My wife’s niece recently had a baby girl. She and the baby live with her mother; the father lives somewhere else locally. They’re not married or engaged, and from what I understand have had an on-again/off-again thing for years. He’s sporadically employed and no one is expecting him to be much of a father or provider.
And yet, she gave her daughter the father’s last name, not hers. Why?
Does she hold out hope that they’ll be a conventional family someday?
Is she following some patriarchal paradigm?
I barely know this young woman, so I can’t ask her. And I realize it’s a relatively small detail in the bigger scheme of things, and what’s more is none of my business. But it just seems wrong. You carried the baby. You birthed her, and now you’re likely to raise her yourself. Why not give her your name?
I suspect the answer lies somewhere here. Or she at least wants the father to be involved in his child’s life and hopes the naming might prick his conscience.
Does the child have cousins, aunts and uncles on the fathers side? And grandparents might look more favorably if the child has the fathers name as well . It causes less confusion down the road and lessons the appearance of strife.
Also makes it easier on the kid not having to explain how he is related.
I don’t know anything about the father’s side, but the child certainly has cousins, aunts, uncles and grandparents on her mother’s side. Why doesn’t their confusion factor in?
And it would be a lot easier for the girl to explain her last name if it’s the same as her mother’s, and not the same as some guy who’s less important in her life.
IMHO, the post about pricking the prick’s consciousness to be in the child’s life says it best. Absentee fathers are causing a huge problem in society.
American society, particularly the more conservative elements, is still very much of the mindset that a child inherits his or her father’s name. Depending on what part of the country they’re in and what sort of social circles they move in, the girl may be more likely to have to explain why she has her mother’s name and not her father’s. Sadly, there are still plenty of places where being born out-of-wedlock carries a stigma, and mom may have made a conscious choice to try to minimize that. She also may be hoping to involve the paternal family in helping raise the child, and giving the child their family name may help them feel more involved or connected.
Because they don’t need to be “sold” on accepting the child as part of their family. They will anyway. The father’s side may or may not.
I think some men (and possibly families) who would regard an action like that as deliberately antagonistic, a statement that they are not welcome in the child’s life. She doesn’t have to be “holding out for a conventional family” to hope, or even expect, that he will be a constant, positive presence in his child’s life.
WAG: Not that they’ll be a conventional family, but that the father will have at least some connection with his kid. And that that’s significantly more likely if the kid shares his name.
The theory I’ve heard is that naming a child after its father is a way of asserting that the child is his, in a way that’s not necessary to do for the mother, because it’s obvious that the child is hers: she carried it, she gave birth to it, and in most cases she’s the one raising it.
These answers all make a lot of sense, but they kind of piss me off, too. It just seems like you ought to do more than contribute a teaspoon of semen to attach your name to a child.
(Btw, I’m no enemy of convention. My wife took my last name when we married, by our mutual preference.)
Something I don’t think anyone brought up - you know she’s a single mother because she’s your niece. And some or most of the people who know her now also know. But in the future, there will be many people who have no idea why your niece and her daughter have different surnames - it could be that your niece was never married, or that she did not take her husband’s name but did give t to her child, or that your niece was married to the father, changed her name and got divorced and remarried changing her name to the stepfathers. It doesn’t really require explanation in most places. If there’s no downside to giving the baby the father’s name and potential benefits, why wouldn’t she do it?
But there is a downside, and you described it yourself. People expect family members to have the same last name, but my niece is going to have to explain this every time she signs the girl up for anything.
Doubt it, it’s pretty common for mothers and daughters to have different last names. Either for the reason given here, a divorce or a married woman decides to keep here maiden name. It’s really not a big deal in these modern times.
I was a single parent. Her dad and I were on / off throughout the entire pregnancy and split for good when she was 10 months old. I pretty much figured I’d be raising her on my own from the start.
She has his last name.
Why?
*In our society, it’s just kind of what you do.
*When a child has their father’s last name there’s less of a “bastard child” stigma.
*I don’t care for my last name
*Provided connection to his family - she was more accepted by them with his last name
*Even though he’s a crappy person and never actually parented her, he’s still her father. Kind of a reminder to him.
*Selfishly, there’s less of a stigma behind having people think you’ve divorced and took back your maiden name versus unwed mother.
Granted, this was mid-90’s, not today.
I can say from my work experience dealing with family court issues, it almost always comes down to the relationship that the parents had at the time the child was born.
This doesn’t happen much anymore.
My daughter had one teacher that insisted on calling me Mrs. [kid’s last name]. It took a few gentle reminders that, no, please call me Ms. [my last name] and she understood. That was the only person who got it confused.
Thanks for the detailed reply. I really appreciate hearing your firsthand experience.
I bolded the bit about your last name because I wondered about that myself. My niece’s last name is very Italian and she likely has to spell it for everyone, but the father’s last name is super mainstream and impossible to misspell. For all I know, that’s the whole answer right there.
When I had been divorced for more years than I had been married, I took back my maiden name. It was partly because I have a first name that everyone misspells and my married name was also one that everyone misspells - and also mispronounces. While my children were in elementary school, I added my maiden name as a second middle name on all of their school papers and on their luggage tags. Just in case. There never was a problem.
My last name was the butt of many jokes thanks to a very popular TV show in the 70’s (ie. when I was in elementary school). I rarely went a day without being teased. At this point, most people under 40 wouldn’t have a clue.
Her dad’s last name is very Minnesotan/Scandinavian, so while a few have had issues with pronunciation, it’s much more pleasing.
And, it’s all irrelevant as next year she’s changing it to something I’m still unsure I pronounce correctly.
You misunderstood - I was saying there are multiple reasons for the different names and it is so common that in most places no explanation is needed. My daughter is 30 years old , and I have never once had to explain why my last name is not the same as my kids’.