Thoughts on hyphenating last names

[Sursumcorda1]

Years ago, I heard the wife of a Mr. “X” say, “I’ve had to work very hard to be Mrs. “X””. I decided that was going to be my marriage intention as a good wife, too.

 

[JulianN]

Years ago, I heard the wife of a Mr. “X” say, “I’ve had to work very hard to be Mrs. “X””. I decided that was going to be my marriage intention as a good wife, too.

Being a good wife does not mean taking the husband’s name, though. For much of the world, it’s not even a cultural norm.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Being a good wife does not mean taking the husband’s name, though. For much of the world, it’s not even a cultural norm.

There are also practical reasons for not doing it when a wife has established all kinds of credit, job history, professional licenses, security clearances, bank accounts, etc in her own name. It’s a significant administrative headache to change all that over to a new legal name. That is also one reason we thought hyphenated names were a bad idea as it just puts administrative burden on two people and can have negative effects on credit history.

 

[Psalm30]

Years ago, I heard the wife of a Mr. “X” say, “I’ve had to work very hard to be Mrs. “X””. I decided that was going to be my marriage intention as a good wife, too.

I think it depends on what is meant here by “work hard”. Yes, it takes a certain amount of effort to be a good wife/mother, but no one should have to “work hard” to earn the love and acceptance of their spouse. We are to accept the person we marry—flaws and all— without expecting them to change or trying to make them change. If there is an aspect about them we can’t live with, we shouldn’t marry them.

 

[Legend]

If some of you are speaking about the ‘Red Pill’ or ‘Men’s rights Movement’ most of that is just about keeping women in their place, and maintaining the status quo-of the 1940s or '50’s, that is. They bring up some good points about Men being considered expendable, and mothers having rights over fathers, as in being able whether to give their children up for adoption, but when asked what should be done about it, just trail off, and say women should be happy with what they have.

A filmed documentary, by a former feminist is available for watching free on YouTube, with ads. All I could really see is men wanting to return to ‘the good old days.’ Yes, a Christian man should be the spiritual leader of his family, but that does not mean that he can decide what his wife (fiancée in this case)should do, without discussing it. And that sounds like that is this man’s mindset. And these ‘Men’s Rights’ groups would just feed his desire to control and not discuss things. If he’s bothered by hyphenated surnames, or his wife keeping, or discarding her birth name, that’s something that should be discussed! He has no right to order her around.

 

[PetraG]

Here’s the thing:

a) This is the kind of thing that would call for marriage counselling, if you were married.
b) I have known quite a few couples who had problems serious enough to need real marriage counselling before marriage (as opposed to agreeing to solicit an outside view or two) and I have never known a marriage that worked out well when there was a need for marriage counselling before the marriage ever took place. That is the time when people tend to be the most willing to give up their own desires in order to accommodate the person with whom they wish to spend a lifetime. It is the time when we are the most naturally and happily other-centered and the least automatically self-centered.

In other words: Marital discord usually does not get better, and premarital discord especially does not tend to get better.

If you are choosing this man, you are choosing a husband who not only thinks that he is the one and only decision-maker in your marriage, but also one who thinks that taking your thoughts and feelings into account is something that is subordinate to his thoughts and feelings. He’s not “putting his foot down” for divine law, here. He’s “putting his foot down” on your name–what people in the world and even what those in your workplace call you. A decision hardly gets more personal to you and more specific to you than that. There aren’t any that you will live with every day and everywhere you go more than that, either.

He’s demanding that you obey him on what is, in the end, a morally-neutral decision. You can expect he will do the same for child-rearing decisions, your professional decisions (that is, both yours and his own), where you live, how you spend your money and everything else that you decide as a couple: that is, your point of view will be relevant only when he isn’t arbitrarily placing his point of view in first place.

I agree with those who suggest you find someone who has a more mature view of marriage, and specifically one who is a lot less self-centered and self-important. If you go ahead, just realize that there is almost no chance that this will get better. Take it or leave it, because it is what you’re going to get.

 

[PetraG]

When you’re married, you will experience many stressors. You need to be able to consider yourself on the same team, pulling together. And you need to be able to resolve disagreements without lingering resentment. If you are determined to marry, I hope you will work seriously on this skill.

Pretending that you’re on the same team and that you respect and hold each other in the same dignity does not magically make that so. The work of marriage takes two working together, not just one enduring the whims of the other.

The passage in Ephesians giving direction to wives and husbands starts this way:
Be subordinate to one another out of reverence for Christ. Eph. 5:21

 

[heidi_storage]

That verse doesn’t specifically apply to vv 22 and following. And if a prospective husband were writing in, I’d tell him to love his wife as Christ loves the church. But if submitting to one’s husband is wrong then quite a bit of the Bible is wrong.

ETA: People should be careful when choosing a spouse. Your post about marital discord is quite right.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

it takes a certain amount of effort to be a good wife/mother, but no one should have to “work hard” to earn the love and acceptance of their spouse.

My personal view is that if a guy is the type who’d make you “work hard” to be his spouse, best to find another guy who tries to make your life as easy as he can (and you do the same for him).

Life is difficult enough and throws enough hard work at you just on its own, without your spouse adding to the pile with expectations of you needing to work hard to earn love or a “position” as “spouse of X”.

 

[heidi_storage]

Yes, a spouse should be secure in marriage and not fear that the other person is going to do something awful, withdraw love, or threaten to leave when conflict arises. Who is going to have our back, if not our husband or wife?

Hey OP: Still there?

 

[TMFLM]

I’m still here, just overwhelmed by all of the responses. I see a lot of good advice and I appreciate everyone’s opinions. I’m really conflicted about what I should do. He’s very good to me and doesn’t control our relationship any other time but this. Our priest tells me that I should defer this decision to him but that doesn’t feel right to me. I’m starting to think that I should offer to make my last name a second middle name and take his as my last. I need to keep praying on it.

 

[PetraG]

That verse doesn’t specifically apply to vv 22 and following.

And you know this…how?

 

[PetraG]

I’m still here, just overwhelmed by all of the responses. I see a lot of good advice and I appreciate everyone’s opinions. I’m really conflicted about what I should do. He’s very good to me and doesn’t control our relationship any other time but this.

OK… in what reasonably big decision has he decided to do what he does not personally want to do because he knows it would please you? I don’t know what that might be, but we’re talking things like going to the 10:30 Mass you like instead of the 8:30 Mass he likes or arranging Christmas around your family instead of around his or things like that.

Being “good to you” when it doesn’t mean doing something that he’s not all that keen to do when his personal preferences are taken into account is what we’re talking about. Looking at the things you want and then choosing the ones he also likes and making a gift of that? That’s not what we’re talking about.

Oh, and as someone married to a physician for a very long time, I would ask whether your intended has the attitude that says “what she does is what we do.” Does he see supporting you in your work as part of his marital vocation? If your vocation as a physician is something that competes with your relationship with him or is in some little bubble over there that he “leaves you alone about” rather being something that he actively supports, be very wary about that. (Female physicians have a markedly higher divorce rate than male physicians for a reason.)

Also, how did your Engaged Encounter go? If you have not been on one, honestly, having been through one, I’d say it is far better to go before the invitations are ordered than afterwards. The general effect is to open all the cans of worms and to get a clear view of where couples agree and where they have things to work out. In your case, you really need to go in a time frame where deciding not to go through with the marriage is not some dramatic break-up that every relative and friend you have will find a shock.

Our priest tells me that I should defer this decision to him but that doesn’t feel right to me. I’m starting to think that I should offer to make my last name a second middle name and take his as my last. I need to keep praying on it.

This raises a red flag with me, as well: I mean a priest telling a couple how they ought to work out their decisions as a couple when there is not a moral question involved. That is unusual. It really does not matter what name you go by. It matters a lot that you have satisfied yourself that the two of you can work out real conflicts in a way that feels acceptable to you. If your husband’s idea of conflict resolution is that he makes the decisions and you keep your mouth shut and knuckle under to what he dictates, that is not going to work. (I’d say “unless it works for you,” but honestly, that’s just a self-centered attitude in a husband.)

You do not have that, or at least not yet, and you know it. You sense that you should really examine that absence. You are absolutely correct.

 

[PetraG]

PS You say you need to pray about this, and that is very good. What did your intended say crossed his heart when he prayed about it? Does he even think this could be a matter about which he might need to approach God and ask if he ought to give in? Why or why not? When he is faced with something he really doesn’t want to do, does he have any habit of praying about it or reflecting on the situation as something that might call for a sacrifice from him?

That verse doesn’t specifically apply to vv 22 and following. And if a prospective husband were writing in, I’d tell him to love his wife as Christ loves the church. But if submitting to one’s husband is wrong then quite a bit of the Bible is wrong.

That’s the question: that is, whether this is a man who believes that laying down arbitrary things he wants is part of his sacrificial position within the marriage. It does not work to give decision-making for a couple to a man who makes decisions in a self-centered manner. Our Lord did not do that. No, His Mother came to him about the wine situation at a wedding, his first response was “Woman, how does your concern affect me? My hour has not yet come,” and yet when she sent the servants to do whatever he told them to do, he took care of the situation generously.

 

[JulianN]

This raises a red flag with me, as well: I mean a priest telling a couple how they ought to work out their decisions as a couple when there is not a moral question involved. That is unusual

Yes, that’s very odd indeed. Why would a priest suggest something like that?

 

[heidi_storage]

The OP has written nothing that makes me think that he’s someone I would marry or someone I’d encourage my sister or daughter to marry. If she goes ahead and marries him, though, she should be a good wife to him–regardless of whether he’s a good husband.

 

[PetraG]

The OP has written nothing that makes me think that he’s someone I would marry or someone I’d encourage my sister or daughter to marry. If she goes ahead and marries him, though, she should be a good wife to him–regardless of whether he’s a good husband.

Yes, I think she needs to decide if his brand of decision-making is something she wants to submit to for a lifetime. He’s been very open; what she sees is what she’s going to get. She needs to avoid rationalizing this as an isolated incident. This won’t be the last time. I would highly doubt that her intended would ever claim that it is. She needs to ask herself if she is OK with that.

 

[Irishmom2]

I’m starting to think that I should offer to make my last name a second middle name and take his as my last.

Is that really all you got out of all of these posts?
I think maybe you should speak to a counselor to sort out your feelings and consider what everyone is telling you. Use it as a second opinion.

 

[JMMJ]

tried arguing my side but he said I “need to obey” him and that he’s “putting his foot down” on this subject.

You are a doctor and you put up with this?

 

[PetraG]

You are a doctor and you put up with this?

I don’t think there is any difference between what a physician ought to put up with and what somebody who empties the trash cans at the hospital ought to put up with. The dignity of a wife and the respect her husband has for her insights and feelings has nothing to do with what she does for a salary or if she does anything for a salary. (That is not to say that the ability and dedication required to get into medical school isn’t testimony to the OP’s ability to make reasoned decisions.)