship and have made it clear that he is to get clean and I want a clean drugs test provided before the baby is born. So far, he has not achieved this.

Due to the relationship breaking down, we'd agreed to double barrel the surname. I have now gone back on this and have said I will only double barrel the surname if he is clean by the time the baby is born, otherwise the baby will be having my surname only.

It's really affecting him but I'm determined to stand my ground with it.

AIBU?
Is it fair to double barrel the surname regardless, as he is baby's father?

Zahariel

I believe this entire thread to be blatantly sexist. Fathers are just as important as mothers and parental responsibility is a default not something that can be opted out of. Poor advice to say it is

Anyone prioritising drug use over their child should have minimal contact with them, male or female.
The couple are not married. She has left the father, for very good reason. She has every right to call her baby whatever she decides.

Of course it can be opted out of. OP’s former partner has pretty much already opted out with his, ‘if the baby doesn’t have my surname, I won’t be able to bond.’ OP does not have that same choice!

Of course either parent could opt out. If he opts out, she takes full responsibility. If she, for some unfathomable reason, was to opt out, it would probably become the responsibility of social services!

You seem to not understand what “parental responsibility” means. It’s a legal term. Not an automatic thing that happens when sperm meets egg.

Parental responsibility is something that many many men walk away from! And yes, some women. This man is already derelict in his parental responsibility as he is still drinking and taking drugs.

Again: (and given that some women walk away from responsibility) it isn't the fact that he is a man, or sexism , that is at play here - it is his behaviour as a liar (didn't tell her ), a drug addict and an alcoholic.

When they carry the baby for 9 months then give birth they can have equal rights imo. A supportive dependable father is, of course, wonderful but a drug addict deadbeat is more of a danger to the child's well being. If the mother is the drug addict deadbeat and a danger to the child that is completely different.

'he says he won't be able to bond with baby if it doesn't have his surname.'

Sounds absolutely ideal. He shouldn't be anywhere near a child, nevermind 'bonding'.

If he is named on the birth certificate he can take the baby away and refuse to return him/her to the OP, and there will be nothing the OP can do about it. This dickhead could keep the baby for weeks on end, whilst the OP's milk supply dries up, he could be snorting cocaine off the baby's bum for all the OP knows, the police won't intervene without a court order.

@Zahariel

"Fathers are just as important as mothers and parental responsibility is a default not something that can be opted out "

Amazing how many fathers manage it....

Well if he can't bond with his own child if it doesn't have his surname then he is no father anyway. Not a chance I would use his surname if that's the only reason he would be in the picture, it's a good reason not to use his surname.

@Zahariel protecting a child from a drug addict father is not bollocks. Not naming the father on the birth certificate means the father doesn't get parental responsibility, so the child can be protected from a man who doesn't have the child's best interests at heart.

There are many fathers on their child's birth certificate who take great pleasure in blocking anything the mother tries to do for the child. Deliberately preventing the child going on holiday, to a particular school or even from having vaccinations.

Keeping a feckless man off a birth certificate is the best thing a mother can do to protect a child.

If OPs ex cleans up his act, coparenting can go ahead. But until that happens, this baby needs to be protected.

women are not better, or worse, than men. Its staggeringly sexist to act and behave this way.

In the OP's case (and in my own) the mother is definitely better.

You have to do what you think is right. You can change things further down the line.

My DCs all have my name. We weren't together when I had DC1, I didn't put him the BC initially. He went on later, we went in to have more children, and they all have my name.

I carried them and birthed them. It's a very old fashioned (an IMO unnecessary) tradition. We got married, I didn't change my name or theirs. I am very glad we went down this route - it felt right at the time and still feels right. You can change things further down the line.

(Ended up divorced and I raised them alone).

If having a baby and being a father won't get give him the push to get clean then the name is irrelevant.

86% of single parents are women, vs 14% men. Of the men who should be paying CMS, 44% are either not paying the full amount or not paying at all. Staggering, isn’t it.

ONS and DWP have the stats on this.

Exactly this! You are right. Do not put him on the BC. You do not want him having any say over your child's life. My ex is a pain in the bum, quite often he'll do things that are deliberately awkward. I can't do anything about it as he's on the BC. I can't imagine how horrific it would be if he was an addict and having control over a child.

You can readdress access if/ when he proves he's clear for a significant amount of time.

I wouldn't double barrell or use his name as a middle name. It would feel like a fake token to me. And if he ends up having no part in your child's life then he/she will always question it and you will always resent it.

Names can be changed at a later date if your child wants that.

But as a single parent, life will be much easier for you if you have the same surname.

Good luck x

women are not better, or worse, than men. Its staggeringly sexist to act and behave this way.

Well said. It's about time something was done about the epidemic of women leaving their children and not paying maintenance.

Also, it is ridiculous in this day and age that it is just assumed that the baby will have its mother's surname - surely we can do better after all these years and finally give men a chance to give their names to their babies.

oh wait ...

Let’s rephrase.
a parent who has an active drug addiction has the potential to be unsafe to the child.

the other parent has an obligation to protect the child from the unsafe parent by whatever means available to them.

it this was a MM gay couple, a straight couple where the mother is the problem, and/or a lesbian couple of parents, I’d say the same thing.

Fathers can at any point choose to be a significant threat to mothers in a way that mothers can't due to inherent physical differences. Fathers are physically at any point in time usually able to, if they choose, overpower mothers.

So they are never equal.

There is always an inequality between men and women and on a population level men will always pose more of a threat to women than women do to men.

So there's that.

But separately there is also the production of milk after birth that obviously separates mothers from fathers and how much each is needed by the child.