New mother trying to decide baby's last name

**sbandy** · 07-25-2009 10:46 PM

I am still only in the first trimester and i have a while to think about it but im trying to decide whether the child should have my last name or the fathers. i want the baby to have the same last name as me but the father feels just as strongly.

as of now the father and i are no longer together romantically, we may get back together further down the line or we may not. ive thought of hyphenation but we both have rather long and kinda odd last names that just sound horrible put together. the father is very excited about this baby now and wants it to have his last name and i think it would be great to have that sense of the baby being his by taking his family name but on the other hand i feel like he walked off from this "family" in a sense when we broke up and want the baby to have mine.

idk...any advice??

**WildChild** · 07-25-2009 10:56 PM

Who will the child be living with? You could be a trend breaker and create a new last name. It is said that the number of last names is dwindling. I've suggested to my son he might take my mother's maiden name one day as there is no one to carry it to another generation. Got any good names in the family tree?

**CHANDLERS WISH** · 07-26-2009 12:17 AM

Just know all the legal rights, by placing his name on the birth cerficate...

I sense there is a tad of concern there for future so don't think emotionally, think logically.

CW

**Little** · 07-26-2009 08:20 AM

Traditionally, the father's name is the child's last name.
However, that gets tricky in situations like this. Who's going to be the main family to this child? Who's going to have main custody? Because when you go to his parent teacher conferences and he's little boy Smith while you're Mommy Jones, they might still call you Mrs Smith.
You might look into some options that other countries use. In Spain and Latin America, both names are used but the father's last name is first. Women don't really take their husbands' names there.
If I were in your shoes, I'd want the child to have my last name for practical reasons. You aren't (and in the near future won't be) "Mrs. Smith" and Mister Smith is not going to be in the daily work of having a child. It could be seen as passive aggressive, but I really think it makes more sense in your case.

**JulyMama06** · 09-02-2009 06:31 PM

I would definitely make your child's last name your own. I don't know your whole situation but legally, at least where I am in the US, if you put the father's last name on the birth certificate he immediately has just as many rights as you do. You do not legally even have to put the father on your baby's birth certificate. It all depends on you and your situation and you do have time to think about it but if I were you I would make it your last name. I also agree with what the other posters said about parent teacher conferences, etc.

**Katsaly** · 09-03-2009 05:31 AM

Personally, I would give the baby your last name. Little explained the practicality of it, and I tend to agree. The father is not with you, and there's really no way of knowing how long he'll stay interested in the baby. You are the one who will be living with the child and raising it.

**SinisterUrge** · 09-04-2009 03:40 PM

Originally Posted by Little

Traditionally, the father's name is the child's last name.

Only if the parent's are married. In the event of an unwed mother the child would get the mother's surname.

Nowadays you can use anything you want. Go ahead and use the numeral 8, they probably won't say anything.

**Miya** · 09-11-2009 05:57 AM

Just remember though that when traveling later with the baby that (married or not, your name or fathers) it would be best to keep the child's birth cert with you just in case immigration got nosy. Not that this applies to your question but just a thought that came to mind. In your case I'd go with your last name.

**Kallygirlie** · 09-11-2009 06:35 AM

[QUOTE=SinisterUrge;109045]Only if the parent's are married. In the event of an unwed mother the child would get the mother's surname.
QUOTE]

This actually is not true. I have 3 nieces, 2 of which were born when the mother was seperated from my brother. Both girls have my families name. it was never a second thought. To me its not really a question of you being together. You say he's really excited, so he's most likely going to be very involved in the childs life right? With or without his last name, he will still have just as much right legally. I've worked in a court house before and I can say most commonly the fathers last name is the one that is used. Dont think emotionally. My brother just recently finished going through a custody battle. He's very involved and a great dad (pays child support + whatever else the mother says she needs) yet the mother now wants to change the babies last name because "it'll be easier" cause people call her Mrs. _____. How hard is it to correct them on that? I get called Mrs. (insert my boyfriends last name) because he's names first on our lease. He even gets called Mr. (insert my last name) because my name is the one on all the bills in the house. Its really just a matter of saying, sorry but I'm Mrs _________. Plus within the first yrs of school they will catch on to who you are. Legally theres nothing stoppiing you from going either way. Its just really comes down to what you and him want.

**SinisterUrge** · 09-14-2009 11:25 AM

This actually is not true.

Actually it was true and standard practice until the industrial revolution and the fall of the Holy Roman Empire (until which time you didn't even have a surname unless you held a fiefdom). Anyway, as capitalism arose and a "middle class" was created it only then became important for the non-ruling to have family ties for owned property. The husband, legally, "owned" his wife and anything doweried to her. This became a problem for established families with no male heir, an unmarried woman (and thus not legally owned) would be able to have children (hopefully male) and keep family land & business in the family.

Into the 18th and 19th centuries you have a legal systems come about that do not make women property of their husbands. No longer do property and children become someone else's responsibility (remember it was perfectly legal to sell your children into indentured servitude until they came of age), Now the entire concept of a family or surname are legally irrelevant and largely unneeded. We are all free to be who we want to be, and can even change our given names.