Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Other subjects
Original poster

Not my surname!

139 replies

Trifle · 04/09/2003 09:45

My partner and I have been together for 15 years, have never married nor do we intend to. Both our boys have their fathers surname and, at the time of their registration had no idea how irritating I would come to find this. From their medical, dental, school, nursery, passport, post office accounts etc etc, there is nothing to relate me to them. As I am the one who ends up taking them to most appointments I have to give their name which is completely different to mine. I have mentioned to my partner how irritating I find this and suggested changing their names to mine but he sees this as a sleight on his manhood. With the benefit of hindsight I would advise anyone to give their children their own surname.

OP posts:
JanHR · 04/09/2003 09:50

My dd had her dads surname and my name as a second middle name. We agreed on this as we are engaged and will get married eventually, but I know what you mean about it being annoying

kayleigh · 04/09/2003 10:24

I never changed my surname when we married. We now have two boys, the eldest is 5, who have their fathers surname. I can honestly say I have never had a problem with their name being different to mine. I don't think I have ever had to explain why either. I guess people have assumed I use my maiden name or that I am not married to their father !
How old are your children Trifle ?

FairyMum · 04/09/2003 10:25

My children have my surname and my husband's as middle name. we are married, but I have kept my name. What had your children's surname got to do with your husband's manhood???

doormat · 04/09/2003 10:25

I can relate to the surname difference being a pain in the bum. I have 4 children with ex's surname, also 2 children with dh's surname. I got married 2 months ago so now have his surname.
I was called mrs and mrs and miss *.I took on maiden name after divorce.
But at the end of the day I am a bit of a traditionalist when it comes to surnames and I think the child should take on the fathers surname (if he is in the picture)as it is all about lineage.

FairyMum · 04/09/2003 10:53

Doormat, what do you mean by lineage ? Not sure if I understand? It is about lineage and manhood ? Sounds terribly old-fashioned to me....

ThomCat · 04/09/2003 11:15

I'm not married, and have no plans to be. DD has DP's surname. Sometimes feel a bit ...weird...odd...something.... when at our numerous hospital appointments I have to give two different names. I don't know why really. I guess maybe it's because I think people will see me in a different light - maybe that's the Catholic in me making me feel guilty for being an unmarried mother!!! I don't think there's anything wrong with it, not at all, just feel that the older women behind the reception might??!! I don't really know, but I must admit as time is going on and we want DD to go to a fantastic Catholic School in our area I'm beginning to want us all to share the same name. I know it shouldn't matter but can't help the little bubble of desire!

wickedstepmother · 04/09/2003 11:20

If I was in this position I would consider a double barrelled name (providing that the names 'go' togther, obviously!). It seems like the best solution all round to me.

I was not married to DD's father when she was born but we knew that we were going to marry at some point and so she got his name, DH and I got married when DD was 11 months and I took his name too.

Angiel · 04/09/2003 11:33

When I had my first 2 children I gave them my surname as me and dp weren't married. Afterwards I changed mine and the children's names to my dp's surname by deedpoll. My 3rd child obviously automatically got my dp's surname.

I did not want my kids to have a different surname to me and my dp also wanted them to have his surname and this was the best compromise we could come up with.

oliveoil · 04/09/2003 11:43

I was really proud when I got married and got all my new cards/passport etc in my new name. Wouldn't even have considered keeping my old one.

judetheobscure · 04/09/2003 12:10

I agree Fairymum - it is terribly old-fashioned. When I married dh I would have kept my maiden name but for various reasons, including the fact it would be easier for any children, I took dh's name. I think there should be a new system where when you marry or have children you choose a new surname, perhaps based on a combination of your existing surnames - a bit like double-barrelling but without making such a mouthful.

Original poster
Trifle · 04/09/2003 12:21

A couple I know had a child and later got divorced. She then went on to remarry and, to avoid having two children with different surnames, she gave her second child by her new husband her ex-husbands surname. Slightly weird that any man would agree to their child having the surname of their wife's first husband.

OP posts:
scoobysnax · 04/09/2003 12:25

I think it is logical for the children to have the same surname as the mother.

These are my reasons:
The mother is the one who most often takes them to school and to other appointments, and if the parents split up the children normally stay with the mother.

Also, the mother is the one who registers the child so she is the one who has the real power to choose...

nerdgirl · 04/09/2003 12:46

I know it's old fashioned but I like the idea of a 'family name'.

So you can all be the Bloggs family and can trace your family tree back through generations of Bloggs'!

If I had kept my maiden name when I married I wouldn't feel I fit properly into the family either currently or historically. I just wouldn't like it to be the Bloggs family and HER!

Hughsie · 04/09/2003 12:51

I've got a double barrelled surname which is both of ours but my dh chose not to take mine - the two boys are also double barrelled but annoyingly my name which is first is often dropped by our nursery and replaced with an inital - i get really crossd about this and am sure it is not helped by the fact that dh isn't called it too.

The boys first names were chosen to fit the surname and sound silly with just his so I am doublely cross but I suppose it isn't too bad unrtil they are learning to read and write

Eeek · 04/09/2003 13:01

I kept my name when I married (it's part of who I am) and when ds's were born we put mine in as a middle name. Our surnames are both long so double-barrelled would have been ridiculous. To solve the problem I take DH's as a courtesy name whenever it suits me ie I'm Mrs XXX. Would you consider that?

Pimpernel · 04/09/2003 13:03

I don't really like the idea that generations of families have to be traced back through the male line.

I'd like to see a system where both female and male lines were recognised. For example, if the mother is Ms Smith, and the father is Mr Jones, they and their children would all be known as Smith-Jones. When the children formed relationships of their own, the daughters would keep the Smith from the mother, drop the Jones from the father, and take their partner's name to form a new double-barrelled name. Similarly, the sons would drop the Smith from the mother, keep the Jones from the father and form a new double-barrelled name with their partners. Can't see it catching on, though - far too many combinations that it wouldn't work for!

dd has my name - in the absence of a better idea, we decided that if the first child was a girl, all our children would have my name. If the first child was a boy, they would all have dp's name.

aloha · 04/09/2003 13:16

I think this is why I got married! Still use my maiden name for professional purposes but we all use the same name otherwise.

codswallop · 04/09/2003 13:18

I dont see why women give children a mans name. If the whole thing is hinged on equality - ie not being the husbands "wife" etc why do women do this. Id say not without a rock!!

kayleigh · 04/09/2003 13:47

We agreed to give our boys my dh's surname as it was my decision to keep my maiden name when we married. And if I hadn't they would of course have have had "our" surname which is my dh's.

codswallop · 04/09/2003 13:49

why did you not all have yours?

doormat · 04/09/2003 13:49

Fairymum I know it is old fashioned and out of date.
Nerdgirl agree with you

codswallop · 04/09/2003 13:50

I like my new one because its foreign and alliterates with my first name. My old one was aboring Yorkshire name...

codswallop · 04/09/2003 13:50

(obviously its Codswallopini)

slug · 04/09/2003 13:58

I kept mine mainly because it's been part of me for too long to change now, but also because my married name is a porn name.

The sluglet has her dad's name, which mostly causes no problems, except when we travel abroad when the fact that we have different surnamens and different nationalities can cause the occasional problem at borders.

fisil · 04/09/2003 19:04

DS got DPs name. We also have no intention of ever getting married.

I mused about what surname to use on a different website and one response was "as you are unmarried, use your surname because when you split up it will be really awkward." I was so offended by this assumption that our relationshop was in some way doomed just because we had made the decision to remain unmarried, that I never went back to that website. But it was also a contributing factor in our choice of surname.

The other main factor was that as a teacher, I find myself assuming that if a child has a different name to its father, then it is usually a step father. I know this means I am pandering to the traditionalist rubbish, but it seemed a bit unfair to burden my offspring with it.