Changing your surname

[slaner]

I just wondered what everyone's thoughts are on changing your surname after you get married. I got married 2 years ago now but just can't come to terms with changing my name. This would be fine except we've got 2 children and they have my husbands surname so I feel a bit weird having a different name to the rest of my family. Also when I went on holiday, me and my daughter went up to passport control desk together and the man wanted to see my husband passport to prove we were parents, he said if I travelled with kids on my own I would need birth certificate to prove I'm the mum, is it just easier to change my name?!

Not sure what point you're making Nickel?

I travel frequently with my 2 dd's - 3-4 times a year out of the country. I'm not married to their father and they have his surname but I have never been asked for their birth certificates or to verify that I am their mother.

If I married, which in itself is pretty unlikely, I don't think I would change my name, after 40 years I'm quite happy with it.

I'm glad you found a good solution Moon, that's a good one for those who do want to have the same name as their spouse and children, although the dynasty thing might not work if your DCs feel the same. I still wouldn't want to change my surname though, even if DH did as well. Did you get people assuming your new name was your DH's original surname?

I didn't change my name. I love my husband and I am happy for my children to have his name but I couldn't bring myself to. mainly because I am very proud of my name - my dad means so much to me and also, my husband's dad is very bigoted against me and people brought up with my faith, so I didn't want his name. I just felt I would never be able to accept it as an aspect of my identity. My husband was disappointed, but he understood completely.

I like the Spanish system. Everyone has two surnames: one name from their father and one from their mother; nobody changes their name on marriage. The name which is passed down is the father's father's, and mother's father's, so it's still patriarchal, but at least every child has their mother's name and men and women have a name for life.

slaner - my point was that if you don't want to change your name, then don't. It makes no sense to change your name just because "that's what's done" or because a silly man at passport control thinks it's easier for him

You obviously don't want to change your name, and that's your choice. you shouldn't be bullied into it because "it's easier". It really isn't.
:)

MoonHare - it's a great idea, the amalgamation, isn't it!

you didn't have to change your names strictly before she was born, though, DD was registered with her own surname even though neither of us had that name. (it did make thee registrar ask me if I was certain that my name was Don because DD's name had an extra 3 letters before the don part. )

I love the idea of making up a new family surname. I wonder if dh would have gone for it if I had suggested that pre-marriage and kids.

Maybe in the baby name topic we should have a 'fantasy surname' thread. I think mine would have been Richmond. I would love to be Mz Richmond - no idea why. Sounds posh and the name of someone who always has a plan.

Narrowboat yes fantasy surnames is a great topic...I like names ending in Y like Mulvaney, Fairley and Delaney, they have a nice ring to them. Also Fairfax as it sounds very romantic and dashing.

I've always liked Callaghan. However, Marshmallowpies - you have turned me onto Delaney. Yes, I like it.

Haven't read past page 3 but here goes. I changed my name on marriage. I liked DH's name and I felt it would be nice to have the same name as we wanted to start a family, and we would be "the Joneses" (just an example). I understand those who don't want to, each to their own, but it was right for me. It'll be good when it's just as common for men to change as women, as I think it is nice for a family to have the same name. Having said that, someone I work with has changed his name to his wife's, and he gets a bit of stick for it which is a shame.

I also wonder about those who go double barrel, as it seems to be more and more common. What are all their kids going to do when they grow up if the trend continues, go quadruple barrelled? Serious question!

Round here each keeping own name and giving child the fsther's surname is much more common. I only know two families with double-barrelled children, in one case the father was born double barrelled and the wife and children took his name, in the other the parents have kept thrir own names but double-barrelled the children. I do know two families where the wife has double barrelled her name with her husbands but neither the husband or children have double barrelled names, they all have father's surnames.

I like the idea of blended names, if we had it would have been 'Hamland'. Love it, a land of ham...

Oh My PhylissDoris if changeing your name upon marriage for a women is a sign of 'growing up', I think you should really apply that rule to the man, he should give up his name in favour of his new partner, so he can at last grow up!
Who actually wants to be known as someones' Mrs in the 21st Century?

Men whether married or not are referred to as MR..but somehow women are expected to adopt a new title and name upon marriage that smacks of their ownership to another male....Mrs from Miss....
I refuse any title and woud never change my family name for someone elses no matter how awkward it might be....

Slaner keep your own name you have done so for the best of reasons....your choice, a matter of principle .....no effort to place your birth cert in your passport if it saves hassle.

I think name changing for women is another vestige of old patriarchal values that has to be done away with completely.

I haven't changed my name and wouldn't do it either.

I think it's sooooo wrong for women to fall for that without thinking what they're doing.

I prefer it when couples decide to use both surnames for both of them, eg Looker-Smith and name the children that as well. Therefore the whole family is called the same, without the implication that women only "have to change".

Also, I would do away with the title "Mrs" altogether. It would be "Ms" or Mr" only. I don't need to know or to go about life making my civil status public or known.

Interestingly enough on this thread, only mmbovary has a nickname with a title in it, but that it is taken from a book as is anneelliott and doctrineofsnatch or is a pun, like eleanorhandbaskets usual non Halloween name change. Very few of us have a gender specific name either unlike zara or dudesmummy or girlwith up thread.

I wonder if this lack of gender definition, is representative only of the FWR topic, or would be similar across MN in general.

Yes, I think we should def leave the title Mrs or Madame as nicknames only :) for women who want to sound important because they "caught" a man. It would be make women of the 24th century laugh.

For the rest of us, Ms is more than enough :)

Mine's a song lyric...actually

Is Madame equivalent to Mrs, or is the mademoiselle/Madame change broadly girl/woman like master/mr is supposed to be boy/man?

I think some posters are mummy (and some daddy!) as that role was
In their minds when they joined.some of the Mrs titles are to do with admiring physique talent eg MrsCumberbatch - I wonder if many men use something like MrJolie as their forum name?

I didnt change my name on marriage, and I have a non-gender specific title. If I didnt I would use Ms. Mrs to me sounds a bit strange. I quite like that people cant tell my gender from my surname. I wouldnt want them to be able to know what my marital status was either.

I used to have a Mrs MN username, it was meant to be a bit of a joke / disguise given that I am well known in RL for never using Mrs, however after coming on a few threads and arguing against the use of Mrs I decided the irony was probably wasted so I changed to a song title.

I think the whole idea of going about life using titles quite old fashioned and conservative, in many ways.

I don?t even agree with people using the title Dr when they?ve done a PhD, worse still, using Lord or Sir. What are they trying to convey behind the title? That they?re more respectable, educated, or belong to a superior class of people?

Is ?a Mrs? more respectable than a Ms or Miss? I think all these promotes a very shallow, and in many cases, erroneous idea about who these people really are. You can be Lord, and still be a drunkard who beats his children up when he goes home.

You can be a single mum, and not therefore not be worthy of any titles, and treat your children with love and respect, and instil in them a sense of decency and humanity.

My issue with title using is that the title holder wants people to judge them because of that. They want to create the ?good first impression?. I?m usually weary of people who are to hung up on titles, and reserve my judgements for after I hear them talking or seen their behaviours or attitudes.

mmbovary It is interesting how a title is actually to establish a hierarchy or 'pecking order' in academic / medical circles isn't it?

In academic circles they are just mr or ms until they get their phd then they are dr. But in medical circles once they are a surgeon, they lose dr and get the more prestigious mr or ms.

But at least it is a demonstration of achievement on their part i.e. they have completed x amount of years of research / study and are fully qualified. So the increased status is a reflection of something of value.

Those that become Sir / Dame etc after years of charitable work / long career in entertainment / captain of industry etc probably see it is a 'just' reward for all the time / effort they put in over a period of years. Of course, they do not have to accept the accolade in the New Year's Honours List etc. Those that do, hope to appear modest by saying that they have accepted it on behalf of their family, as if it was their partner's desire to meet the Queen and not theirs...

greenhill, I do see your point, but you can still do a lot of charitable work, and achieve many things in life without having to introduce yourself to the world, as "the person who achieved this or that/or the person who did this or that".

If you are capable and accomplished within a field or social arena, people who care about what you've done or achieved, will know it anyway. Why do you have to advertise it in a title?

Also, in the case of Lord/Dame/Sir, a lot the time we are talking about people who come from a very priviledge background. It's easier in life (easier NOT easy) to achieve degrees/positions and do charitable work when you come from that background. So it's not so much that they got the title on solely personal merit/ability/intelligence/charity, but the fact that they came into a world full of opportunity, and yes, they made the most of it. And the title is just reinforcing that.

I think this society has too many hung ups about social class and status, and the title issue is just a reflection of that. Again, it's a vestige of patriarchal values and a very male orientated way of thinking and dealing with the world.