I really need opinions from people who will read this and think about if prior to answering. Please, no off the wall answers, as they may change affect the results.
Do you think/feel that the child of an unmarried couple should have the mother's or the father's last name
(Assuming he was there for the mother and the child throughout the pregnancy and during labor and delivery and was financially and emotionally attatched and supportive)...
If they have broken up at time of birth?
If they are together at time of birth?
2007-08-29 06:09:17 · 22 answers · asked by Baby8Grl2000 3 in Pregnancy & Parenting ➔ Parenting
Ok... I can see this needs a little more explaination.
The mother and father both will be raising the child and the father will be the only one working to support the child. He has offered to give 50% + of his earnings for the baby alone. He has been and plans to be there for the child no matter what. In addition, his family has been more than supportive and helped as much, if not, more than the mother's family.
I am asking that you assume, regardless of the parents state with each other, that the father is going to do whatever he is supposed to as a father for his child.
2007-08-29 07:14:10 · update #1
I love how everyone assumes I am asking about me. On the contrary I am married and my child does have my husbands last name.
I am the Aunt of the child and just wanted some feedback outside of the loop.
My child is 2 months today and I have it all too freshly in my mind how pregnancy, labor and delivery can be. It takes 2 to make a baby and if you willingly make a baby without being married than I don't believe it should be a factor in the thought proccess. They weren't married when they started trying, the father took the step of proposing and was accepted and niether one of them pushed a wedding date and now after the baby is born
2007-08-29 07:56:45 · update #2
If I, being the mother, had any doubt in my mind that the father would not be there for my child, I would say my last name. But if he had been supportive and I believed he would continue to be, regardless of if we were together or not, I would give the child his last name.
2007-08-29 06:16:53 · answer #1 · answered by Heather A 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I think that the parents should consider how the active the father would be in the child's life. I have a friend who has her father's name, because he has been there from day one, even though he and her mother weren't even dating at the time she was born.
However, it is often easier to give the child the name of the custodial parent, simply because most of society will assume mother and child (or father and child) share the same last name. If the kid lives with mom, but is named after a guy he's never actually even met, it can be confusing for no good reason.
What I really have a problem with, though, are the women who will give their child their name instead of the dad's, then change it a few times along the way, based on whoever she is married to at any given time. I have a cousin who has done this, and I don't think its right.
Basically, I don't think there's really a simple answer here. But no, I would not automatically give the child the father's last name just because he's the father. It's just tradition, and if you cared about tradition that much, it's a fair argument to say that you (or whoever the mom is, I use "you" in the collective sense) would share a last name with the father as well, ya know?
Whatever works for you. I just think all parties who stand a risk of feeling hurt over this should be considered. If the father and mother aren't married, and aren't together, but the dad is an active dad and would be hurt that the child didn't have his name, I don't think that's right. In a case like that, I would use a hyphenated name.
2007-08-29 06:59:52 · answer #2 · answered by CrazyChick 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
for social security purposes, the child should have the father's last name.
if anything were to happen to the father of the child, if there is no legal documentation attaching him to the child, the child will not receive any benfits as a result of the father's misfortune.
so, wheter the mother and father are together or not, the child needs the father's last name, because there will never be a misconception of who the mother is. after all, the child came out of her womb, so there's no way that can be denied. therfore, if something misfortunate happens to the mother, the child will not have difficulty collecting social security benefits.
God Bless.
p.s. if the parents are not together, there is always the issue of child support. it is an ugly issue, but probably a smoother ride if the child has the father's last name - easier to look up in computer systems, easier to justify, etc.
2007-08-29 06:32:16 · answer #3 · answered by EM 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Every couple is different. I think that the answer will be different for each couple.
Honestly, though, if the mother will be raising the child then it will be easier for the child if he or she has the same last name as the mother. This is true whether or not the child's parents are married at the time of birth.
2007-08-29 06:29:33 · answer #4 · answered by Sheila 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think the child should have the mother's last name.
95% of unmarried couples split up before the child starts school. It costs a lot and requires the father's approval to change the child's name to his/her mother's surname.
If there isn't enough committment to marry before the child is born, why create more 'unnecessary paperwork.'
2007-08-29 06:16:35 · answer #5 · answered by CarbonDated 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If I were in any of those positions, I would give the child my last name. I have to be married in order for my child to have the father's last name. But that's just me~ people should do whatever they feel is best.
2007-08-29 06:17:44 · answer #6 · answered by Proud mother! 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I personally think that the child should have the father's last name regardless of whether he broke up with the mother or not. The father is the head of the household regardless of whether he and the mother are together.
2007-08-29 14:03:21 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
If the father is there from the get go than the baby should have his last name.
If he decides that he is not going to be there for the baby then the baby should have the mother's last name.
My baby sister has my Mom's last name because her dad wasn't around. He left my Mom after he found out she was pregnant. He didn't claim my sister until she got 2 years old after the DNA told him that she was his.
2007-08-29 07:41:11 · answer #8 · answered by Calico L 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I myself had a daughter out of wedlock, her father was there through everything and she does have his last name. I think it all depends on how the parents feel about it and more importantly the mother. If they are broken up and the mother wants the child to have her last name then thats her choice.
2007-08-29 06:19:24 · answer #9 · answered by Amber 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
My daughter received my last name since me and her father wasn't together at the time of her birth. We are married now but didn't get married till she was 8, she still has my madien name b/c she doesn't want to change her name. Since we are married now the child I'm pregnant with now will have his name.
If we had been togehter at her birth but not married I would hyphenate the last two names
2007-08-29 10:48:16 · answer #10 · answered by his wife 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋