stuck with baby's last name

[milkytash]

posting because i can't talk to anyone in real life who isn't biased. dd needs registering soon and we still haven't talked properly about her last name. i mentioned when i was pregnant i wasn't happy about it just being dp surname and it caused an argument so just haven't brought it up again. the obvious this is to double barrel but we both have really long surnames and i think it would look silly. ive thought about having one of our names as a middle name but how do you decide who's names where??

don't know what to do

My parents went with [First Name][Middle Name][Middle Name][Mother's Surname][Father's Surname]

It's a bit long but it works, even though it's quite clearly a surname disguised as a #3 middle name.

Well ultimately it's your decision because you are the mum and the one responsible for registering the birth of the child. That said, it should be decided by both of you with discussion and compromise.

In your situation I would double barrel the name. It might be long but that is the most fair course of action. Its not fair for him to insist the child has only his name. And it's not fair for you to insist the same thing.

Having the fathers surname is the traditional way, unless the father is not really involved anymore.

If you must use your name, the usual is like the poster before me wrote - use yours a middle name and your partners as the real surname.

I personally don't really like those very made up sounding double barrelled names.

There are no hard and fast rules on this one, you just have to work out what works best for you and your family. I know of the following scenarios:

• kid takes fathers name, mum has different name
• kid has double barrelled name, parents don't double barrel themselves
• kid has double barrelled name, dad keeps his original name and mum double barrels to match kid
• whole family take a portmanteau name, with one part from dads and one part from mum
• mums surname is used as a middle namr

They all seem 'normal' to me, although some are more common than others.

We went for the portmanteau option, but only because it gives us a "normal" sounding British surname. If it came up with something bonkers then we would t have gone it.

I'm no huge fan of double barrelled but I get why it exists as a thing. Many of DCs friends have whoppers of double barrelled names and it just becomes normal.

What would you prefer OP, and what are your DPs views?

Tough one, and there is no right answer. Do you feel able to discuss it with your DP without arguing?

You get to make the ultimate decision, as you're not married, but a compromise would be best.

Have you got plans to marry?
As obviously you would all end up with the same if ds had df name.
I have my dh first name as my surname and ds has double barrelled so first name +df full name as surname!!
We are married but changed my surname before we married.
Double barrel it and use first name and middle only?

Why can't your child have their fathers name? Surely you were commited enough to this man to have children with him and so letting them have his surname shouldn't matter to you. Your child is not a possession to be owned- British tradition is for children to have their fathers name, other cultures do it differently.

Do you plan on marrying him eventually? If so will you take his name?

DD is Clarissa middle name 2ndm middle name last name-last name....

I don't two long last names are bad.

HOWEVER; do you want your child to have the last name of a man that reacts this way...? :(

*I don't think two

it's just tradition for children to take the fathers name from when men were seen as more important so i don't think that's fair.

if it was completely up to me i would give her my name because i'm the last one to have it in my family. dp has a really big family.

i am worried to bring it up with him just because i don't want to upset him and know there will be a backlash from his family if it's not just solely his surname

It's not about being fair, as I said your child is not a possession to label and argue about.

Ultimately if you want her to have your name you get the say as her mum because of you being unmarried. Now how is that fair?

Hi OP, doesn't sound too good, to be honest.
Are you planning on staying with your partner for life ?
Is your partner from a different culture, I ask, due to the family involvement ?
If at all you are unsure, give your baby, your surname only.
If I'm barking up the wrong tree, give him your surname as a middle name, as generally, children do take their DFs name.

it's just tradition for children to take the fathers name from when men were seen as more important so i don't think that's fair.

You are right, milky. Either give your DC your name or both.

My dc have their fathers Name as one day we will get around to marrying.

My sisters dc have their fathers surname as a middle name and our family name as their surname.

Boils down to personal preference.

That's a tough one and not many are going to agree with me here.

If you are completely solid in your relationship then do what feels right for you.

If there is even a chance that you may not be together in the future then I would use his surname as a middle and yours as the surname.

I know quite a few people who are now single mums and have different surnames from their children, if the dads are involved or not, they live with their mum abs siblings - with different names and it causes issues for the mum.

Talk it through but be strong and do what is right for you, you have just as much right to use your name as his, just because he has a penis doesn't give him a bigger say regardless of tradition.

In a similar situation we used my surname. We weren't married and had no plans to so I felt it was best and their dad doesn't mind. We are still together and it's not an issue. My kids just accept their dad has another surname. It's a fairly recent tradition for unmarried parents to use the fathers name I believe.

It's not tradition for children to have their father's name. It's tradition for them to have their mother's name. It's just that conventionally the parents would be married and the mother would have taken the father's name. Traditionally, children of unmarried mothers had their mother's name. So, the tradition thing is bollocks. The only fair way is to go double-barrelled, or choose a whole new surname.

It's not tradition for children to have their father's name. It's tradition for them to have their mother's name. It's just that conventionally the parents would be married and the mother would have taken the father's name

Absolutely this.

Any thoughts Milkytash ?

I might get shot for saying this, but does it really matter? What's in a name?! Surely it's just easier to go with the flow and give the child the mans name. If it means a lot to you, have your name as a middle name - and put your foot down on that.

The baby has your name because you are not married to him. Is there a reason why you are not married? Not being judgy, just wondering if he hasn't asked or has refused, or if you are reluctant. To me if you don't want to Marry him, or if he hasn't suggested you marry, then you shouldn't give baby his name.

Surely it's just easier to go with the flow and give the child the mans name

Until you want to take the baby abroad without the partner and have to jump through hoops as you have different surnames - which is then made even more complicated if there's been a difficult breakup and the now ex-partner won't grant approval for travel or name change...

Ravioli what if she gives it her name and then the dad wants to take it abroad?! That's a bad argument.

I'm not giving advice to the dad though.

Unmarried mother = baby having mums surname.

Its very old fashioned to believe children should have the fathers surname.

I would never allow a child of mine to be registered in a different name than mine.