has anyone else felt sad about baby not having your last name?

[kalidasa]

We are expecting a little boy at the beginning of December. I have pretty much given in and accepted that he will have my partner's last name, but I do feel sad about it, in particular that it'll be only me without the name. (We are not married. We probably will get married at some point but even so I wouldn't change names as I publish under my name and it's important professionally.) We were both open to using both names in some way but they just sound ghastly together (both monosyllabic and to be honest my last name is quite ugly anyway!). DP's last name is objectively more attractive and also has the advantage that it appears to be British (my nationality) even though he is actually French (his nationality), so in a way represents both sides. It also has a strong family history for DP (his father and g'father are quite well known) and is significant to him as a result in a way that isn't really true for me.

But I still feel sad about it! Has anyone else been in a similar boat? Did you give your name as a middle name (seems a bit token but perhaps worth doing)? Or come up with some other solution?

I have a few friends who, like you, can't really change their name for work purposes but wanted one family name. They have changed their name for everything personal but still use their maiden name for work, publishing articles and events. Then they have the best of both worlds, can you do that?

Well Squoosh maybe you should stop trying to pick a fight with someone with all that bold block letter shouting that you had going on and take your own advice.
In my case it was my own decision, my fiancé never so much as even indicated he wanted the baby to have his name. He would have been happy either way.
OP it's your baby so it's your choice and you should be happy with whatever you do.

marge2 adopt the baby? eh? It's his child, no need to adopt it

The words in bold were to represent that it was a quotation from your post. Obvious one would have thought.

marge - that's not correct in this situation - the OP's baby is also her DP's baby, regardless of whether they are married or not.
You can't "adopt" your own child.

Just take your own advice ffs! Or do you need me to scroll up and re-quote it for you?

Please do shimmy, I'm finding it quite difficult to know what you are going on about.

I actually think pretty much like shimmy. I would never say a dc without the dad's name has a weaker bond with him deedee - just that giving the dad's name is a nice way of cementing the bond.

I didn't mind because they had to have one of our names - they don't go together as double-barrelled names, and my surname is v v dull while dh's is interesting.

I have to say though that my girls don't like having a different name to me, and I do feel a bit sad about it sometimes. When we do finally get married, I might use my partner's name a bit to make my dds' happy, but my passport, bank accounts, professional name will remain the same.

OP, if you feel strongly about it then tell your partner and say you would at least like your name as a middle name. FWIW, DD has DP's surname, I have my surname, and we won't be marrying so it will be like this for all of DD's life. It doesn't bother me. DP really wanted DD to have his surname and I was happy for this to happen. Like dill, I know when dealing with schools and that, if anyone calls me 'Mrs DDsurname' I will just respond to this.

Your baby is neither parent's more than the other's, so the talk of who 'deserves' to have their surname carried on is, IMO, a bit ridiculous. Nowadays children have all kinds of surnames, often not the same as either parent.

I'm always really confused how much people on MN talk about how hard it is if the DC have a different surname from their mum. Not that I don't understand when it might be a problem - passport control, say - but if they have the mum's surname, the dad will then just have the same problems! Or is that less important, somehow?

There is not right or wrong in this situation, not in the wider picture. There is just a right or wrong for how you and your DP feel. As you feel sad that your baby won't have your surname, then talk about it more with your DP and see if you can reach an agreement - a middle name is good. But its entirely about how you feel, not what everyone else thinks.

Well that's what my cousin had to do so that when he married his partner, their child changed her name to his, when his partner did. It WAS his own child.. You can't change childrens names by deedpol so to change the name you have to 'adopt'. But it was years ago now...perhaps things have changed.

no you don't.

sorry, i think your cousin was misinformed.
things haven't changed - for a change of an adult's name you don't even need deed poll - a lot of people use it because it creates a paper trail, but they don't need to by law.
if he's named on the birth certificate as the father, and thy both want the child to take his name, all they have to do is start using it as the name.
here

(it's likely that your cousin meant the child "adopted the name" rather than the father adopting the child)

Well I'm not ging to swear blind that was the case, but that's what I was told.

sounds like the kind of thing my mum comes out with

Ds is 5 now and I'm still sad that he's not got my name, I wish I had put my foot down more and insisted on him having my name.

I know that if we hadn't come up with this amalgamation surname, I would not have been happy to give her DH's name.
I wouldn't have been happy not to give her my name, but DH wouldn't have been happy if we'd given her mine and not his - this way, his name disappears (it's not nice), and although mine does too, at least the name she's got is nicer, and we've got equal shares in her name (except his is 5 letters and we used 3 of each, so really, I win )

I was married and had already taken my exH's surname so all my boys have his surname. Now that I'm divorced I feel obliged to stick with my ex's surname to be the same as the DC. They don't want me to change. I wish we had double-barrelled them, now.

Yes and I hate it. XP wouldn't let me give the dc's my surname (think screaming and abuse before registering the birth of DC1).

So they are stuck with his name now. Although I have started looking into the legalities of changing their name by deed poll. I can't stand having a different name to them.

Totally understandable. I won't change my name even if I get married and would be a bit weirded out to live with James Jones and have a daughter called Lucy Jones and be all on me own with my surname, when there's no reason for that to be the case.

I love Nickel's solution :)

TBH I think that the default should be children having their mother's surname, whatever that happens to be at the time, because in the event of the relationship ending the vast majority of the time the mother has main care of the children.

Am impressed nickel, when asked, we said we'd choose a surname that went best with our chosen first name but we didn't do it.

I think, like elephants, that the 'correct' answer is that a child of unmarried parents should take the mother's name, as it is so rare for a mother not to be an active parent.

What we chose to do though, my proposal, was that dd has DP's name. I don't expect to marry and prob wouldn't change name if we did. Neither of us is particularly attached to our names, they don't flow nicely together, mine is one syllable and i think odd as a middle name (though there's some family tradition of maiden as middle names) and, personally, I don't like double-barrelling as where does it end.

I felt so clear that dd is my child that I could afford to be magnanimous. DP wouldn't have objected to my name but I think was pleased at the link. We haven't encountered the identity problems yet. I'm sure people will refer to me as mrs DP, just as now, many people with whom I instigate contact refer to him as mr lottiegb.