Mini has a double barrelled name. It doesn’t make her posh but it does mean that in the future, she will need a slightly longer space to fill out her surname on forms. Papa was against this dual appellation. He, being male, had wanted his surname alone to extend to his daughter. Most family members (on both sides and of both sexes I might add) were of the same opinion.
It’s a commonly held opinion I find, that children these days continue to be given the role of carrying on their father’s name, whether their parents are married or not. Not one of my female friends who have carried a baby for nine long months and then endured the agony of labour have allowed their surname to be on the birth cert of their child. Why is it that women seem to be so against this? Why do we continue to be so willing to discard our own name, one that has identified us for 20, 30, 40 years and embrace that of another?
|This passport has how many names on it??|
Personally I don’t see anything wrong with a double barrelled surname. It can be considered cumbersome but I think there’s something nice about seeing the history of both parents in the combined surname-two families coming together to create a new one. Of course this does to lead to possible linguistic challenges down the line-what if Mini falls in love with a similarly two-fold monikered individual-would their children then be lumbered with a quadruple surname? Surely that would be bordering on child abuse. Unless you take the example in Spain where everyone has a double barrelled surname and children are given the first surnames of both parents, e.g. Hector, the son of Juan Fernandez Banderes and Maria Iglasias Gomez would be Hector Fernandez Iglasias.
There is another solution to this parenting conundrum. Come up with a brand new surname for the whole family. One that everyone can enjoy. Mini Skywalker anyone?