Would you call your child a name you don't like so you could use the nn that you did like?

[fizzpops]

Just out of interest, I am not pg or anything?

My DH and I had conversations about names when I was pg with my DD (didn't know we were expecting a girl) and loads of names we liked the shortened version of but not the whole name - Charlie but not Charles etc.

A colleague was horrified that my friend had called her son Jake rather than Jacob and wouldn't accept that I thought it would be strange to give a child a name you really disliked for the sake of the nn that you did.

I would always give the full name because it gives a child MORE options later on in life.

I MUCH prefer the nn of DS2 to his full name and he is always called the nn, but i do like his full name and could never have chosen it if I didnt! I would have gone straight for the nn as whole name if I didnt like the long name.

we picked the short version of the name for two of ours - didn't like the long version of either.

I think currently anything goes with names - so most people see nothing wrong in Jake rather than Jacob.

both my kids have long versions of their names as official names, but with one at least I knew I'd always use the shortened version - with the other one the shortened version just kind of happened and stuck.

as others say it does give them more options later on though

We chose the short version for DS. I liked the long one (not as much as short one) but everyone else hated it. A shorter name also matched my other kids names better. I also don't see the point in a long name that will only be used at the doctors etc. I myself have a long name but have always been called the short version. It feels odd and over formal when the doctors etc call me the long name (they always do). Most names originally came from longer/other names anyway.

My Ds 2 is called Charles, although we don't really like it. We always call him Charlie.

We did this, as you said, because we thought it would be better to give him the option of using Charles when older.

There are a number of diminutive names , especially for girls, which IMO don't really work for teenagers/adults, so again, I'd go for the longer version eg Kitty (Katherine), Ellie (Eleanor), Abby (Abigail).

Jake is a bit different because it's more established as a name in its own right

I would use a name on its own ( without long form)

I love the name Charlie but not Charles eg !

If you dont like the long version ( dont want your child to be known as it) then dont use it at all

My dd if she had been a boy would have been called James and dh would have used the nn Jamie whereas I prefer James.

I prefer Dan to Daniel.

I'm with Lockets.
we called my DS Charlie because we don't like Charles at all, I suppose we should maybe have thought about whether he may want to use Charles instead when he was older but at the time we just thought there was no way we would ever call him Charles.
we wanted him to be Charlie so Charlie he is!

lockets:

Actually, DS2 is called Charles Charlie Charleston the third

I would always make the longer version the name and then use nn.

Jamie is a lovely name for a boy. But James would look better on GCSE, A level certs, etc.

Same with Joe, Sam, Ben, Dan,Tim, etc. I know a family of boys where all DC have this kind of name (just 3 letters), and no middle name either. Mum didn't want names that could be shortend. Joe now as nn of 'J'!

yes, we did with DD2 she is Alexandra known as Lexie but it gives ALL the options later on for her and as someone who has always hated her own name that was important to me

I would give a longer name too.

My DS2 is Edward - known to everyone as Ed, but you can't put Ed on a birth certificate can you?

My mum is a lawyer and it brought it home to me when she sent me a note on her headed notepaper, which has her full name on it - Mrs blah de blah (various letters after the name)

It would have looked ridiculous if she had some cutesy shortening as her full name, though she is generally known by a nickname.

dizzy OOH, love Lexie

Or Nigel

I would have to like the long name as well as the nickname, and would use this on the birth certificate. So for ds2 I liked Will, Dan and Joe, but not William, Daniel and Joseph, and didn't use them.

notagrannyyet:

'Jamie is a lovely name for a boy. But James would look better on GCSE, A level certs, etc.'

What?

Sorry I genuinely don't understand what you mean.

I agree with the long name on the birth cert idea. It just hands a little bit of autonomy back to the child later in life, when they're a person.

Also fashions change so much. A Betsy christened Betsy in 1940 may have hated her name for much of her life, but a Betsy named Elizabeth would have been able to use a nickname she liked more as fashions changed (if she chose to)

This is really interesting, I have an Alec who is just Alec but in general I like a 'big' name with a nn and the only reason my Alec isn't Alexander is that I specifically didn't want it to be got wrong and him to be called Alex.

Ds2 is Hugh but is always called Shug or Shuggie - you can hardly have that as a 'real' name can you! Mind you we never thought of it when we named him, he was nameless for about 4 days, then when my dad came to the hospital and we told him the name he said 'hello Shug' and Shug he has been ever since.

My DH on the other hand is James, but only ever called Jamie and the other week someone rang up and asked to speak to James and he told them there was no one of that name here, before suddenly saying 'oh no, there is, it's me!

Yep, have done with all three!

My mum named my brother and I by short names so that they would not be shortened. But then she used the nn of John-Jo for my brother and the odd sounding nn that my brother used for me because he couldn't say my name properly when he was young!!

DN is Charles Edward but called Charlie and Edward was used because SIL liked Woody as a nn! Bit odd really as they dont actually like Charles or Edward!!

There are names that stand in their own right such as Max or Jake so the full name is not always needed imo.

I would not give my child a full name that I did not like but if either of my boys had been a girl they would have been called Annabel but maybe Belle for short.... am confusing myself now as I dont like just Belle but love Annabel!!

I would always give the longer version officially so they can choose. I know a Jamie who insisted on being James once he got to about 8yrs, he was adamant and everyone changed.

DSM Didn't mean to offend! Jamie is a lovely name.....I just think James is more of a grown-up name. Might be influenced by the fact that DS had girl friend called Jamie-leigh!

I like the name Coco for our new baby, but I wouldn't give a child that name for life- I feel it a little 'out there'. So I think I would be more likely to use Constance, giving her more options later in life. Equally, dh loves the name Bear, but I think realistically he would need another official name, such as Bartholemew...

I don't know, I can see the benefits of both options tbh.