Name Changing when married

sanj2408

Hi all,

Ive had a look at the other threads on here but couldnt really see anything to do with name changes.
What is done these days? Is it still the norm for a married woman to take her husbands surname or do people do hyphens?
Reason I ask is because Im getting married this year and really want to keep my own name but DF thinks i should change it because thats whats "normally done"
Any thoughts welcome please and thanks....

Penny Dreadful

sanj2408 wrote: »

Hi all,

Ive had a look at the other threads on here but couldnt really see anything to do with name changes.
What is done these days? Is it still the norm for a married woman to take her husbands surname or do people do hyphens?
Reason I ask is because Im getting married this year and really want to keep my own name but DF thinks i should change it because thats whats "normally done"
Any thoughts welcome please and thanks....

Do what you want to do. Some people just can't wait to change to their husband's name, some think they're not married enough if they don't. Some people double barrell and others keep their own name.
Who cares whats "normally done", do what you would like to do.

kayos

Some will say go double barrel, some will retort but what happens when the kids get married.

Some will say take your husbands name, some will retort that its a old tradition and should not be followed any more. Even bordering on sexist (there is a better word but I forget it).

Then there is the just keep yours. Other will retort that this makes it very confusing for the kids.

Multiple choices, multiple arguements against each. You guys will just have to come to an agreement on what you two want.

I'm still not sure if my OH will be taking my name or not. To be honest for me its something I would like. Can I explain it fully? Nope. But at the end of the day the most important thing is your getting married.

kayos

Penny Dreadful wrote: »

Do what you want to do.

What a great start to any marrage a unilaterial decission.

NTC

My wife never changed her name, that was 7.5 years ago. No issue with me, why should it.

But I know she uses my names when she at meetings (e.g. weight watchers) and does not want people knowing her real name ????? I never really understood that TBH.

Long story short, do what ever you want. When you and you husband are invited to events you will be called "the whatevers" anyway

brokensoul

I am getting married in August and i have decided to take my husbands name as i like the idea of us ( and our children hopefully) all having the same name.

I think it is an entirely personal choice, my OH did not expect me to change my name. I have encountered a few women who had a problem with the idea of me taking my OHs name, and i dont understand why, to be honest.

All women are named for some man, the only choice is whether you are named for your father or your husband. It is a patriarcal system either way.

Beruthiel

sanj2408 wrote: »

Reason I ask is because Im getting married this year and really want to keep my own name but DF thinks i should change it because thats whats "normally done"

Who cares what's 'normally done'
I won't be changing mine.

iguana

Another option is to use either name depending on the circumstance. I use my own name for anything relating to work or personal issues I'm involved in. I use my married name at the doctors and the vets, anything which is a 'family' issue. My passport has both names as the surname, not hyphenated.

suzieled

I know a few that are not changing their names straight away, due to their profession and they dont want to go around changing email addresses/signs etc. But they said once they start to have children they will change their name.

I will probably do something very similar even though when I told my OH I wasnt changing it al all (which I was joking), he wasnt impressed at all. It still means awful lot to some people but are you one of those?
:)

artyeva

i won't be changing mine. i like my surname, and i'm the last in a long line of many generations to have it - so someone wuld have to kill me beofre i'd give it up :mad: ''...from my cold dead hands...'', etc etc

i've never understood that idea of taking your husband's name anyway - way too archaic for me. i was my own person with my own identity before i met him and my name is part of that identity. if we don't call our kids my surname then the surname dies with me - and that makes me really really upset when i think about it, so i try not to. we've come to a compromise that our kids will be double-barrelled with his name-my name...

How Strange

I've decided to change mine much to everyone's suprise including my OH. I just like the idea of us being a family with a shared name. I probably won't change it in work as it's too much hassle with business cards etc but I'll gradually change it on passport, drivers licence etc.

I've no problem with changing my name and I don't believe in the 'it's old fashioned and a sign of ownership' thing. So is marriage if you want to think of it like that.

My OH didn't care whether I changed it or not so it was definitely my decision.

BC

iguana wrote: »

Another option is to use either name depending on the circumstance. I use my own name for anything relating to work or personal issues I'm involved in. I use my married name at the doctors and the vets, anything which is a 'family' issue. My passport has both names as the surname, not hyphenated.

This is what i'll be doing. I won't change my name for work and my friends will always know me by my maiden name. But for things like booking holidays together i'll use my married name.

I don't plan to change any of my documentation in the immediate term but as things like passports and driving licences come up for renewal then I probably will change them.

Penny Dreadful

kayos wrote: »

What a great start to any marrage a unilaterial decission.

I didn't mean the individual "you" I meant the collective "you" as in you two decide what you would like to do. Get me now?

kayos

artyeva wrote: »

i won't be changing mine. i like my surname, and i'm the last in a long line of many generations to have it - so someone wuld have to kill me beofre i'd give it up :mad: ''...from my cold dead hands...'', etc etc

i've never understood that idea of taking your husband's name anyway - way too archaic for me. i was my own person with my own identity before i met him and my name is part of that identity. if we don't call our kids my surname then the surname dies with me - and that makes me really really upset when i think about it, so i try not to. we've come to a compromise that our kids will be double-barrelled with his name-my name...

The above minus what I struck out is basicly my OH's view.

Thing is if we go the double barrel its like this.

You might only have female children. If they marry they may not keep the mothers part of the double barrel if getting married. They also might take their husbands name when marrying.

So even with your good intentions of keeping the family name alive it might not happen. And any way to me it would still be dead as soon as you double barrel it any way. Cause its no longer the "bloggs" familly name its the "bloggs-smith" familly name.

But every one has their reasons for wanting or not wanting an option. I just fail to see the keeping the family name alive arguement. Its not even why I would like my OH to take my name. Its more of two becoming one and the fact I hate double barrels.

kayos

Penny Dreadful wrote: »

I didn't mean the individual "you" I meant the collective "you" as in you two decide what you would like to do. Get me now?

Sure as hell did not read that way .

sanj2408

Thanks for all your comments.
We already have a son and he has fiances name already thats my main doubt, Id like to have the same surname as him.
I dont have any brothers and Im the eldest and I like my name which is mainly why Im a bit adamant about changing it but at the same time I would like to take his name but I don't think we'll be any more married by doing so.

I think I might do the two names thing - my own name for work etc and married name for schools, doctors and other family things.

Thanks again everyone!

Heineken Helen

I won't be changing mine... it's who I am and getting married doesn't make me somebody else. I'm not joining his family, we're becoming our own family... but neither of these means anybody has to change their name. He's quite upset about me not taking his name... but I asked him how he'd feel if he had to change his and he may have understood that a little. Anyway, MAYBE if it becomes a big issue down the line... but I really don't see how it would. I know some couples who have different names and it works for them. We'll let it work too... it's only an issue if you make it one.

katts

I spent quite some time debating this one. I feel my surname is a large part of who I am, so really didn't want to lose it. On the other hand, I didn't want us to have totally separate names, especially if there would be kids in the future. I don't like the idea of using different names in different places; I want one name, whichever that is. I also much prefer my name to his, for various reasons - it sounds better, is shorter, Irish, and easy to spell.

I was quite decided to go double barreled for a while - it sounds a bit ugly but I figured that was just because I wasn't used to it, and it seemed the best of both worlds. What changed my mind was that I kept noticing families being referred to by a group name - "We're going to go visit the Smiths today" or "The Murphys called by" etc - and I really liked that - I felt that didn't work if one of us was double barreled, and so one name seemed best. Now naturally I'd prefer if that was my name, but I can understand that due to society, that would be odd, and commented on, etc. Shouldn't be that way, but there you go, and I'm not going to make him go through the effort of breaking the mould and being peculiar, so I'll let him off. So there you go - I'm taking his name.

I'll probably try to keep mine as an extra middle name, just to kid myself that I'm not totally losing it :rolleyes:

Alliandre

I don't really mind changing my name. It's a very common and boring surname anyway. The only thing that would bother me is trying to change it on everything, but that would all get sorted after a while. I just really like the idea of us both having the same surname.

Chinafoot

kayos wrote: »

I just fail to see the keeping the family name alive arguement. Its not even why I would like my OH to take my name. Its more of two becoming one and the fact I hate double barrels.

So why don't you take your partner's name?

As for your unilateral decision comment...its her name, and it ultimately is her decision. If there is no room for compromise she absolutely should do what she wants to do.

kayos

Chinafoot wrote: »

So why don't you take your partner's name?

Ya know the way a lot of Spike Lee's superheros all have names with the same letter that sound like a cartoon? Well tbh thats the crix of me not taking her name.

Chinafoot wrote: »

As for your unilateral decision comment...its her name, and it ultimately is her decision. If there is no room for compromise she absolutely should do what she wants to do.

Hmm if thats the way you see thats the way you see it. But most people will agree that a marriage/relationships can only work when both partners agree, if they can not agree they dicuss and come to some happy middle ground. One partner making a choice that effects both people without taking the other into consideration or even talking to them? Thats just a poor way to be in a relationship never mind a marriage. You think its ok for a wife to not let the husband know she has stopped the pill and is trying to get preggers?

I'm not saying the OP should take her partners name, I'm not saying she shouldnt either. But this is one of those things that comes up at the start of their married life together and the dicussion about this issue should happen between them. THe OP just refusing point blank to take her partners opinions into account is just a bad way to start a marriage.

See what I did there? A marriage is about sharing everything and always being mindful and respectful of each others feelings. Hense I highlighted all the plural's not the singulars like you did.

sanj2408

kayos wrote: »

THe OP just refusing point blank to take her partners opinions into account is just a bad way to start a marriage.

I didnt say I was not going to take his opinions into account. I will decide what I want and discuss it with him to talk out the views and concerns of both.
I don't think a comparison to deciding to have a baby is really appropriate as his name will stay the same regardless without much impact on his own life.
Having a baby is a huge step to take and a decision which should be made as a couple.
Its me who would be changing my name so ultimately, yes, it is my decision. If my fiance loves and respects me (as he does) he will understand that.

Chinafoot

kayos wrote: »

Hmm if thats the way you see thats the way you see it. But most people will agree that a marriage/relationships can only work when both partners agree, if they can not agree they dicuss and come to some happy middle ground.

Fail to see the part of my post that said "if there is no room for compromise"? For example, neither want a double barrell name or she ultimately wants to keep her name and not take his.

kayos wrote: »

One partner making a choice that effects both people without taking the other into consideration or even talking to them? Thats just a poor way to be in a relationship never mind a marriage.

Explain to me how, in this day and age, her not taking his name affects him? She, nor I, never said there would be no discussion so please don't put words in my mouth, thanks.

kayos wrote: »

You think its ok for a wife to not let the husband know she has stopped the pill and is trying to get preggers?

That is one of the most ridiculous analogies I've ever heard on this subject. You're actually equating a woman deciding to keep her own name with a woman deceiving her husband and trying to get pregnant?! Yes, you're right, thats *exactly* the same thing. :rolleyes:

kayos wrote: »

I'm not saying the OP should take her partners name, I'm not saying she shouldnt either. But this is one of those things that comes up at the start of their married life together and the dicussion about this issue should happen between them. THe OP just refusing point blank to take her partners opinions into account is just a bad way to start a marriage.

How has she refused point blank?? She has come here and asked a question because her husband wants her to change it as it's "the done thing."

Where did she say there would be no discussion? She didn't. Where did I say there was no discussion? Oh thats right...I didn't. Just to point it out to you again since you clearly missed the point quite spectacularly there...*IF* a compromise *can not* be reached, the decision ultimately falls to her as it is her name. No amount of discussing will change that if neither can agree. You might not like it, but since she is the one who is expected to change her name, she is the one who should decide.

kayos wrote: »

See what I did there? A marriage is about sharing everything and always being mindful and respectful of each others feelings. Hense I highlighted all the plural's not the singulars like you did.

Nah what you did there was jump to conclusions based on very little, put words in both the OPs and my mouth and pretty much didn't read the posts properly. Well done you.

kayos

Chna read my first post..... I gave the common options, some very common arguements against them and I said its up to the couple to decide what they want.

My unilaterial comment was in response to Penny Dreadful. Because there is no room on a healthy relationships for unilaterial decissions no matter what the subject is. My "stopping taking the pill", while out there, is the same thing its a unilaterial choice made by one partner. Heres another the man decides that he is taking a job in Abu Dabi and comes home and tells the wife "honey pack your bags I've sold the house, bought one over there and enroled the kids in a school too. We fly out in the morning" I use out there analogies simply because it shows that while the subject is totally unrelated the process behind it is the same. One partner making a choice with out consulting the other. And before people say I'm saying this is what the op said or that china this is what your suggesting its not. Its what I took from Penny's post. Ok are we clear on that? And penny did then come back and say she ment the royal "you" although the underlining really does not suggest this to me.

I never ment my post to say the OP refused point blank again it was about the unilaterial choice as I took Penny to be suggesting. What I wrote was not clear and when read again does come across with a totally different meaning than intented.

So we all clear OP I never ment to suggest you were not talking to your partner. Read my first post I thought that was reasonable.

All along I've been saying a relationship has been about the pair, about the union and the agreement of both partners. That they have a united front. I really though that was a good thing. But no I get attacked for it.

sanj2408

Ive read and re-read your posts and still can't see how you were putting forward an even slightly rational comparison on the subject. Your comparisons are inappropriate for the subject being discussed.
Maybe you should put your point across more clearly in future.

kayos

sanj2408 wrote: »

Ive read and re-read your posts and still can't see how you were putting forward an even slightly rational comparison on the subject. Your comparisons are inappropriate for the subject being discussed.
Maybe you should put your point across more clearly in future.

I am not trying to compare stopping the pill and changing names. I'm showing that unilaterial decissions no matter what the topic have no place in any relationship. I even said that in my last post. The subject was not the pill or name changing it was making choices without talking to a partner. Which as I said in my last post is not something you said. It was in response to penny's post, which china then said was right. But at least she said if there was no room for compramise.

If you read my last post I expressly point this out. And gave another example equally as unrelated to the name change business but with the same unilaterial process being used.

Look OP as I said in my first post talk to your partner and come to an agreement that you both agree on. Hope you both have a happy wedding and life together.

Chinafoot

kayos wrote: »

My unilaterial comment was in response to Penny Dreadful. Because there is no room on a healthy relationships for unilaterial decissions no matter what the subject is.

Penny Dreadful had already clarified what she meant before your "point blank" comment.

kayos wrote: »

My "stopping taking the pill", while out there, is the same thing its a unilaterial choice made by one partner. Heres another the man decides that he is taking a job in Abu Dabi and comes home and tells the wife "honey pack your bags I've sold the house, bought one over there and enroled the kids in a school too. We fly out in the morning" I use out there analogies simply because it shows that while the subject is totally unrelated the process behind it is the same.

The effects of the decision are nowhere near the same so you're not in anyway comparing like with like. Her deciding to keep her name will in no way change their relationship unless he is some sort of chauvinistic moron who feels like he'll be less of a man. His only argument for her changing has been "its the done thing." Thats very weak.

kayos wrote: »

One partner making a choice with out consulting the other. And before people say I'm saying this is what the op said or that china this is what your suggesting its not. Its what I took from Penny's post. Ok are we clear on that? And penny did then come back and say she ment the royal "you" although the underlining really does not suggest this to me.

Why are you nitpicking at Penny? She clarified what she meant and yet you're still banging on about one partner not consulting the other when you have no evidence that this is the case here. This is in no way relevant to the OP. Nowhere did she indicate that there would be no discussion.

kayos wrote: »

I never ment my post to say the OP refused point blank again it was about the unilaterial choice as I took Penny to be suggesting.

Again, Penny clarified her post before your "point blank" comment.

kayos wrote: »

What I wrote was not clear and when read again does come across with a totally different meaning than intented.

Should probably read the thread properly before posting then, eh?

kayos wrote: »

So we all clear OP I never ment to suggest you were not talking to your partner. Read my first post I thought that was reasonable.

All along I've been saying a relationship has been about the pair, about the union and the agreement of both partners. That they have a united front. I really though that was a good thing.

Nobody is saying otherwise. You are the one who has picked one comment, that has since been clarified, from someone who is not the person looking for advice and you ran with it.

kayos wrote: »

But no I get attacked for it.

:rolleyes:

OP, you're right, if your partner respect you he'll understand that changing your name as it's "the done thing" is not reason enough for you to want to make that change. Its your name, and deciding to keep it does not mean you're not "together" or "united" in the relationship. Best of luck

iguana

kayos wrote: »

My unilaterial comment was in response to Penny Dreadful. Because there is no room on a healthy relationships for unilaterial decissions no matter what the subject is. My "stopping taking the pill", while out there, is the same thing its a unilaterial choice made by one partner. Heres another the man decides that he is taking a job in Abu Dabi and comes home and tells the wife "honey pack your bags I've sold the house, bought one over there and enroled the kids in a school too. We fly out in the morning" I use out there analogies simply because it shows that while the subject is totally unrelated the process behind it is the same. One partner making a choice with out consulting the other.

It's perfectly fine to make a choice without consulting your partner if it doesn't affect your partner or if it affects your partner in a small way. A few years ago I had to fire one of my staff at work, it was a huge decision, it meant that for a little while I would need to make some adjustments to my work hours and I was emotionally upset at the decision I made. But it had nothing whatsoever to do with my husband and he wasn't consulted on it.

And that's a much more apt comparison. Whether a woman changes her name or not has nothing at all to do with her husband. He might like it if she did but at the end of the day it has no impact whatsoever on his life so he doesn't have any right to be involved in the decision. The names of their children is a different matter and both parents have to come to a compromise on that.

Zulu

If you were following tradition, you'd take his surname. IF you were following tradition.

My OH will take my name. I won't entertain the current double barrelled madness fad. It wasn't a big issue for her, but she wants to have the same name of our children.

TBH I don't think I'd agree to a church wedding otherwise. I don't see the point in "cherry picking" traditions.

kayos

China I've said my point blank comment did not read as intended and in the same post that you give out to me for reading someones post that did not come out as intended and attack me for not letting go you are doing the exact same thing.

Oh and nit picking? Your the one breaking my posts into how many quotes? And ignoring what doesnt suit you as well. I may be a pot but China your the kettle.

I said sorry, I explained what I ment and you still attack? And when doing so do the exact same thing your attacking me for?

kayos

.

iguana

You understand that I can see your original post right? And I'd have completely ignored it if it wasn't for the aggressive way you titled your edit.

It's quite simple, anything which affects both partners must be discussed and compromised on. Be that their children, where they live, what they do on holiday and of course their wedding.

But anything which does not have an impact on the other is not something the other has a right to have an input on. They may be asked for their input but they don't need to be asked. The name change is one of those things. Whether a woman changes her name or not has no impact on her husband. It's up to her and her alone. She may like her husband's opinion, she may ask for it, she might even tell him it's up to him if she has no strong opinion on the issue herself. But if she does any of those things it's her choice and if she decides outright that she will never ever change her name it's not something her husband has any right to an input on if she doesn't want that input. It's ultimately her decision and her decision alone as she is the only one who's life will change because of it.

kayos

iguana wrote: »

You understand that I can see your original post right?

Yup I was a mod here before. But I would have expected a mod not to bring up and dicuss publicly a post that was deleted by the poster in the space of what? a minute after posting it as they decided to leave it be and not post it? Thats about the same as you posting up a PM sent too you.

iguana wrote: »

And I'd have completely ignored it if it wasn't for the aggressive way you titled your edit.

Hardly call it aggresive but hey thats me.

iguana

kayos wrote: »

Hardly call it aggresive but hey thats me.

And how exactly should 'thread of crap' be interpreted?

Zulu

Not aggressive anyway, possibly dismissive?

...anyway isn't all this seriously off topic?

ShowAndGo

Penny Dreadful wrote: »

Do what you want to do.

kayos wrote: »

What a great start to any marrage a unilaterial decission.

kayos: You deserve post of the day for that response!

iguana wrote: »

It's quite simple, anything which affects both partners must be discussed and compromised on. Be that their children, where they live, what they do on holiday and of course their wedding.

But anything which does not have an impact on the other is not something the other has a right to have an input on. They may be asked for their input but they don't need to be asked. The name change is one of those things.

One of my pet hates is the way people state their opinion as if it is an undisputable fact. It may come as news to you Iguana but you don't get to decide what does and does not affect people’s relationships.

OP: You are not obliged to change your name. My advice would be to discuss with your partner, explain to him how import it is to you that you keep your name and ask him why it is important to him that you change your name and take the discussion from there.

iguana

ShowAndGo wrote: »

One of my pet hates is the way people state their opinion as if it is an undisputable fact. It may come as news to you Iguana but you don't get to decide what does and does not affect people’s relationships.

You'd think that if it was one of your pet hates you'd be better at identifying it then.:rolleyes:

Whether or not a woman changes her name has no real impact on a man. He doesn't have to change his passport, his driving license, his bank account, his details at work, he doesn't need to fill in certain sections of Garda clearance forms. He doesn't have people who know him by one name or the other. He doesn't receive cheques that he can't cash because it's a different name to the name on his bank account. He doesn't have to contact all of his utility providers to change his name on them. He doesn't have to decide if he should leave at least on bill in his old name in case he ends up in a dispute about his identity. He doesn't need to have a copy of his marriage certificate always to hand just in case it's needed.

Anyone who changes their name has to do all of that. That's not an opinion in anyway whatsoever. It is an indisputable fact, an actual reality of all the little bureaucratic tasks that must always be completed when anyone changes their name. And which years and decades into their lives still cause inconveniences.

As for whether a woman wishes to involve her husband in the decision I already said that lots of women will choose to do that. But that is their choice, not their husband's right.

tinkerbell

iguana, I totally agree. It's the woman's decision on whether or not she wants to change her name - it has no impact on her husband.

cruiserweight

My fiancee and myself have discussed this issue. My point of view is that it does not affect me so she can do whatever she wants. She thought about the issue for a while and in the end she decided that she will take my surname and replace her middle name with the surname that she has now. In fact what was a more important discussion IMO was if we did not have the same surname then what surname would our kids have. Although she has decided to take my surname, before she had we had discussed this issue as it would have affected us both and our family together, who knows she might change her mind on the name change between now and the big day

hazeler

Zulu wrote: »

I won't entertain the current double barrelled madness fad.

Having a double barrell name is not a current fad. It stems back from generations of our families. There are alot of people out there with two surnames, and not many people will go by both but they will definately have them on their birth cert. To say that this double-barrelled madness is a fad, is a little naïve and offensive to those who have and use two surnames.

OP- I wont be taking my FH name. If you feel like you have a strong connection with yours, and would prefer to keep yours, then that is your entitlement. We have long gone past the days where people did things only because it was the "done thing". I think that people waste too much energy on etiquette and traditions and having to have it done the "right way" instead of concentrating on what is right and good for them. Make a decsion on what you feel is right and then relax and enjoy your wedding day!!

Supercell

With double barrelled names..what name do the kids take?

My fiancée will take a double barrel name but i am not sure what our kids should be called?

What if we have a strong minded daughter (very likely if she takes after her mother!!), will she want a nonsense quadruple name when she marries??

I would prefer they take my family name of course..
I'm curious , has anyone else here thought about it?

How Strange

Supercell wrote: »

With double barrelled names..what name do the kids take?

My fiancée will take a double barrel name but i am not sure what our kids should be called?

What if we have a strong minded daughter (very likely if she takes after her mother!!), will she want a nonsense quadruple name when she marries??

I would prefer they take my family name of course..
I'm curious , has anyone else here thought about it?

Supercell, IMO the children take the fathers name more for legal reasons than anything else i.e. if you're travelling alone with them or something it just saves the hassle of having to explain you're their father and not an abductor especially if your little darling is kicking off and shouting how much he hates you and wants to go back to his mammy.

I personally hate the double barrel thing. To me it's like sitting on the fence. Either change your name or don't. Sometimes I think it's a hangover from colonial times, it makes us sound posher and grander (now there's a controversial comment! :eek: ) I'm taking my OH's name because I want to. He couldn't care less what I do however if/when we have children they will definitely have his name and I like the idea of us being this little unit, our own family.

I personally had no problem taking my OH's name despite the obvious inconveniences of having to change documentation etc and probably being known by two names for ever more because no-one knows how to spell my name. I have a good old fashioned although common as muck Irish name and yet I have to constantly spell it especially for Dublin people gggrrrrr... The spelling of my new name is quite obvious so no more having to say 'my name is xx' and then automatically spelling it.

Zulu

hazeler wrote: »

To say that this double-barreled madness is a fad, is a little naïve and offensive to those who have and use two surnames.

It's not naive & it wasn't meant to be offensive.

The double-barreled concept is relatively new in this country. Now I'm happy for you to prove to me that it's been in existence for 10 generations in your family, but frankly, we all know it was relatively rare in this country until the last few generations.

I'll be creating a new generation of my family, with my name. It means alot to me and my OH respects that; like me she respects tradition.

We have long gone past the days where people did things only because it was the "done thing".

Now that is a naive comment. The amount of church weddings, christenings, & communions that are undertaken each year because it's the done thing I'd wager far out weight the converse.

How Strange

Zulu wrote: »

The amount of church weddings, christenings, & communions that are undertaken each year because it's the done thing I'd wager far out weight the converse.

+1
Totally agree with you on this point.

So many couples want to get married in a church not because they're religious or go to mass regularly but because it's all part of the traditional big white day.

Same thing with christenings and communions.

From what I can see, people cherry pick the 'traditions' that suit them and disregard the ones that don't.

catho_monster

Double-barrelling is not such a new fad.
I have a double-barrelled surname, my mother double-barrelled on marriage and I followed suit. On my birth cert my mothers surname name is stated as the middle name and my fathers surname was my surname. However, I was always referred to using both, double barrelled.
I choose as a teenager to use only my father's name, and to keep my mothers name as a middle name.
I shall not be taking my future husbands name. This is my name, its part of my identity, it just wouldnt feel right to me.
If we have children, we may consider to have the same as I got as a child - his surname as surname, my surname as a middle name, thereby giving us and the new person we make the option of double-barrelling or just using his surname.
T'aint rocket science like.

Zulu

catho_monster wrote: »

Double-barrelling is not such a new fad.
I have a double-barrelled surname, my mother double-barreled on marriage and I followed suit...

What about your grand parents? If it was your mother that started using a double-barreled name then, relatively, it is a very new thing! (ie: one generation)

kayos

catho_monster wrote: »

I have a double-barrelled surname
<snip>
If we have children, we may consider to have the same as I got as a child - his surname as surname, my surname as a middle name, thereby giving us and the new person we make the option of double-barrelling or just using his surname.
T'aint rocket science like.

So you are considering call your child as an example Mary Bloggs-Smith Murphy, seeing as your surname is a double barrel eg. Bloggs-Smith? Thus give your children a tripple barrel? Or am I misunderstanding what you mean. If I am please just say.

catho_monster

Yeah, no. Not triple barrelling (thats just mean imo) - I dont use the double-barrel anymore...
And even then, I'm not sure we'd actually use the two surnames in normal everyday life for the child. The point is that they would be there. That the child would have both of our names and not just my husbands. If the names are on the birth cert as middle name and surname, then there's a multitude of options open.
It's just one possible feasible solution like...

namurt

I've already made my decision but just thought I'd add another dimension to this thread.
My OH legally took his step-father's name when he was young and that's the name that I'll be taking. So not only am I not carrying on my bloodline, or whatever it's meant to be, but I'm not even carrying on his.
Has anyone else done the same as me?

ManFromAtlantis

keep your own name if you want. why should you change.
unless hubby is a little insecure.

is it the spanish that have a good system where children take part or both of their parents names ? seems reasonable.

Penny Dreadful

Zulu wrote: »

If you were following tradition, you'd take his surname. IF you were following tradition.

My OH will take my name. I won't entertain the current double barrelled madness fad. It wasn't a big issue for her, but she wants to have the same name of our children.

TBH I don't think I'd agree to a church wedding otherwise. I don't see the point in "cherry picking" traditions.

Actually if people were to follow tradition the wealthier of the partners getting married would have their name carried on and the less well off person would drop their surname. This was the way things used to happen and money not gender ruled the day. If a poor man married a woman from a wealthy family he took her name.