What surname for the baby?

[JamesJames]

Most of the discussion on here seems to be about first names / middle names, but my real question is around surnames.

When my wife and I married, we each kept our own surnames. This was exactly as we wanted and expected -- we both find the long survival of the custom of a wife taking her husband's surname rather odd.

However, now that we're expecting a baby we face a problem of what surname to give him. We don't like newly-minted double-barrelled surnames (and our surnames would be very clunky if put together anyway), so what to do?

In terms of our own parents' views, my father has a strong expectation that the baby will have my/his surname (he is always wittering on about "continuing the line" as if we were aristocracy or something), and I think he'd be very upset if it didn't. I don't think my wife's family have any particular expectations, however.

In terms of my wife and me, we both want the baby to have our own respective surnames, but I think it is more out of a general desire to stake our claims rather than trenchantly-held views for either of us!

How do we solve this?

Boys take your names, girls take hers? In our case it meant no one got mine as we only had boys, but that was always a risk. Both ours have a "family" name of mine as a middle name.

Can you make a portmanteau from both your names, ie. Benson and Wright becomes Bright?

I know of various solutions in my friend group. Really just depends what you're comfortable with.

Double barrelled
One parent's surname
One parent's surname and the other's as a middle
Alternating surnames between children

I know some families prefer to choose the rarer or more interesting name, so have gone with the mother's name. Or the side where there won't be any other grandchildren with that name.

The baby should have the mother's surname married or unmarried.

Have one as a middle name?
Make up a new one incorporating bits of both surnames?

I also know one family where, for example, the mums last name is Jackson and the son is Jack (first name).

Double-barrelling is the most sensible option. If it sounds "clunky" then you can let the children choose one of the names to go by informally when they're a bit older.

Find one name that works for all the family. This could be a partial double barrel if the full names are clunky, a portmanteau, or just pick a new family surname that means something to you and your wife (place name? Or look back in family history to see if their is a name that features in both families, for example).

I’d go with double barrelling. The trouble with one name being used as a middle name is that who’s will that be? You will both want your name as the surname as middle names are not as important.

If your dad is 'traditional' (rather than a sexist or driven by his ego) historically babies 'should' have their mother's surname...

Our double-barrel is fully ridiculous.

We went with it anyway. Only fair thing.

@JamesJames mother's Surname. SHE has carried the baby, not you & certainly not your father.

it is extremely unusual for a mother to walk away from her children, not unusual for fathers.

nothing stopping you taking your wife's name if you want to have the same surname as your children.

I wouldn't alternate, or have boys with one surname and girls with another. That makes no sense as some siblings will share a surname and others not!

FWIW, I didn't change my name and the DC have DH's surname. It has never mattered one jot.

The thing with double barrelling is that it just pushes the decision 'down the line'. The next generation will have 4 names to 'choose' from. If you are planning on more than one child you could alternate - 1st child your wife's surname, 2nd child yours etc, with the other parent's surname as one of the middle names.

We were/ are in the same situation. The girls have their dads surname and my surname as a middle name. It’s worked out really well for us personally.

What if the surname was Matthews or Williams for example, could you really give that to a girl as a middle name? Would sound a bit odd. Double-barrelling would be the better option in that case.

Why not take your wife's name and then you can all have the same name!

It should be the father’s surname.

There is no 'should'
Why do you think this?

We went with DH’s and I felt like a crap feminist for a few minutes but I was happy with the decision and it worked better with her first and middle names (which were my choice and had significance to my side of the family).

Do consider that it might be an issue for whichever of you doesn’t get their name if they plan to take DC abroad in future without the other parent. It actually wasn’t for us - though I had a letter from DH and a copy of the BC ready, nobody was bothered. They might have looked more closely if it was DH going alone with her, or not I don’t know - it’s one of those things I’ve heard might be an issue but no direct experience!

If your dad is expecting it to be done the traditional way then traditionally it’s the mother’s name that is given to the baby. Married, or unmarried whatever name the mother has gets used.

If you’re planning more than one child then one has hers and one has yours.

Go with the birth mothers surname.

This is reason people change their surname on marriage, it avoids all this. You take her name, she takes your name or pick a different name you all adopt.

Mothers name always.