Child's Surname

Jo_R_2

samandona wrote: »

Whoever made the point about problems with hospitals/customs/doctors etc if the baby has my name but bf takes him/her to hospital for example - thank you! I just told the BF and I'm now mildly concerned he is going to propose! :O:O

I didn't realise men had no legal parental rights if they wern't married to the mother. Crazy.

I'm not married and haven't ever been, and my ex has parental responsibility for my DDs and my OH has parental responsibility for our baby as they both came with me to the register office when we registered each respective birth.

Person_one

Caroline73 wrote: »

I actually find it really sad that someone would feel that changing their name is sacrificing their identity. It wouldn't change who you are.

Of course a name is not my whole identity, but its a part of it, and I feel its an important part. Its what I've answered to my whole life, I look up when I hear it spoken aloud, its what I've been signing on paperwork for years in the same way, its what I shakily learned to spell and write as a child, its what was responsible for a lot of teasing at school (there's a slang word for sexual relations in there, yay!) and therefore helped me a little to become the resilient assertive person I feel I am today, as well as developing my sense of humour and laid back-ness (probably not a word, sorry!).

If my face changed it wouldn't 'change who I am' fundamentally, but it would have an effect, a name is the same to a lesser extent.

I know I keep going back to the sexism thing, but if a name is really so unimportant, why do so many men balk at the suggestion that they could also change theirs or get upset or offended when their partners want to keep the name they've had all their life? There is a glaring inequality here!

Person_one

Jo_R wrote: »

I'm not married and haven't ever been, and my ex has parental responsibility for my DDs and my OH has parental responsibility for our baby as they both came with me to the register office when we registered each respective birth.

This is true, its been the case since a new law in, I think, 2003 or 4.

My brother and his partner aren't married but because they both went to register the birth they both have parental responsibility.

*Louise*

samandona wrote: »

I didn't realise men had no legal parental rights if they wern't married to the mother. Crazy.

After 2003 fathers now have automatic parental responsibility, so they do have a number of legal rights that they never used to have.

samandona

Thanks for the correction.

Foggster

brighthair wrote: »

I won't change my surname if I marry. I am the last one by my surname in my family, and I'd like to keep hold of it

I double barrelled my name when I married and my husband changed his surname to the new surname.

When I had my daughter she took both my name and her fathers.

mogadon

I think the baby should have the mother's name, if the father is named on the birth certificate, and the parents marry later birth can be re-registered with their new name, and a new birth certificate is issued. It's one of the very few situations where you can actually reregister a birth, rather than just legally changing the name. If parents marry later the birth should be reregistered anyway, even if there is no name change, because the child has a new 'status'.

The facility is there for situations exactly like this, so why not use it?

Courgette

What an interesting read! Have been wondering the same thing really. I got married last October and am STILL deciding what to call myself :eek::rotfl:. I feel pretty strongly about your name being a big part of your identity too and wasn't sure I wanted to change mine. I've now decided I'm gonna double-barrel as will the baby due in August. I have a DS from a previous relationship and he has a double-barrel name but we're all pretty laid back about which bit who gets called and when.

Incidentally, I did suggest to my husband that he could change his name to mine and he just looked at me like I'd suggested he should start eating babies or something :eek::eek::rotfl::rotfl:. I really don't get it cos he's so laid back about everything else!

ljbnotts

samandona wrote: »

Whoever made the point about problems with hospitals/customs/doctors etc if the baby has my name but bf takes him/her to hospital for example - thank you! I just told the BF and I'm now mildly concerned he is going to propose! :O:O

I didn't realise men had no legal parental rights if they wern't married to the mother. Crazy.

If the father goes to register the birth with the mother so that he is named as the father on the birth certificate then he has equal and joint parental rights and responsabilities for any child born after 1/1/2003.

If asked for advice we advise the child to be in the mothers name as if in the future they marry the surname can be changed to the fathers upon re registration.

frivolous_fay

anotherginger wrote: »

I like what you're saying.

When will women stop changing their names to signify that they are now the property of their husband!!??

I think the tradition of being the 'property' of your father, to be passed on to be the 'property' of your husband is pretty outdated!

Give me a 4 letter surname that's easier to spell than the 7 letter one [EMAIL="I@ve"]I've[/EMAIL] been correcting on paperwork for 30 years.

Good luck finding a modern bride who's changing her name because she wants to signify that she's now hubby's property!