Why do children get the father's surname?

[ElephantsAndMiasmas]

Where two parents have different surnames, it still seems to be the norm that children are given the man's surname - why is this?

I'm not saying that they should get the mother's surname, but it seems odd that dadsurname is the "default", especially given that if the relationship breaks up, they're far more likely to end up with their mum.

Can anyone shed any light on this?

I changed my name to dh's when we married. I don't have anything to prove either way - we both know that he does not own me and so does everyone else whose opinion matters to us - and I was content to go with convention.

Being an family history/genealogy buff, I wonder how the family historians of the future will cope with the results of today's occasionally whim-based approach to the naming of offspring...

Also, what I want to know is how the double-barrelleds will handle the issue when they grow up and have kids of their own?

"Being an family history/genealogy buff, I wonder how the family historians of the future will cope with the results of today's occasionally whim-based approach to the naming of offspring..."

It will give them something interesting to look at and consider in relation to the era and the attitudes of their ancestors at the time. I think everything is so well documented now and with the wide availability of data they will need something to get their teeth into other than just the tracking and mapping.

The interesting results are not always the ones that take you anywhere, though, AliceWorld. I'll grant you that there is much better recording now than there used to be but then again, there are many more people to record now, too.

In dh's family tree, we were searching for one particular family but found a number of possibilities - it was only when we looked at the couple's children that the fact they had followed the tradition of the day in the names they used allowed us to feel confident which one was the right one.

I'm not actually suggesting that anyone be guided by this in how they choose their dc's names, of course.

I would like to use the Spanish way with a tweak.

Mr Green Smith and Mrs Brown Jones get married and keep their own names.

They have a child called James. They then either get to pick whether to pass on their first or second name or father's pass on their father's name and mother's pass on their mother's name. If they did the latter the child would be called James Green Jones.

A bit like this nappyaddict?

Sounds good to me.

I'm not sure why people talk with hilarity about "how the double-barrelleds will handle the issue when they grow up" - double barrelling may be increasingly common but it's not new. There is a double surname going back several generations in my dad's family for instance, and the choice for people with these names is much the same as for people with one name:

• each keep their own name

• one takes the other's name (Mr Black-Cat and Ms Smith-Jones become Mr & Mrs Black-Cat)

• both adopt new name...

The only real difference is that you're not likely to splice 4 names together, so the new name is likely to be:

• one from each of you (e.g. Ms Smith-Jones and Mr Black become Mr & Ms Smith-Black)

-something totally different, because they're fed up with all the names - e.g. become Mr & Ms Tiddlywink.

FWIW I will keep my name and any future DC's surname will be one of my names + DP's surname. E.g. James Duffy-Miasmas.

DP and I don't ever intend to marry except maybe one day for tax reasons. Maybe that doesn't sound very romantic, but then I don't see how romance has anything to do with marriage!

DD has my surname, with DP's surname as a middle name. If she'd been a boy it would have been the other way round. Maybe we've set ourselves up for a lifetime of explaining that yes, she is his daughter, and no he is not Mr Mysurname but oh well. We already have to explain why we're not married (marriage being the default of course, so you'd need a good reason not to be).

My mum kept her name when she married my dad but I've got my dad's name. I kept my name too but I think kids will likely have DH's name with mine as second middle - it's important for my to be in there somewhere. It does feel like somewhat of a cop-out, taking the easy option. I would actually prefer hyphenation, as would DH, however our surnames are an awful combination and I'm not willing to make my kids' lives difficult for the sake of a feminist point. I guess I feel that that it is an immense privilege to give birth and be physically bonded to your baby. Because DH won't get that I want him to have some sort of tangible connection to his child, and the name makes sense.

Oh, and I know what happens when the double-barreleds reproduce! A double barreled woman I know had a baby last year. She is Jane A-B. Husband is John C. Baby is Joey C-B. They just chose one of her names to keep and pass on. Really not a big deal.

DH and I thought about this, me more than him probably. I haven't taken his name which he had no issues with at all. However, we've agreed that children will have his name. the reason is definitely about tradition and who cares more - ie I was brought up to assume my children would not be little BlingLoving's while DH was brought up to assume that his children would be little DHSurnames.

It's tricky because part of me feels from a feminist point of view that it's wrong. But I also feel that you have to pick the battles you really care about and I simply don't care that much about my children having my name. If I had the kind of surname that worked as a middle name we probably would have considered using it as a middle name (not a double barrel) but otherwise, it seems unnecessary.

We did briefly talk about giving the girls my name and boys his, but again, it felt like he was compromising for something I didn't care about that much.

I'm more concerned about the fact that I don't care than I am about the names themselves.

[although when I tell people that if DH hadn't worn a wedding ring I wouldn't have done so either, I'm always amazed at the shock on their faces! ]

My children have my maiden name as a middle name, I really wanted them to have a record of my family on their birth certificate. Also there is a tradition on the Welsh side of my family to give children the mother or grandmothers maiden name. I think it is common to double barrel if you are unmarried. I think it is really frustrating for women who get divorced and feel they have to keep their ex's name because they share it with thier children.

I think the fair thing would be for girls to inherit mothers names and boys to get fathers. But obviously we will keep this tradtion that harks back to women being property of men.

But Bling - they will be your children as well, do you not feel strange that they are "labelled" as exclusively his?

I wasn't brought up to think my DC would be little Miasmas either - but when I came to think about the fact that I didn't want to change my name, and then realised that DCs would "automatically" be named after their father...well it just seems really unfair! Me and DP both have unusual names with a lot of history, and neither of us would be willing to give them up. I want my DCs to have a "name" connection to both families.

Evil, that's the thing - I don't feel the need to give them my name for them to feel mine. And I can assure you, anyone who suggests they are more his than mine because they have his name is in for a fight [lioness emoticon] .

It's something I grapple with a little because I think maybe I should want them to have my name but I don't feel strongly either way.

To be honest, I think deep down giving them either name seems a bit silly and arbitrary but we have to give them a surname so it makes sense to use one of ours.

Your point about your name having history etc is I think an important one. I don't feel that emotional connection to my name. It's just a name. It's my name so I don't want to change it, but I don't feel the need to pass it on.

Having said that, I do have more of a concern with the first names of our children. DH's family has a tradition re naming of the first born son (shock, horror), and I want my family to be represented somehow. Embarassingly however, I don't have a male name on my side that I particularly want to give any of my sons so that isn't working out too well for me! (if we have a girl, she'll be named for my grandmother).

I'm glad this has been bumped, I was looking at it the other day!

I feel kind of similar to Bling. No marriage or kids yet but we've talked about it. I was surprised to find that he was adamant that kids have to have his name. He has a short surname and I have a really long one that I always have to spell (but love). According to him, his family have traced their family tree back pretty far and there are no other living males with the surname, so it's important to him for this reason.

Like Bling, I started thinking about it from a feminist point of view (Why's his family more important?) but decided that really do I care that much about this? I have a brother, so my name won't be lost. And he did consider that boys could have his name and girls mine (he suggested the first one takes his and the next mine!) I think he just wants one boy with his name, if we should ever be so lucky!

Besides I think I would keep my name at work and take his name for everything else, and be happy with that.

Mmm, well I honestly don't get why I would ever want to take DP's surname either. Being called it in passing by people who don't know (e.g. delivery person) is fine of course - who cares really? But being known by his surname in general just seems reeeeeeally weird to me.

Do I get plastic surgery to make myself look more like him as well? Start to dress like him? Imitate his accent?

Evil - you're touching on a pet hate of mine. I don't care of random shop person calls me MrsDHName (although I'd prefer they called me MsDHName but accept that is never going to happen), but when the broader world expects me to change my name and insists on calling me by DH's name it infuriates me.

Every time I get a card from a friend addressed to MrsDHName it winds me up. In fact, I have decided to start gently, but firmly, reminding people who send me such things that that is not my name. [although it's pretty insulting that I have to keep repeating myself in order to be called by my correct name].

So what have we learnt, kids?

Some people:

• expect you to change your name when you get married, and use "Mrs"

• ignore it if you choose not to do either of those things

• get a bit shitty when you remind them of your name because it is not the name they are "expecting"

• expect women to wear wedding rings, but don't expect the same of men

• expect women to be happy to not pass on their names to the kids, but don't expect the same of men

• think that the fact that they have a long ancestry of same-named people means they have a right to continue that with their kids (despite presumably having a long ancestry of women-with-different-names as well, unless these men were magical men who could make babies all by themselves)

Well, put like that...

I thnk I'll move to a commune and start indulging in free sex. It all sounds too depressing.

Excellent, well I think my work here is done.

It's funny, usually MN makes me see more points of view and mellow out a bit (ha!) but the more it gets discussed on here, the more total-bollocksy all this name-changing/child-naming stuff seems. It seems a bit fishy how coincidentally the person who really doesn't mind, happens to hate their original surname or gave up arguing first happens to be the woman. No prob really with who takes who's name or whatever, but the gendered aspect of it is so clear.

whose

At least on here people are thinking about it. I have so many strong, successful, wonderful female friends who didn't give the name thing a second thought before getting married having children. Now that really scares me.

My god, my ability to time is at an all time low this week. Sorry!

TYPE!

Shite.

:o
And sometimes it is patently bollocks.

A friend of mine has a vast but close-knit extended family, loads of aunties and uncles and cousins all proud to be e.g. "Robinsons" and there is a lot of talk of "ooh, the Robinsons always do this" etc. A really clear and well-loved family identity basically. But she is dropping her surname for her fiance's because "it's a common name and his is more unusual"

Ugh.

I have more respect for people who take their DH's name because "it's traditional and I want the world to see I'm his wife".

At least it's a reason. Not an excuse.