Thursday, November 03, 2005


Jody over at Raising WEG has a new post about surnames, and why she changed her surname when she got married. I didn't change mine, which seemed a very simple decision at the time. It's only later it seems more complex. It meant though, that we had long long discussions about which surnames to give the children when they arrived. In fact, the main reason we found out the sex both times was to give ourselves enough time and information to have the discussion.

Its not enough for women just to keep their name - that just defers the problem for a generation - you need to think about what names to give the children as well. I've always thought that a sensible strategy that works down the generations is to give the girls the mother's name, and the boys the father's name.

I'm quite proud of my distaff line - I'm the oldest daughter of the oldest daughter and so on back until about the 1850s. So creating a strategy that would keep that heritage alive using one single name makes a lot of sense to me.

Many people (including, unfortunately, E, my husband) don't like that - they particularly don't like members of the same family having different surnames. Luckily, as it turned out, we had two boys, so we both agreed on their surname. But as the only member of my family with my surname, I'd quite like having company. And if everyone did it, it would seem pretty natural.


At 9:42 am, Blogger Susoz said...

I have a friend in the US whose agreement with her partner was that the first child had her surname 9with his in the middle) and the second child had his surname with hers in the middle. And that's what they've done. the first was a boy, with her name, and the sceond was a girl, with his name. If they have another, it will take her name.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home