Imagine a man meets, then marries a young widow with no kids. He did not know her before she was a widow. They are now expecting their first child. She really wants to name the child after her late husband. The man absolutely refuses and won’t even compromise and use it as a middle name. Where do you stand? Is she wrong for even bringing it up? Is he just being jealous of a dead man, or is he justified? Would it be different if it was a widower who wanted to name the child after his late wife?
Linda Rosenkrantz and Pamela Redmond Satran, the authors of Beyond Jennifer and Jason, an outstanding book on naming babies, say that if one parent absolutely vetoes a name, for whatever reason, the other parent shouldn’t insist on it. I agree.
That said, if one parent takes that attitude on something so important to the other, he/she needs to be really tactful about it, and give the other parent a lot of say in what the new name is. In this case, the baby absolutely cannot be named (Whatever father’s name is), Jr., or after the mother, if the genders are reversed. Under any circumstances.
Both scenarios seems really creepy.
Now, if say, the man wanted to name the child after a relative and that name also happened to be the same as the woman’s late husband. Still a bad idea, but at least is conversation worthy.
Yeah, it’s his baby too, so he gets veto power assuming he’s acting in good faith and not just vetoing everything but his first choice. I totally understand why someone wouldn’t want their baby named after their spouse’s previous partner.
I don’t think she’s necessarily wrong for bringing it up, but I don’t think her husband is unreasonable for not wanting to do it.
/edit: I changed my mind somewhat. Even bringing it up skeeves me out a little bit, but I don’t actually think it’s wrong.
When does the narwhal bacon, my friend? I’ll say the same thing I said over there - I could never name my child after someone I associate with sex. Of course, I’ve never been married or had children, so maybe it isn’t as skeevy as I think.
Gender of deceased is irrelevent IMO. I think middle name is a reasonable compromise. YMMV
When does the what what? That doesn’t even make sense. Bacon isn’t a verb. Yeah, I stole this from there. I didn’t comment over there, but I was more sympathetic to the wife because the husband seemed like an asshole to me. In the abstract, I agree with the veto for any reason, but be tactful about it because it is important to her. Middle name would be a good Solomon splitting the baby solution.
The widow or the widower in either case is just being icky. There are better ways to memorialize your lost spouse…naming your child with another person after them is just wrong.
It’s traditional in some cultures (including the one I come from) to name children after a person who’s died who was a close relative or who you cared about especially.
From that viewpoint, I don’t find it creepy or icky at all, I completely agree - if it was me I’d probably want to do the same thing.
However, I would be willing to compromise as far as the baby’s name starting with the same first letter as my first spouse who’s died. Does that seem less creepy? Like if husband #1 was Jason, baby could be named Jack, Jeremy or Justin? Or Jessica, Jasmine, or Jennifer if a girl? To me that seems like plenty of compromise… I’d hope my 2nd husband would be agreeable…
So your (hypothetical) spouse’s name is right out, then?
I’d be against it (naming after a dead former spouse), personally. You’re starting a new family with me, and haven’t let go of your old spouse yet? Big red flag for the whole marriage.
Oh wow, you read reddit too?
I’ve never liked Jr. names anyway. If it’s something where the naming has gone the same since great-great-great-grandparent, then that could trump it, but I’d likely use a different name for day-to-day life. My dad and my uncle have the same name and that’s annoying enough, having my husband and son with the same name would drive me nuts.
I remember a while back someone posted this essay about the second wife of a man whose wife had died tragically. I really liked the attitude that the second wife had towards her husband’s dead wife: a healthy amount of respect and affection, rather than feeling threatened by her.
If my current partner died (though of course I hope he doesn’t), I could picture myself wanting to honor his memory in a manner like this. I wouldn’t want to be with someone who refused to consider a compromise like using the middle name.
I think someone who had the level of maturity and empathy I would want in a partner would be able to understand why I still had some affection for someone who was taken from me tragically and wouldn’t react this way in the first place. Even if they weren’t happy about it, I’d want them to be willing to budge on something that was really important to me.
He IS jealous of a dead man, but I don’t see a problem with that. Its nice that she wants to honor him, but this will be the child of the new husband, not the old one.
“Ahypothetical”—that’s a pretty name.
For a girl, of course.
Personally, I find it odd and creepy. Even for a middle name. That part of her life is over.
Is it wrong to bring it up? I think it’s odd, but wrong? I don’t know. I think if my wife would bring something like that up, I’d be grateful. The relationship is obviously not something that will work for me, especially now knowing she’s still burning a candle for Mr. DeadGuy.
I think if I’m a widower and ask that question, I’ve got bigger problems and am not ready for marriage.
This is the single best thing I’ve read out here in quite a while. Of course, someone would get the name and spell it a-thetical, where “-” = hyphen (What?)
I actuallly think its quite sweet to want to have the lost husband remembered this way.
I would like it if my current wife wanted to remember me this way, and if I were the current husband would see it as a caring and thoughtful move.
Wanting a widow to “forget” her dead hubby is not nice in my view.
Need more info, including the males desire to be a father. we all have shortcomings and the desire of the woman to have such a name must be also weighted against the desire of the man, and that effect on the care of the child.
She would be wrong if she didn’t bring up her desire (for this child).
I don’t know, not enough info provided. There could be a reason either way.
No it is the same.