Surnames as Christian names

[Timesrchanging]

What do people think of this.
Baby due in November. middle name agreed on ages ago its dps surname but is also often used as a Christian name (think similar to Martin or Graham).
First name was down to a shortlist but dp has thrown in a curveball name. It's one have only ever heard as a surname. Hated it at first but it's really growing on me. Will share but wanted to know views on using surnames in this way first.

Harrison
Carter
Jenson.
I think they're awful, sorry but if you're talking about
George
James
Lee
Graham
Paul.
Which are also recognised surnames. Then they're all fine.
So we need the actual name before we can give opinions

Curious to know what you will do if you get married. Will the child then be Harrison Paul Paul?

I dont really like the clunkier ones either, as the pp above examples.

But hey! 'Ur bubba ur rulez' as they say on the other site

It's quite traditional in some places. I know loads of middle aged to elderly men with names Christian names which is actually their mother's maiden name. Names like Jackson, Ramsey, Thompson, Clarke, Boyd, Barclay, Hall etc. But I think the reason they work well is because they have a family connection, rather than just being a random surname? But over time, loads of surnames have become 'standard' first names so who knows, the one you're thinking of may end up being one of those?

I'm not opposed to the concept. I think it depends on the name itself. I like Archer and Reid, Jackson is fairly innocuous, but Hunter is a 90s gladiator, Bailey is a drink, and many others sound silly.

As long as the child has an innocuous alternative to use.

Curious to know what you will do if you get married. Will the child then be Harrison Paul Paul?

Why, what happens to the child's surname if OP gets married?

For me, it really depends on the surname & whether I like the sound of it. I don't object in principle to surnames used as first names.

For example I quite like Harrison & Jenson, but can't stand Carter and Hunter for boys, or the likes of Taylor and Harper for girls.

My DF & my DB share a middle name that is a very unusual old family surname. I won't share it as it's outing and very, very ugly . I didn't give it to any of my sons.

It's just like every other type of name I suppose, some people like them and some don't. The only consideration I would perhaps make would be how likely it could be that the child could grow up and marry and have the same surname and first name; I quite like the name Taylor for example but wouldn't use it for this, probably very neurotic, reason!

They are a bad idea if the surname is one that is typically a first name, Because it gets damned confusing when names are reversed for lists. Someone is listed as eg Graham, Jackson. It isn't then clear his name is actually Jackson Graham. I know someone who is a gp receptionist and that drives her potty. She has to enter details carefully and alsi be sure to call either Jackson or Mr Graham

It depends entirely on the surname.

I'm not overly keen on surnames as first names but can get along with names like Parker, Archer, Reid, Jackson as first names. However, if it's something like Patterson or Knolly or Cumberdale then it might look a bit more odd.

I'm afraid you're going to need to tell us the name, OP.

It sounds very American, not necessarily a bad thing, but definitely a thing.

If you like it, go for it. My DSis gave my DN our surname as his first name, still find it a bit weird....

This was a tradition of my gran she called all her sons surnames as christian names and i have carried on the tradition with my own dc xx

I hate the stuff like Parker, Ryder ,Jackson, etc. Things that are actual surnames but people believe they are cool, i don't personally like them and think they sound very american

But stuff that is an actual normal first name is fine. I think there is nothing wrong with George Williams or Willam George for example. The examples your gave (Martin and Graham) are normal enough, if a little old fashioned. Would love to hear what it is.

I don't like them, names like Harrison, Jackson, Ashton etc, but plenty of people are naming their sons in this way so it isn't unpopular.

Find it less of an issue for boys' names although personally don't care for it but really don't like it for girls names. Think it is v American. McKenzie & McKenna for example are a couple of the daughters from some of the Real Housewives shows. Another daughter was called London!
Having said that, Kelly, which I always think of as a surname, has been a girl's name quite widely used in the UK, at least in the 70s/80s.

I don't mind surname names but I prefer them with surnames that are not names in themselves iyswim eg Hunter Jenkinson rather than Hunter James as it seems like the order of the names is backwards. Is your surname a 'name name' as well?

I'm not keen on surname names TBH. It's not unusual these days though, so if you like it then use it!

Some I like, some I don't really. Depends on the name completely. I quite like Jenson but not Harrison for example.

Some I like, some I don't. Much like all names, tbh.

I don't like it at all, names like Jackson, Harrison, Sullivan are all really tacky and will date as much as Shelly and Keith do now.

Classic surnames like George, James etc I like.

There are a few I like, but generally I don't. They sound a bit "trendy"

I love Evan (Evans is a surname)

I like

Jackson

This is really common in Scotland. You often come across children called something like Blair, Campbell, Finley, Murray or Ross which are all common surnames too.

The only issue is that if you have a surname which is also used as a first name sometimes there can be confusion about which is which - is your child Murray Finlay or Finlay Murray?

Queen it's funny you should say that you think the name Jackson is tacky and will date. The only Jacksons I know are elderly men. I think of it as a granda name.