Do you think it's acceptable for a woman to keep her last name if she were to get married?

[Irish_Girl_68]

I don’t think it matters either way. I kept my maiden name the first five years of my marriage for professional reasons. My husband didn’t have an issue with it and our children have always had his last name only. After our daughter started school I began using both my maiden and married names (no hyphen). I did this for about a year before I decided I was tired of writing out two long last names every time I signed something. Now, I solely use his last name.

 

[AllSeasons]

Or do you think a woman should take her husband’s name?

I’m a female only child and if I get married someday I’ve always had the idea I want to keep my last name and possibly pass it on to my kids to keep the family name. I guess i’m open to combining it with my future husband’s, if his wasn’t too long.

Personally, as a guy, I don’t really care if my future wife took my last name. Now the kids’ last name, that would be trickier. In your situation with you being an only child, maybe the second-born male child can take your last name. Of course, that would depend a lot on the views of your future husband (and his family).

 

[StJudePray4Me]

Such a personal choice.

I know women on all sides of it – one who kept her name and now wishes she had changed it; one who changed it and now wishes she hadn’t; as well as those who did or didn’t and are perfectly happy.

I even know one couple who each kept their names, had 2 kids and gave the girl the mom’s surname, and the boy the dad’s surname. It confuses a lot of people.

Just be prepared to have to explain a lot, if you go against cultural norms. People will assume that yours is a blended family if not everyone has the same surname.

Also remember: That which we call a rose. By any other name would smell as sweet.

 

[achmafooma]

It’s up to the couple, really. My wife and I both felt it was important to have the same family name, and we’re both somewhat traditional so she took my name.

However, she still uses her maiden name in certain contexts – primarily for her art business. She is ethnic Chinese and has strong Asian influences in her art and jewelry designs, but with my last name she would sound very European .

I know a few couples where the wife kept her maiden name, and it doesn’t seem to have had any material impact on them…but I’m old fashioned and like the tradition of the wife changing her last name. It speaks to the ‘two become one’ aspect of marriage.

God bless!

 

[EasterJoy]

It is convenient for a couple to have the same last name, but there are even advantages to having one name for business and another for your private life.

In the end the question is up to the couple. When you meet the man you are going to marry, the two of you ought to take whatever surname for each of you as pleases the other. In the big picture, that is what matters.

 

[Joe_5859]

That’s what happened to me!

(More or less.)

I’m a female only child too. And, even as a child, I hated the idea that the name would die with me. I often wondered if I could find a guy who would take my name…

But, then I met my fiancé. And he is quite attached to his name, which is also unique from his family…so…

I’m willing to change. It’s not that important. I’m more concerned that we all have the same name.

Of course, the way to avoid the whole issue altogether is to just find and marry someone with the same last name (who is unrelated, of course).

Someone I used to work with actually did this in a roundabout way. She had been married for years and her first husband passed away. Then she met another nice man who happened to share her maiden name. So when she got remarried, she went back to her maiden name, which was also her new husband’s last name. Full circle.

 

[NSFrame]

I think women should change their names. Do they have to? No. But I think it’s one of those things that you do as a gesture to your husband, the same way a guy buys an engagement ring or gets down on one knee for his wife, neither of which is required but both of which make the woman feel loved and cherished. A male friend of mine has a wife who refused to take his name and he felt sort of rejected, even though they do have a happy marriage.

 

[Luna_Lovecraft]

Or do you think a woman should take her husband’s name?

I’m a female only child and if I get married someday I’ve always had the idea I want to keep my last name and possibly pass it on to my kids to keep the family name. I guess i’m open to combining it with my future husband’s, if his wasn’t too long.

I assume you’re talking about English-dominated parts of North America. When it come to other areas, namely Spanish (language)-dominated areas, the rules and protocols are quite different.

I teach Spanish-speaking students who have up to three sir names listed on their official transcripts, siblings whose sir names are flip-flopped (one’s Hernandez Garcia and the other’s Garcia Hernandez), kids who don’t do by any sir name on their records, and kids whose last name(s) are a re-combination of their parents’ names (think Antonio Villaraigosa). In the end when I get a new kid I just as, “Honey, what do you want me to call you?”

Mr. Lovecraft and I married late in life. I’d been known by my maiden name professionally for 20 years. I did want to take his name - I thought it was a way to honor him and his family - but I also thought I would be able to go by my married name privately and my maiden name professionally. This was a foolish idea, as I now know. Once I notified my human resources department of my legal name change, once I made it into “the system,” I became Mrs. Lovecraft on all work-related documents, and that started a tide that I couldn’t fight. I still call myself Ms. Smith at work, every August I have to fight with the employee ID badge makers to get them to print mine as Ms. Smith, and at the beginning of every year some kids are confused because the sign on the door says Ms. Smith, but their course schedules says Mrs. Lovecraft. And I tell them that if I can deal with their three sir names, they can deal with my two.

Luna

 

[SMHW]

First off, this is not a MORAL decision. It is a legal and convenience issue that has come to take on the significance of respect for the husband by the wife.

The respect-for-the-husband issue should be addressed by the couple prior to marriage as should all other non-moral issues that contribute to the compatibility of the couple.

The legal and convenience issues will depend on local regulations and such matters as the number of records/obligations the woman has under her maiden name.

 

[VeritasLuxMea]

Ok, just to get one thing straight: it’s a very personal decision and I refuse to pass judgement on anyone one way or another.

That said, while convention is beginning to bend on this issue, it does not seem to be bending on the idea that a wedding should be an emasculating process. The name change is one of the few things that the groom “gets”, a sense of satisfaction in passing his name along. But if you look at the other factors of a wedding, they are almost entirely female-centric:

-It is the bride that gets the diamond ring, no equivalent for the groom. (often thousands of $$$$ out of pocket, before any guarantee of marriage)
-Groom has to plan the proposal, bride gets to sit back and pass judgment on whether it was a “good” one or not.
-Bride that gets the “bride-walk”
-The bride that gets the “oohs” and “ahhs”
-The bride now has the bachelorette party to match the groom’s bachelor party, but still gets the “bridal shower” whereas the groom does not.
-The bride is told it’s “her day” and often tells the man what to wear, gets to live out a princess fantasy.
-A recent innovation called the “groom’s cake” involves a small cake made to honor the groom, whereas the substantial cake that everyone actually likes is the “bridal cake.”

-The attendants are the “bridal” party, not the “groom party”
-If you go to any vendor showcases you’ll note that they are called “bridal showcases”, not “groom showcases”, and they cater unashamedly to the bride above all else.
-The bride gets congratulated for getting married, the groom gets scorned and ribbed
-All the trappings of a reception: the centerpieces, the flowers, the sappy music… all female-centric.

…and so on. Just my personal take on the matter. Anyway, the point being, if you intend to keep your own name, I would suggest making a SERIOUS effort not to emasculate the groom as is typically done in the wedding process. For again, the passage of his name is one of the only aspects of a wedding that is “for” the groom.

 

[mfrances]

Hello All
I am a woman getting married this year in June.
I am taking my husband’s name.
I think it’s beautiful for me to share the name of the man I chose.

You can say “you’ve had your name all your life” but this is a new and exciting chapter of life together. But there is certainly nothing morally wrong with keeping your own name. Women have their reasons for not changing it, such as not liking the name or if the woman is published or well known professionally by her maiden name.

 

[NSFrame]

Ok, just to get one thing straight: it’s a very personal decision and I refuse to pass judgement on anyone one way or another.

That said, while convention is beginning to bend on this issue, it does not seem to be bending on the idea that a wedding should be an emasculating process. The name change is one of the few things that the groom “gets”, a sense of satisfaction in passing his name along. But if you look at the other factors of a wedding, they are almost entirely female-centric:

-It is the bride that gets the diamond ring, no equivalent for the groom. (often thousands of $$$$ out of pocket, before any guarantee of marriage)
-Groom has to plan the proposal, bride gets to sit back and pass judgment on whether it was a “good” one or not.
-Bride that gets the “bride-walk”
-The bride that gets the “oohs” and “ahhs”
-The bride now has the bachelorette party to match the groom’s bachelor party, but still gets the “bridal shower” whereas the groom does not.
-The bride is told it’s “her day” and often tells the man what to wear, gets to live out a princess fantasy.
-A recent innovation called the “groom’s cake” involves a small cake made to honor the groom, whereas the substantial cake that everyone actually likes is the “bridal cake.”

-The attendants are the “bridal” party, not the “groom party”
-If you go to any vendor showcases you’ll note that they are called “bridal showcases”, not “groom showcases”, and they cater unashamedly to the bride above all else.
-The bride gets congratulated for getting married, the groom gets scorned and ribbed
-All the trappings of a reception: the centerpieces, the flowers, the sappy music… all female-centric.

…and so on. Just my personal take on the matter. Anyway, the point being, if you intend to keep your own name, I would suggest making a SERIOUS effort not to emasculate the groom as is typically done in the wedding process. For again, the passage of his name is one of the only aspects of a wedding that is “for” the groom.

Um, you seem to have some sort of unresolved deep-seeded issues around weddings?

Btw, you are supposed to congratulate the groom on the wedding, not the bride. Apparently congratulating the bride is crass (I was told this by older relatives at my own wedding).

 

[Katie966]

Ok, just to get one thing straight: it’s a very personal decision and I refuse to pass judgement on anyone one way or another.

That said, while convention is beginning to bend on this issue, it does not seem to be bending on the idea that a wedding should be an emasculating process. The name change is one of the few things that the groom “gets”, a sense of satisfaction in passing his name along. But if you look at the other factors of a wedding, they are almost entirely female-centric:

-It is the bride that gets the diamond ring, no equivalent for the groom. (often thousands of $$$$ out of pocket, before any guarantee of marriage)
-Groom has to plan the proposal, bride gets to sit back and pass judgment on whether it was a “good” one or not.
-Bride that gets the “bride-walk”
-The bride that gets the “oohs” and “ahhs”
-The bride now has the bachelorette party to match the groom’s bachelor party, but still gets the “bridal shower” whereas the groom does not.
-The bride is told it’s “her day” and often tells the man what to wear, gets to live out a princess fantasy.
-A recent innovation called the “groom’s cake” involves a small cake made to honor the groom, whereas the substantial cake that everyone actually likes is the “bridal cake.”

-The attendants are the “bridal” party, not the “groom party”
-If you go to any vendor showcases you’ll note that they are called “bridal showcases”, not “groom showcases”, and they cater unashamedly to the bride above all else.
-The bride gets congratulated for getting married, the groom gets scorned and ribbed
-All the trappings of a reception: the centerpieces, the flowers, the sappy music… all female-centric.

…and so on. Just my personal take on the matter. Anyway, the point being, if you intend to keep your own name, I would suggest making a SERIOUS effort not to emasculate the groom as is typically done in the wedding process. For again, the passage of his name is one of the only aspects of a wedding that is “for” the groom.

First of all, not all of this is always true, and second of all, if someone is so focused on who “gets” what and making even some abstract score, they are not ready to be married. “You got to wear a nice dress, so you have to take my last name”? Sounds really immature. And has nothing to do with the issue.

As a few people have already pointed out, this is really a a personal or cultural issue, and not a moral one. Different cultures do things differently, and women often choose to keep their maiden names for a myriad of reasons, professional or otherwise. As long as her husband doesn’t care, I don’t see why it needs to be an issue. That being said, I do love having the same name as my husband, it feels more cohesive. But it’s a personal choice.

 

[chevalier]

If you hyphenate you still carry both of the surnames. As far as children go, you could agree to hyphenate their names or, say, give one of the sons your maiden name as his only surname, to keep the line alive. People have done all sorts of things, including cousins getting adopted and changing their surname, to keep a family line alive. Heh, I’m male with a hyphenate name but let’s not get into details.

I agree, however, that you’d need to be considerate with the fiancé’s feelings and pay some extra effort. Being sensitive to the name question yourself, you should have an easier time imagining that your husband-to-be also could. Also, since the typical way, the customary way is that the woman changes her name, as in we aren’t starting from a zero point from which it could go either way but this would definitely be an explicit decision, it would have the potential to send a message. You need to make sure the message your husband-to-be gets is not that his name is not good enough or that you’re going to have a different type of family.

I’m willing to change. It’s not that important. I’m more concerned that we all have the same name.

As much as I don’t really care for the substantive issue, I’d freak out if a woman asked me to take her name unless I knew in advance of some genealogical considerations (e.g. historical name, last of the line etc.). Whatever is going on in her mind, I’d be asking myself. For the record, you can both hyphenate. Men have occasionally done that, same as they have gladly taken some nice quarterings on the coat of arms when marrying particularly well (meaning last surviving heir of some family). Sometimes men have actually taken their wives’ names to speed up assimilation into the local culture if they were immigrants from afar.

 

[Contra_Mundum_1]

Before I got married I researched this a bit and realised that changing the surname is not a religious issue, but only a cultural one. The church has no rule about this and that fact was important to me, not what the trend of the day is. I never really wanted to change my surname and for the first 2 years of marriage I kept it. But then we had our first child and I started to feel the need to be included in the family name because the baby got my husband’s surname. I decided to add my husband’s surname to my own and now I am hyphenated. I like it this way and my husband has no problem with it.

 

[VeritasLuxMea]

Um, you seem to have some sort of unresolved deep-seeded issues around weddings?

I’m actually very sensitive to these things. I blame feminism! LOL just kidding. I also blame my parents for having such a darn good moral compass and being so egalitarian.

Btw, you are supposed to congratulate the groom on the wedding, not the bride. Apparently congratulating the bride is crass (I was told this by older relatives at my own wedding).

Yep, that is true. I should have phrased that better. I know there’s no other way to speak about this besides anecdote, but I think you see this in the culture as well: guys get a lot of grief for getting married. It’s that whole, “your best days are behind you/you’ve got a ball and chain now/happy wife, happy life/'Yes, dear”/‘Honey Do’" nonsense. Even among Catholics. One of our Deacons in our parish actually says a few of these lines himself… and several pre-cana couples, to boot! No joke! It’s bloody pervasive.

You know what I mean?

Katie966:

First of all, not all of this is always true,

None of it is always true. I would say it prevails in western culture.

and second of all, if someone is so focused on who “gets” what and making even some abstract score, they are not ready to be married. “You got to wear a nice dress, so you have to take my last name”? Sounds really immature. And has nothing to do with the issue.

As you might have predicted, I disagree completely.

Supposing, for example, that a spouse does not honor your birthday - but you did theirs. That is a sign of disrespect. It may be immature to nitpick, but I don’t think it’s immature to point out biased cultural assumptions - in my opinion, that includes both the name change thing and some of the stuff I’ve mentioned previously.

For example, the next time you’re aware that a male friend or family member intends to propose, tell him not to get her a ring. Then tell him if she protests to call her “immature.” Let’s see how that flies!!!

 

[Link0126]

Depends on the situation but for the most part no. It doesn’t lend itself to the true nature of marriage when husband and wife have different last names. Then, you need to decide on the name of the Children. If given the father’s name, the wife is the only one with a different name. Back in the day your last name used to be called your “family name”. A family should have the same last name.

 

[horselvr]

I am divorced and still go by me X’s last name until some legal issues are resolved.

Once everything is cleared I will go through the court system yet again, and have my name legally changed back to my real name. There really are very good reasons for a woman to have her own bank account and credit cards in only her name.

Everyone in the family is well aware that if I die before everything is resolved, they are to make sure my real name appears on my burial stone.

 

[anp1215]

Absolutely yes.

You aren’t property.

I dont like combined names. To me it seems indecisive. Most of my friends took the male’s last name. Three have taken the female’s last name as a family name. Two have combined by hyphen. A friend of a friend picked a last name that was common in both’s anscestry (citra 1700’s).

The real issue is the naming of children. It is hard, somewhat embarrising, for staff of school/church/restraunt to “guess” last names. There is a stigma still for families who have different last names.

I think there is a return to family last names as many of my friends come from broken homes where mom wanted to keep her last name. They see it as a sign of cohesion. I will personally be taking FH’s last name…I have 3 brothers, two already married, so my parents are well covered

Ok, just to get one thing straight: it’s a very personal decision and I refuse to pass judgement on anyone one way or another.

That said, while convention is beginning to bend on this issue, it does not seem to be bending on the idea that a wedding should be an emasculating process. The name change is one of the few things that the groom “gets”, a sense of satisfaction in passing his name along. But if you look at the other factors of a wedding, they are almost entirely female-centric:

-It is the bride that gets the diamond ring, no equivalent for the groom. (often thousands of $$$$ out of pocket, before any guarantee of marriage)
-Groom has to plan the proposal, bride gets to sit back and pass judgment on whether it was a “good” one or not.
-Bride that gets the “bride-walk”
-The bride that gets the “oohs” and “ahhs”
-The bride now has the bachelorette party to match the groom’s bachelor party, but still gets the “bridal shower” whereas the groom does not.
-The bride is told it’s “her day” and often tells the man what to wear, gets to live out a princess fantasy.
-A recent innovation called the “groom’s cake” involves a small cake made to honor the groom, whereas the substantial cake that everyone actually likes is the “bridal cake.”

-The attendants are the “bridal” party, not the “groom party”
-If you go to any vendor showcases you’ll note that they are called “bridal showcases”, not “groom showcases”, and they cater unashamedly to the bride above all else.
-The bride gets congratulated for getting married, the groom gets scorned and ribbed
-All the trappings of a reception: the centerpieces, the flowers, the sappy music… all female-centric.

…and so on. Just my personal take on the matter. Anyway, the point being, if you intend to keep your own name, I would suggest making a SERIOUS effort not to emasculate the groom as is typically done in the wedding process. For again, the passage of his name is one of the only aspects of a wedding that is “for” the groom.

I agree completely. Here’s another one: those cake toppers that have the bride dragging the groom along by his collar. Seen those? Blech.

 

[Luna_Lovecraft]

It doesn’t lend itself to the true nature of marriage when husband and wife have different last names.

How so?

Then, you need to decide on the name of the Children. If given the father’s name, the wife is the only one with a different name. Back in the day your last name used to be called your “family name”. A family should have the same last name.

Go back to what I wrote about Catholic cultures in Mexico and Spain (and for all I know, other places, too). Lots of Catholic families have family names that are all over the place to our eyes. I know they follow rules, but the end result is that mom, dad, and kids can all have different sir names. It doesn’t make them any less of a Catholic family, does it?

Luna