Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Pregnancy

Talk about every stage of pregnancy, from early symptoms to preparing for birth.

Flip

1 2 3 4

Original poster

Sad at having different surname to children

96 replies

iloveberries · 29/03/2016 08:07

I have DS with my EXH. I kept my married name as it felt very much mine. I had established my career with this name and most importantly I like having the same name as DS.

I am pregnant with a much wanted baby with my new partner (not that new!) He wants the baby to have his surname and I can fully understand that but I feel really sad at having a different name to baby. I think one day we may marry but even then I think I would like to keep my current name (ex H name and same as DS as it feels very much mine.)

I know this is a trivial problem and name is just a name and the main point is that we are so delighted to be having a baby after a few troubles long the route to healthy pregnancy but I can't shake that feeling that I feel uncomfortable that the baby will have his last name and not the same as me.

OP posts:

Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

Original poster

iloveberries · 01/04/2016 08:11

I just can't shake the feeling that double barrelled names are a bit of a mouthful and a bit, well, unecessary. It just sounds a bit OTT... (No offence - it's just my personal feeling)

I also wonder if in 20 yrs I will think "why on earth have I still got exH's name")!

At the moment I would just like the baby to have my name, same as me and DS....

OP posts:

MirandaWest · 01/04/2016 08:20

I currently have the surname I changed to when I married XH, as do my DC. Am marrying DP in a few months time and am double barrelling my surname with his as my DC don't want me to have a different surname from me (neither do I tbh). I still feel a bit like I won't be me any more. Is strange as was perfectly happy to do it first time I got married but if I were doing it again I wouldn't have changed my surname in the first place.

Am starting to think a system like that in Spain sounds like it would be better - everyone knows where they are and you don't have to make decisions along with associated angst

Ledkr · 01/04/2016 08:28

I decided not to chsnge my married name when I got married as I dudbt want poor dd to have a different name. Then we had dd2 and she has her dads name. She has just started school and I often get called Mrs Dh's name.
Now that dd1 is older I might change it agsin but only back to my maiden name but only cos I don't like being associated with my ex knob of a husband

VinceNoirLovesHowardMoon · 01/04/2016 08:33

I have a friend who kept her xh's name and had another dc with new dh. She gave dc her surname, ie the one she assumed 10 years earlier and her other dc have. She got cross when people implied that it wasn't really her surname as why not? Do women only ever borrow the new surname if they change it on marriage? Thankfully her new dh is a decent sort and didn't get all caveman about it

Blu · 01/04/2016 08:36

I understand, iloveberries, and hopefully your situation now will encourage other women to think twice before changing their names or giving a child the father's name.

I know a baby had two parents and both are equally important, but it is the old tradition that always seems to put women in this position.

If your first child has feelings about it, either hyphenating your name, or the baby's is now the only way to go.

Unless you revert to your born name, and hyphenate your first child's name to her father's name and your born name. And give the new baby it's parents names.

You could use your professional name and born name together at work....

But that doesn't solve your resistance to double barreled names.

Something has to give!

SoupDragon · 01/04/2016 08:44

It annoys me that kids and women have to take the mans name

They don't have to.
Many choose to.

I think I would double barrel them or use mine as a middle name (I have no plans to ditch my married name. It's my name now.) I won't be having any more children though!

I do think it would be unfair on the father to give a child only the name of the XH.

HarrysMummy17 · 01/04/2016 08:57

I feel the same. We were in ncu for a while when ds was born and he started of as baby L. (My surname). He was then registered under Dp's name as always decided, however it then felt like he was less mine.

Dp and I play to get married one day but I think if still like to keep my name so I'd never have the same name as dc.

Double barrelled isn't really an option with our surnames.

It doesn't bother me too much yet as ds is only 3 and we don't often use his full name but I'm sure once he starts school it will start to bother me.

I've got his little hospital band with my name on beside me bed

WombatChocolate · 01/04/2016 09:16

A friend of mine had a name issue. She wasn't married (really wanted to be, but DP whilst committed was anti marriage) but didn't want to have a different name to her children.

She decided that the children would have her name. She wasn't prepared to have a different name to her own children. Her DP wanted them to have his name (as did his family) but she said that was only going to happen if she had his name too. Although she never said it, I think she took the view that her man would only have the right to name his child if he married her. She never demanded he marry her or anything like that, but made it clear that the 2 things went together. Tbh, I could see her point - why should the man get to name his child, if he isn't prepared to marry the mother (assuming the mother actually wants to get married)

So friend and children had one name and father had another. She felt happier doing the school run etc having the same name as her kids.

After about 10 years, DP decided he would marry her, because he knew it was important to her (turned out he had a fear of the marriage ceremony not marriage itself). At that point they all took on DPs name.

I think a lot of this name thing for many people is related to whether they want to he married to the father. It is certainly more complicated if there have been previous partners or husbands who were fathers. My personal view of the rule of thumb is that the mother should decide. Generally speaking, I don't think the children of previous relationships should have their surnames changed unless there is no contact with father. Both mother and children of new relationship should be able to choose which names to have - children very likely to have name of father if married, (might or might not if unmarried - mothers choice) mother might or might not take on mans name for a variety of reasons, such as work name, attitude towards giving up own name etc)

It seems to be assumed by most in this thread that the norm is for the father to give his name to the baby. Personally, I wouldn't make this assumption unless married. (And even then recognise it is mothers choice) If parents aren't married I can see no reason why the baby should automatically have his name - it is totally the mothers choice then. I see these names as uniting families together - ideally a united family will all have the same name - for many people they don't need to be married to feel fully united, but for others they do and of course a woman only takes the mans name when married, so understandably may not like baby to take mans name when she herself is left out of that naming unity.

WombatChocolate · 01/04/2016 09:25

The more I think about this, the more I think the name thing is about showing you are a family unit. having the same name makes you a family unit. What can make mothers uncomfortable if the father and child having the same name, so being a family unit, but her remaining outside of it, by having a different name.

And ultimately, the power over this does still rest with the man. It is within the mans power to marry or not marry and that determines whether the woman can have his name or not - so she can choose not to take his name on marriage if she wants, but cannot choose to take his name without marriage.

Women usually want to be seen to be strongly connected to their children. Having the same name is pretty key within this. On the basis of this, I'm surprised that more unmarried women don't give their children their own surnames rather than those of the father.....or is it that they hope to marry one day,mso don't?

As a general question, how do mums who have children with a different name to them,find it? Would you prefer to have the same name or is it not an issue at all for you?

motherinferior · 01/04/2016 09:29

I was going to say I insisted that my children should have both surnames...and then remembered that it was never an issue, we just both assumed it.

(We did have a short argument about whose surname should go first, mind.)

HooseRice · 01/04/2016 09:32

but cannot choose to take his name without marriage

In Scotland that would be fine.

Proudmummytodc2 · 01/04/2016 09:33

My DD and DS have their dads name it doesn't bother me to be honest with you but kids are starting to notice it now but we are getting married this year so it will be "fixed" but I do think it would be unfair to your DP to give his child your EXH name that just isn't right in my opinion that's a kick in the teeth in my opinion like he would be taking it you wished his child was your EXH but as I said just my opinion.

FiveSixPickUpSticks · 01/04/2016 09:35

My personal view of the rule of thumb is that the mother should decide.

Surely it should be a joint decision. Mother and father are both parents.

MeredithFrampton · 01/04/2016 09:40

The number of dads raising their kids without the mums around is a tiny fraction of the number of mums doing it alone

A lot of those mums are pissed off to find themselves raising children whose name is different to theirs and is that of a bloke who wasn't committed enough to stick around.

There is no way on earth I would have given my kids their father's surname alone, especially not when we weren't married.

I find it baffling thst so many women do it without thinking. Many cone to regret it later. you always hear from them on these threads.

MrsJoJo · 01/04/2016 09:47

I reverted to my maiden name when I got divorced and will not change it for anyone! I had given up so much during my marriage that it was a way of reclaiming my own identity back. My DS has my ex's surname and that's fine with me as he is our son...

I've just got engaged & recently pg - my DF knows I will not change my name on marriage but our baby will have his name. He has two DS and his ex kept her married name so I really don't want to be the next Mrs.W lol!

I know our multitude of family surnames will confuse people but we're a happy rabble and just don't care what everyone else thinks!

WombatChocolate · 01/04/2016 10:01

Yes, I don't understand why people give the fathers name, when the father isn't on the scene by the time of birth, or if the relationship is such that they live apart or have no smese of being together into the long term.
In the vast majority of cases, the mother WILL be around into the long term, so is the certain one, so when the father and mothers future is very much in doubt, giving the child the mothers name seems very sensible to me.

When men insist on their baby having their name (and when women agree who aren't even together and feel uncomfortable about agreeing) this seems the worst of patriarchy - men somehow feeling they have the power or the right to name their child, but without any commitment to the mother and to the future. Isn't this just men going round sowing their seed and demanding to be known for it, without taking any responsibility?

A number of people have said that small babies and small children don't know about their names or who they belong to....that is true, but very quickly they are at school and do know. It is worth trying to take a longer view.

WombatChocolate · 01/04/2016 10:09

In an ideal world, yes it should be a joint decision. In an ideal world, everything would be clear cut.

Men should have a chance to express their view. If they want to have their name given to their child, then that is fine IF the mother also wants it. Ultimately, it has to be her decision. She might choose not to allow it,especially if the man is no longer with her or if the future of the relationship looks in jeopardy, and certainly if the father is looking like he is unlikely to have a proper fatherly relationship with the child. Basically, I think men forego any rights to name the child if they can't or won't take the responsibilities of fatherhood - and that includes responsibilities towards both the child and to their mother. It doesn't necessarily mean they must marry the mother (and many women don't want that anyway) but that they should be willing to behave like a parent towards the child and be supportive towards the mother either as a partner, or as an absent father who still supports the mother in terms of bringing up the child. Sadly, lots of men don't do either of these things and don't show any signs of doing them from the start and I really can't see why they should name their children.

OllyBJolly · 01/04/2016 10:13

I didn't change my name on marriage and when my ex left, I changed my two DCs' name to mine. I did have this strong feeling I wanted us all to have the same name. It was easy as they weren't at school and XH didn't object because he was feeling guilty If I'd had any more children, they would have had the same surname as siblings.

I do think it's ridiculous that it's assumed the father's name trumps all.

SoupDragon · 01/04/2016 10:14

It is within the mans power to marry or not marry and that determines whether the woman can have his name or not - so she can choose not to take his name on marriage if she wants, but cannot choose to take his name without marriage.

A woman, or indeed man, can choose to take whatever name they wish.

My parents have a friend, probably aged about 86, who is Mrs X. She was never actually married to Mr X, a fact that only became apparent on his death.

kiki22 · 01/04/2016 10:33

I changed my name to dp's becausei hate my own name, I don't see my dads or his family so the name has no connection and i wanted the same name as ds. There was never any doubt for me ds would have dp's name because of the reasons above and that dp is a wonderful father and was before dp was even born.

I changed mine by deed poll it cost £30 quid it was easy and its quite fun to be the rebel who changed her name without getting married!!!!

VinceNoirLovesHowardMoon · 01/04/2016 10:47

I don't care at all that ds doesn't have my surname. He has the surname of his dad which makes perfect sense to him. His dad isn't English and I wanted ds to have a tangible connection to that side of his family since he doesn't live there or look much like them.

Blu · 01/04/2016 10:58

Wombat:
A woman (or man) can change their name to whatever they like, with or without marriage.

Marriage is irrelevant in this whole names business.

Both partners could change to a new combined name, double barrelled, merged or completely random name, with or without marriage.

For all the women who have chosen or gone along with the default setting to give a child the father's surname and wish they had the same name and plan to change their name on marriage at some time in the future - change it now, if you want to!

But just as giving a baby a father's name is 'traditional' , so it is that mostly on a split up children remain primarily resident with the mother. So for many reasons, but also that pragmatic one, I would never change my own name or leave my own name out of a child's name.

MissGintyMarlow · 01/04/2016 11:37

My dcs don't have my surname, I could not care less either, I would never have dreamed of changing my name on marrying but didn't care if they took their father's name at all.

The problem with double barrelling is what happens to the next generation - when they marry other people with double barrels, we are going to see some seriously long-winded surnames.

The idea of giving your name as the baby's middle name is the best compromise.

SoupDragon · 01/04/2016 11:39

The problem with double barrelling is what happens to the next generation - when they marry other people with double barrels, we are going to see some seriously long-winded surnames.

They seem to mange just fine in Spain. I believe the child just picks one name to double barrel with the spouse's name.

MeredithFrampton · 01/04/2016 13:10

"The idea of giving your name as the baby's middle name is the best compromise."

Why?

That's not a compromise, that's giving the child her partner's surname and not hers. So 100% what he wants.

Why not give the partner's name as a middle name?

Flip

1 2 3 4