Surname change after adoption.

[Anonymous]

What would be the point of keeping his biological father’s last name? Who benefits from that? Wouldn’t it be easier on the boy to have the same name as his new dad? He’s only six.

[Anonymous]

I was adopted by my beloved stepfather at a very early age and loved my adoptive father (RIP) very much and was closer to him than I ever was to my bio dad. I agreed to be adopted but I never felt “at home” with his name and when I became an adult I opted to return to my birth name. I would advocate for whatever name your DS feels “at home” with. For me that involved a wider family/clan and cultural identity than simply the father figure involved. Your DS might have different criteria for what that means to him. Best wishes to your family!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All of our adopted children had the last names of their biological parents before we adopted them. I honestly don’t see how this is different. But either choice is fine, OP. I’m just voting for all taking your new husband’s name at the adoption (not the wedding).

Well in one case the biological parent is someone who you were married to and chose to conceive this child with. In the other case they’re essentially strangers who you have no preexisting connection or loyalty to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of our adopted children had the last names of their biological parents before we adopted them. I honestly don’t see how this is different. But either choice is fine, OP. I’m just voting for all taking your new husband’s name at the adoption (not the wedding).

Well in one case the biological parent is someone who you were married to and chose to conceive this child with. In the other case they’re essentially strangers who you have no preexisting connection or loyalty to.

DP. I don’t see it as a loyalty issue to either father, biological or adopted. My feeling is that it would be better for the boy to have his adopted father’s last name for practical and bonding reasons.

[Anonymous]

My children have my name. I birthed them, I raise them. Are women still chattel? There is no reason for a woman to take her partner's name. There is no reason for a child to receive the father's name.

[Anonymous]

OP, I personally think you shouldn’t change your sons name. But mostly wanted to say how sorry I am for your devastating loss and happy that you have found love.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My children have my name. I birthed them, I raise them. Are women still chattel? There is no reason for a woman to take her partner's name. There is no reason for a child to receive the father's name.

That train has left the station, though. OP already took her deceased first husband's last name, and the child also has that name.

In this case, it's trickier because OP's choices are:

1) Revert to her birth name, leave son's name as is to honor bio dad

2) Revert to her birth name, change son's name to her birth name as well

3) Switch to new husband's name, leave son's name as bio dad

4) Switch to new husband's name, change son's name as well

If it were me, personally, I'd choose Option 1. Yes, having 3 names in a family is annoying but it's not the end of the world in 2022. However, I am aware of how hard blended families are, so I'd be hedging against a future divorce and not wanting yet another name change down the line.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My children have my name. I birthed them, I raise them. Are women still chattel? There is no reason for a woman to take her partner's name. There is no reason for a child to receive the father's name.

Eh… okay. Not the point if the issue here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, I personally think you shouldn’t change your sons name. But mostly wanted to say how sorry I am for your devastating loss and happy that you have found love.

+1.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Your new husband can take your and your son's last name. You can all change your last names to something different. Or everybody keeps their last name.

This, I’d you want everyone to have the same last name, new DH can change his surname. Anything else is Effeed Upppp

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What would be the point of keeping his biological father’s last name? Who benefits from that? Wouldn’t it be easier on the boy to have the same name as his new dad? He’s only six.

His father’s family and extended kin did not die with his father. He has a family , a heritage, and a family history. The befit is that it is his identity. No one should stop himnif who he is just because his mother is in a new relationship.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of our adopted children had the last names of their biological parents before we adopted them. I honestly don’t see how this is different. But either choice is fine, OP. I’m just voting for all taking your new husband’s name at the adoption (not the wedding).

Well in one case the biological parent is someone who you were married to and chose to conceive this child with. In the other case they’re essentially strangers who you have no preexisting connection or loyalty to.

DP. I don’t see it as a loyalty issue to either father, biological or adopted. My feeling is that it would be better for the boy to have his adopted father’s last name for practical and bonding reasons.

Plenty of kids don't have a parents last name and seem to bond fine. You should not erase his dad. It will make things worse rather than better. This is how adoptions fail.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My children have my name. I birthed them, I raise them. Are women still chattel? There is no reason for a woman to take her partner's name. There is no reason for a child to receive the father's name.

That train has left the station, though. OP already took her deceased first husband's last name, and the child also has that name.

In this case, it's trickier because OP's choices are:

1) Revert to her birth name, leave son's name as is to honor bio dad

2) Revert to her birth name, change son's name to her birth name as well

3) Switch to new husband's name, leave son's name as bio dad

4) Switch to new husband's name, change son's name as well

If it were me, personally, I'd choose Option 1. Yes, having 3 names in a family is annoying but it's not the end of the world in 2022. However, I am aware of how hard blended families are, so I'd be hedging against a future divorce and not wanting yet another name change down the line.

No, the other option is to have the child have two last names, no hyphen or two middle names.

[Anonymous]

You were born Jane Doe
Married your child father and became John Smith
Your child is Jack Smith
You are now engaged to Jeff Johnson
Jeff Johnson wants to adopt your child
So why not go by Jane Smith Johnson or Jane Smith-Johnson and have your son go by Jack Smith Johnson or Jack Smith-Johnson?
Fiancé goes by Jeff Johnson, Jeff Smith Johnson, or Jeff Smith-Johnson as well.

Viola!

[Anonymous]

Makes sense for new DH to change his name to OP's and son's name. Is new DH so superior he can't do that?