Naming conventions are changing in the area of marriage, as a growing number of women either merge their own surname with that of their husband or simply shun the latter altogether.

Should the tradition of passing the surname through the male line be upheld? Or is this practice outdated and sexist?

Should a woman keep her surname when she marries? Do you think a woman compromises her individual identity and professional reputation if she loses her name?

What do you think of double-barrelled names?

Does sticking to two separate names erase some of the romance of marriage?

I'd like to know what you think...

foxy, i think marriage is obsolete,in it's traditional sense. in modern society, i think a group of 6-1o adults ought to enter a partnership to raise children of the group. they should aim to replace themselves, or a little less, until population pressure on the ecology is sustainable.

within the group, one or two would be responsible for child-minding, the others for income production. the group should adopt a surname, such as 'smith4361"

Dear Demos,

You're not much help to me, unfortunately... I was hoping to get some answers to the questions I've listed up above. Because I've got a bit of a personal dilemma at the moment. It's my future daughter-in-law who's insisting on keeping her maiden name - when she marries my son next year. Here I thought I was a very "with it" person, and I must admit I'm really struggling with her decision ...

Foxy, you are good at picking on touchy subjects!

It probably comes down to what suits the individual. My sister is recently married and she has hyphenated hers. I changed my name (I didnt really want to, but my husband is ultra conservative and probably would have called off the wedding if I didnt - which should have served as a warning). We are both fond of our family name, as its a one-off; everyone in the world with that name can be traced back to one place.

Plenty of professional women go by two surnames - their own at work (usually because this is the name that their qualifications are in), and their married name at home/socially.

Is your daughter-in-law from a family of just girls? In my personal experience, where there is no son to "pass-on" the family name, girls seem more likely to want to retain theirs. She has no doubt got a good reason, but it may be a very personal one that she is not comfortable sharing.

The practice of using the mothers maiden name as a middle name for one of the children used to be common. Also, if you go back to our convict past, convict women who bore chldren (whether married or not), gave their own surname to those children (it makes researching family history in the convict era VERY tricky at times).

Dear Country Gal,

Thanks so much for your comments. My future daughter-in-law has a brother, but I'm not sure if he's a step-brother, so his surname may be different to hers. You've given me something to think about, which is what I was looking for in starting this thread - so again, Thank-you.

I wouldn't worry about it too much Foxy. She can change her name at any time after they are married. My wife wanted to keep hers and I had no problem with that, until of course she got pregnant and then fill out the forms for "fathers name" etc. and also on my sons birth certificate. It looked a little odd of course even though we were married, and then she realised that it may cause some confusion (and raised eyebrows from nonothing busybodies) down the track and decided to change her name to mine for convenience sake. She's actually happier to have the same last name as her children.

It's true Foxy! You're a thread-starting star.

I'm on the absolute opposite end of the spectrum. I find it incredibly strange that some women change their names. I have only one girlfriend who did it; she did not have a happy or supportive family and was ready to symbolically leave it. I'm not married to my partner, but we might marry, and I'm sure it would freak him out if I suggested changing my name to his. I'd also find it strange if he wanted to change my name to mine. We'd both accomodate it, of course, and freely share our name, but we love each other because we are ourselves, and our names are so intimately associated with that.

Plus, there's my job. My identity.

Because we're thinking about having kids, I've canvassed a lot of opinions about children's last names - how fathers and mothers feel about having a different last name from their child, if it's confusing etc. No-one I've yet talked to seems to find it a problem. Most children I know seem to carry either their mother's surname as a middle name. Because there are lots of children in my family, who bear my last name, but none in my partner's family, I think that's what we'll do.

Why would you prefer your future daughter-in-law to change her name?

Dear Bugsy and Botheration,

Thanks to both of you. I must confess that coming from a conservative European background - my upbringing has kicked in. I'm trying to be as broadminded as I can - but deep down, I still feel that when a woman marries she should take on the man's name. She can keep her own for professional reasons, but she should be known as, 'Mrs ....' on the marriage certificate and all legal documents. It gives the children a stronger sense of identity - and things are less complicated - (on passports - when travelling et cetera).

Why would a woman want to marry the man - but not take on his name?
That's what I'm having problems with. Because the way that I was raised was - you marry not just the man - but his family as well.
If he's good enough to share your bed - his name should be good enough for you to share.

Anyway, I love my son deeply and it's his happiness that matters to me
so of-course I'm not going to rock the boat. I actually think my daughter-in-law is fabulous and I love her dearly - that's why all this came as a bit of a surprise.

"It gives the children a stronger sense of identity..."
Does it? I haven't heard that from any people I know whose mothers kept their name. It also doesn't give children a stronger sense of their *mother's* identity. I know my mother felt terribly sad giving up her name. As her child, I wish she hadn't had to.

"things are less complicated - (on passports - when travelling et cetera)."
Really? I live in a de facto relationship - we've travelled, made enormous purchases together, as far as the world concerned, we're married - and it has never once been a problem. Is there really a time it would be inconvenient? I can't even imagine an example here. From experience, I can tell you travelling is certainly not one of them.

"Why would a woman want to marry the man - but not take on his name?"
A woman wants to marry a man because she loves him and wishes to spend her life with him and have children with him and support him through the great varieties of experience that life presents. What's a name got to do with it?

And if you really do think sharing a name is an irreplacable act of committment, would you be equally happy if your son chooses to take his wife's surname?

"If he's good enough to share your bed - his name should be good enough for you to share."
Again, if that's the reasoning, there's no need for it to be a gender thing. It's a non sequiter to me. You may as well say, "If he's good enough to share your bed, he's good enough to get a tatoo for." My partner's so fantastic he's virtually perfect, but I'm still not getting a tatoo.

Either way, I can honestly say I don't think our sex life suffers because we don't share a name!

Foxy, I think its a bit of a legacy from the past, where the husband took possession of his wife, and the name change was symbolic of that. Another legacy of such is the giving away of the bride by her father, who owned her prior to her marriage. For some more enthusiastic feminists I know, this latter practice is one to be thrown ou in all haste, but I think its still a nice tradition. My dad gave me away when I got married, but I dont think he was under any delusions that he had any say in how I conducted my life!

As for marrying the family, well perhaps that is not quite as relevant today as in the past. Families tend to be wide-spread and not living in each others back pockets. If anyone had suggested to me that I was marrying my in-laws, I'd have called the whole thing off pronto - we dont get along (primarily because I dont believe that women are second-class citizens and they do).

Country girl!! your a gem, an asset to the blogs I read.
fluff4

Foxy, first congrats on showing the courage to fess up to the struggle when one set of values conflict with another. That takes some courage to put out there.

Intellectually I'm in agreement with botheration on this but emotionally I suspect that if I remarry I'd be thrilled if my wife and I share a surname (and doubt that I'd change mine). That may change if and when I get to the situation and is not something I'd want to make a fuss about.

The best advice I can give is to keep being honest with yourself about what is happening with you, much easier to keep things in perspective.

Cheers
R0bert

It took my lady & I 28 years to get round to getting married, but when we started to producing offspring, she took my name, for simplicity, & to avoid any future problem for the kids.

My parents changed their name, by deed poll, & having to produce the deed poll, not a copy, with my birth certificate, has been a bloody nuisance all my life.

I have always felt that hyphenated names was an affectation, used by the worst people, & should definately be grounds for divorce. Using a maiden name is so pretentious that the lady is probably better left a maiden, to enjoy it all to her self.

People who are unable to share a name, are unlikely to be able to share a life, at least in any meaningful way.

Foxy, for my two cents worth ... it's a name.

The real issue is how the two of them deal with it - if this is a conflict, what better way to test the boundaries of your relationship than come up with a mutually agreeable decision. After all, isn't that what marriage is about.

As for your feelings or anyone outside of the betrothed, although an important factor, should not influence their ultimate decision. Hopefully they can achieve a suitable resolution and lay strong foundations for a successful marriage.

(Though I hope my son keeps his name!)

I've read all of the posts - Thank-You for your comments and advice.
Of course it is up to my son and his fiancee to work out. And I'm not going to interfere. But privately I'm still hoping that sometime down the track...she's going to want to add my son's name to hers.

I've tried to analyze why I feel the way I do. I suppose that it could be - because of our background. Our families lost so much as a result of the second World War. My husband's family and my own had such a struggle. They were demeaned in so many ways, yet they still refused to change or give up their surnames. It gave them a strong sense of identity.

I know that this is emotional baggage for me - and although it's my baggage - I should not pass it on to my son. I know that. And eventually of course I will accept their decision.

Stress is the biggest thing that gets in the way of our modern day lives. Its up to you "THE WOMAN" to pick the right man. You must take five years to know your man before you even think about marring him. As for your name! WELL! If you make your bed, you will just have to lay in it. Don't say I didn't warn you.
All you need is love!
The name you make for your family will be of your own hard work. If you want to fail! You will

Wow evolution ... that's a pretty amazing statement - 5 years pre marriage. I was engaged after 5 weeks, married after a year and now rapidly moving towards our first decade's anniversary.

I'm not sure living or being together any amount of time assists in better preparing you for marriage, children and the whole life time commitment. I've seen relationships dissolve after being together for years, then finally marrying.

Marriage is a different state of being together - it's a sense of belonging, as well as acceptance - it's not fleeting like a relationship where you can walk anytime, it's a lifelong commitment ... though I fear this is where many people miss the point.

Foxy wrote: "Our families lost so much as a result of the second World War. My husband's family and my own had such a struggle. They were demeaned in so many ways, yet they still refused to change or give up their surnames. It gave them a strong sense of identity."

I find this confusing Foxy. Isn't this an argument for keeping one's name? Like your family, your future daughter-in-law is refusing to change or give up her surname.

Is there a part of you that thinks that her identity, her family, is somehow less valuable than hers? If so, maybe it would help to talk to her about her heritage. (Or her parents, if you spend time with them.) You might find stories there that you weren't expecting.

Dear Botheration,

You always credit me with 'commonsense.' Well, in this case you've made a very valid point and I'm rather ashamed of myself. Of-course your right. I am only seeing things from my side of the fence...

Hi everyone,
As I recently got married just a few weeks ago I thought I would tell you of my experience. I was originally married more than 25 years ago and at that stage I assumed my husband's name. When I divorced I "reclaimed" my birthright. Frankly it was a great deal of hassle and took quite a few months to change everything, but the feeling it gave me was fantastic. I was me once more. It may have been mere symbolism, but it was important.
My children have kept their father's name. And now I have remarried. I decided to stick with my maiden name because of the bother of changing it again; the fact I was known professionally by my maiden name; and, to be honest, I couldn't really see it serving a useful purpose as we are too old for more children!
My new husband had/has no objections, although I think it may have been interesting if he had! I think we would have reached an impasse as I feel very strongly that my name is part of my identity and I don't wish to give it away.
Susan Prior (editor of On Line Opinion)

Congratulations Susan on your "re-marriage".

I would ask though, how do you feel about your children maintaining their fathers name? Have any of them expressed an interest in taking your maiden name?

My father reverted to his mothers maiden name after falling out with the family ... history to us now, though my wife suggested we revert back to the original. (All too difficult to be honest).

It is an interesting question. They have asked about it but I have said to them that their name is theirs as my birth name was mine. I suggested that if they wish to change it they leave it until they are older and think about it again at that stage. Frankly I don't mind either way. Although a complicating factor for both of them is that both my daughters are adopted and also they rarely see their father: they feel little connection to him (his choice I add hastily before all of you accuse me of preventing him seeing them!). I suspect that they will stick with their adopted father's name and probably keep it after they marry, if they do.

Funnily enough, my parents went through quite the crisis in surname when they got married and had a solution I've not heard other families adopt.

When their parents were bickering about the situation, they simply picked a new one out of the phonebook, and changed both their names.

So I'm only the second generation in our family which has this surname. I quite like it, seeing as it's better than either of the other surnames I'd have had.

So there's always that option...

Foxy, I wouldn't want you to feel ashamed for a minute! I think it was an excellent idea to bring it up, given it was worrying you, and I'm sorry if I sounded condescending, which I most certainly don't feel. The variety of responses show there's no hard and fast rules. Besides, it's also just a generational thing. As I said before, only one of my married contemporaries changed her name, so it's really just shifting fashion.

Names are personal and heavy with meaning, so for that reason any discussion around names can be emotional. It's a good disussion.

I'm just surprised none of the grumpy old men around here have found it yet.

Oh, oh ... can I be a grumpy old man!

You have no idea how much you people have helped me. Thank you one and all for your posts... They've given me so much food for thought. And I'm actually beginning to look at things from a different angle...

When we got married some time ago my wife (with reasonably strong feminist leanings) insisted that she keep her maiden name.

I said I had no issue, and she even went further to say that the girls would have her name and the boys mine. I thought there might be some complications but it really didn't bother me.

A month before the wedding she changed her mind. Having got used to the new idea, and worrying that there might be second change of heart I asked her why.

The answer was simple, as she was sure that it was entirely her choice, and that there was no pressure whatsoever, she chose what was convienient.

The issue is about choice. There is no need to conform to any cultural norm now that the nuclear family is a rarity. You should do what will make you happier. (I do admit that a single name is easier though)

I also have a different surname to my children and have never encountered so much as a raised eyebrow. But one of the things I also want to point out is the issues of divorce. Yes, of course: spit over your left shoulder, knock on wood, cross your fingers and all of the above at even the mention of the word...which does NOT have anything to do with your son and daughter-in-law.

However, in addressing perhaps another reason for married names falling out of favour: - with the best will in the world a person can marry, the children take the family name and then, after a divorce and remarriage, find the kids with different surnames after all: - like Susan's kids.

So, there is never a certitude about the stability of names for most people in any case. Like Botheration, changing names is not an issue amongst most of my friends...but those who, tragically, do end up divorced, are glad no name changes are involved.

Democritus, you have to admit, the "choice" is always the woman's though. How long and hard did you think about changing your name to hers? I'm not suggesting you were anything other than a loving, free-thinking husband, but I think it's worth noting that this is an issue women are forced to address, while men generally keep their own names without any internal quandry.

Well, my son and his fiancee have decided they will have a double-barrelled name after all. She will take his if he takes hers.
And he's agreed, so they will link the two together.

I've got to admit I always thought double-barrelled names were a bit, well you know...

Anyway, it's their decision. So there you have it.

Good on ya Foxy!

I'm still with you in my thinking - especially about double barrelled names, though I've enjoyed this repartee and am so glad they've reached a compromise and begun what will obviously prove a fruitful marriage.

Just a post script to my recent decision to keep my maiden name when marrying for the second time. A parcel arrived addressed to MacKenzie (my husband's name). It had to be signed for so he eventually managed to get across town at great inconvenience to pick it up. When he got there it was addressed to Susan MacKenzie but they allowed him to pick it up, even though I couldn't as I had no ID with MacKenzie on it. He did the equivalent of an "I told you so" smirk, as in "you should have become Mrs MacKenzie"! I guess we are going to get little annoyances like this but I shall stick to my guns. Prior it is!
Cheers
Susan Prior - Ed

To Everyone,

Thanks for all your inputs into this thread. They've been great!

It looks like my son's family is to have double-barrelled names.
It's their choice and we'll get used to it.

As long as they're happy with it that's what matters.

I'm just ecstatic to be getting such a lovely daughter-in-law.
She is very special!