Modern times; How do you decide your children's last names?

[Akytalusia]

i have strong feelings about this subject. forgive me as i rant. >.>

your first name is your name, your last name is more like a designation of your clan. personaly, i think it should be left open until the human reaches some designated age when they are recognized as possessing adequate enough psychological faculties to reasonably opt for themselves to join either their parents clan if the parents belong to the same clan, or which parent to join if they belong to seperate clans, or create thier own should they for any reason choose to do so.
the 'bloodline' or 'lineage' or 'family' concept that's been used to determine these things thus far is so twisted and chauvinistic and through it's extensive reign has so completely screwed up any prospect of accurate or coherent records and conversely affected people's perspectives about thier relationships with one another and consequently thier actions and interactions relative to each involved and thus shaping history into this irredeemably convoluted abomination and good LORD it irritates me like you wouldn't believe... i can't even think about it without dying a little inside. >.> man that was a long sentence...

er.. sorry about that. rant over.

 

[frobalt]

It would have to be the double-barrel name.


If I get married I'm keeping my mother's second name and, seeing as I'll have carried them and pushed them out, my children will have my name.

Of course, they'll have two parents but it'd be cold day in hell before I have children that don't get my name.

That is certainly a good way to piss off the father of these potential children, as you're essentially saying he wouldn't have a say in it at all. Or is it just me that would be put-off by such an unwillingness to compromise?

After all, what are you going to do if you have a husband just as stubborn who wants the children to take his name? Simply throw in his face your biological ability to carry and give birth to children?

Sounds like a divorce waiting to happen to me.


In my case, my current girlfriend has stated that if she were to get married she'd take her husband's name, as she's not so fond of her last name, so that wouldn't be an issue to me.

 

[Quesa]

My paternal grandfather and great grandfather both died before 30, my family tree is very flat on the side my name's on. I was happy my wife was comfortable with taking my name, it wasn't a deal breaker though.

 

[Akytalusia]

-snip-

Lighten up mate. Your over thinking this.

yeah, i'm fine now. it's pointless to think about since nothing can be done about it, and i usually don't. but i saw the question and it just came bubbling up. i needed to vent.

 

[Appleshampoo]

If the father is planning to stick around then the child should have the Fathers name. That's the way it should be because dammit, fuck all this political correctness bullshit.

If the dad decides to run off and not take responsibility then it's up to the mother.

My son got my last name, even though his mother wanted him to have hers. I made my case of 'Children should have their dads name, I'll take all your shoes from you if you say otherwise' and won.

 

[flames09]

My child shall carry on my family name, I do not want it dying out with me.

 

[trollnystan]

I have one of the most common names in Sweden - although combined with my first name I'm pretty darn unique anyway - so unless the father had a god-awful name like Pitts (no offence Russ Pitts, but you do NOT want that surname in Sweden) or something I'd have no problem with his name. No hyphenation though; my last name is 9 letters long, it doesn't need to be longer.

 

[FamoFunk]

My Child has her Fathers surname, because it's the 'done thing' and I think double barrel surnames are ridiculous.

Does it bother me She doesn't have my surname? Nope. I'm still her Mother.

 

[Bertylicious]

i have strong feelings about this subject. forgive me as i rant. >.>

your first name is your name, your last name is more like a designation of your clan. personaly, i think it should be left open until the human reaches some designated age when they are recognized as possessing adequate enough psychological faculties to reasonably opt for themselves to join either their parents clan if the parents belong to the same clan, or which parent to join if they belong to seperate clans, or create thier own should they for any reason choose to do so.
the 'bloodline' or 'lineage' or 'family' concept that's been used to determine these things thus far is so twisted and chauvinistic and through it's extensive reign has so completely screwed up any prospect of accurate or coherent records and conversely affected people's perspectives about thier relationships with one another and consequently thier actions and interactions relative to each involved and thus shaping history into this irredeemably convoluted abomination and good LORD it irritates me like you wouldn't believe... i can't even think about it without dying a little inside. >.> man that was a long sentence...

er.. sorry about that. rant over.

Surely though your family name, and by extension your family, forms part of your own family history. Without a family name wouldn't a person be dislocated from a familial (if indeed that is a word) identity?

Also, what you've reffered to as the 'bloodline' or 'lineage' or 'family' concept merely a structure by which different familial idenitys can be set amongst one another and regarded? By this I mean a naturally occuring structure logically grown to help one differentiate one's self from one's fellows.

 

[Sexy Devil]

This is one of those things that I really can't even begin to care about. It's just a dumb name and considering I have never even spoken to the majority of my non-immediate family, I really can't care about that heritage.

That said, I'm going to go for the compounding names thing just because I think it'll be funny when the second generation does it.

 

[chadachada123]

For one: I think it should be the choice of the couple. They can name their kid (basically) whatever they feel like. That said, I'd personally prefer my child to have my last name, because I'd like to continue my family's lineage, but if it's an nonnegotiable issue for my wife, then I'll have to compromise, and I accept this as long as my sister has her children adapt her name. SOMEONE in my family is going to have their name passed on, by it my sister or myself.

However, one explanation for men taking the last name is the issue of paternity. When a child is born, it is obvious who the mother is. There's no "need" to adopt her name, given that it's indisputable that she's the mother. However, men have no such connection. Taking the last name is the closest a man can get to "showing" that he's the father. It's almost like a reassurance that, yes, this child is in fact his.

Is it justified? I would say to a degree, but I also think that paternity tests should be mandatory anyway, making the issue of little importance.

 

[Da Orky Man]

Double-barreled surname. I've got one, but usually only ever use my Dad's.

 

[bobmus]

My children would have my name. It's common tradition, and in no way an embarrassing name, so they're having it.
(I do often wish my surname had two syllables though, names sounds much better with to syllable surnames)

 

[Jonluw]

The way my parents did it was give me my mother's last name as a middle name, and my father's last name as my last name.
That's a very common practice where I'm from, so it's not really seen as having a middle name and a last name, but rather as having two last names.

I often wonder whether I should write my mother's name in its entirety when signing forms and such. I mostly just shorten it to an L though. Because it makes me feel more awesome.

I try not to give one last name priority over the other though.
In my confirmation, I forgot to write my mother's last name on the form, so in the ceremony I was referred to by only my father's name. Slightly embarassing, considering that my relatives were present.

The real issue, however, comes when it's time for me to have children.
i.e. I'm one step ahead of OP.
What should I call my children?
Surely, I can't give them both my last names and my wife's.
At least one name must perish, but which?

 

[Fujimora_Pantsu]

Adopted children usually come pre-packaged with full names, so I don't suppose it would be a problem for me. Otherwise, I would probably go with my partners name, as mine is rather common.

 

[SwimmingRock]

For me, it's an easy fix: I don't like my surname. If I ever get married (and I ain't having no damn kids without marriage, if at all), I'll probably take the other persons name anyway. You know, unless that one's really stupid or generic. Sure, my name's lame, but I'm not becoming a Smith or whatever the Dutch equivalent is. And if we both have shit surnames? Pick a new one and pass that on. Booya.

Or don't. Honestly, if my kid eventually decides to have their name legally changed, all the same shit to me. I've never found names to be interesting. I generally tell people when I meet them that "Hey, you" is a perfectly valid way to address me, because I have no interest in names. Not surprisingly, I forget other peoples names all the time. I remember them by characteristics or relation to myself and others.

 

[Colour Scientist]

That is certainly a good way to piss off the father of these potential children, as you're essentially saying he wouldn't have a say in it at all. Or is it just me that would be put-off by such an unwillingness to compromise?

After all, what are you going to do if you have a husband just as stubborn who wants the children to take his name? Simply throw in his face your biological ability to carry and give birth to children?

Sounds like a divorce waiting to happen to me.

How does the child having both names mean that he has no say? It IS a compromise. I'm not saying the child should just have my name, but both, I don't see how you can compromise any more than that?

I see no good reason why the children would only take his name. The only reason I can see is tradition and I don't pay too much attention to archaic traditions.

There would be no fear of divorce. If someone I was with didn't understand how important it is to me than we wouldn't be married in the first place.

 

[minka1995]

For me If I were to ever get married I would keep my maiden name, It would be nice if any children I have took my name.
After some tracing of family history I found that my family name finishes with me and my sister, It would be a shame for our name to die out.