Changing a baby's name once adopted. Your opinions?

farm mom of 10

I have adopted three times from foster care. The first child, I moved his first name to his middle name, and gave him a new first name. The second and third time, we adopted a little girl, and a year later, her baby brother. I kept the little girl's name the same, because it was beautiful, and the middle name was the same as my husband's middle name. The next time, we had opened the adoption of our daughter to her extended family, and I hated to change the baby boy's name because of that. His middle name was his grandfathers, so what I did was add my own father's name to the middle, too. Now he has the same first name, and both his biological and his adoptive grandfather's names!

Independ"ant"

I think its odd and disrespectful both to the achild and the natural parents.

Its another obvious indicator that Paps are looking for replacement babies for the ones they cannot give birth to.

Xander

Your kid now. You decide.

Cute_Lion_Cub

I'd say that if the child is old enough to know their own name, then it should not be changed. That would get confusing for the child, and could end up with them having a feeling of lost identity when they get older.

If they are a baby though, or extremely young, I feel that it's ok to change the name because they will not remember their original name. When they got older though, I would tell them their original name, and help them understand their heritage.

anjlbeing

I think if the child is old enough to know and SPEAK his/her name, it should not be changed. If the child does not know their name-probably an infant, it would be ok.

Shannon

A baby can respond to his or her name at 4-6 months of age. Changing it afterward is confusing and wrong.

My husbands name was changed when he was adopted at age 14. To change a name at that age is to consider the child property. It is wrong. Children are not property. They are human beings. The responses like "it is yours now" is sick and appalling.

Changing a last name is legally required, therefore I have no opinion on that subject matter.

Kate

If the child is between the ages of 0 months and 1, it is easier to change the name as there less likely to be confusion, easier to adjust to.

If the child is between 1 and 5 generally the first name is kept, for although if they child goes by say Nikki and that was the legal first name, you could still can her Nikki as a nickname and use Nicole as the legal first name.

However, I find from about five up usually the first name stays the same as it would be quite confusing if you were to change the name.

But if you were adopting an older child, even when it comes to a last name often they are asked if they want to keep their biological last name or change it to the adoptive family's last name.

However, if I adopted myself, I would if it was an infant, change the first name if I did not truly like it or could not live with it and make that the middle name at the very least. I could never take away the name the child was given completely.

Myself, my biological parents named me Katie Jane, my adoptive parents loved Katie and Jane so they combined them into one word Katiejane, then added a middle name from my grandma.

Seb

Change it if the kid wants it too. Well if the adopted kid is something like 1 year old or 2 years old then itÂ´d be okay but if the kid is older... like already 9? then you better let it be.

roxyzfoxy4u2

All depends , if the baby is more then even a few weeks old, then i think it's counterproductive.Baby's respond to their names in the fisrt few weeks of life.

Miss Honesty

if they are too young to understand then i think its okay. but if they are old enough to know their name and know that it is being changed then that isnt very fair.

LOVE_SICK

its ok to do that because the baby is still young they wont know there first name

angie<3

um all i can say is if its a baby i guess its more ok than if they are a child because i was 6 years old and someone tried to change my name completely. that was pretty stupid and i was old enough to know my own name........

megurl

it would confuse the child

Gray

I would go for it if you are the adoptive parents, it is your baby. It is not about "ownership", but about belonging. If the baby's original name wasn't terrible maybe make it his/her middle name and also if the birth parents seemed super attached/involved (many birth parents do not give 2 craps about what they named their baby, and you are taking responsability for them you should have the honor of renaming your baby and letting the baby know you love them and cared enough to pick a special name out for THEM in YOUR family).

I had a friend named Colin whose birth parents named him Sasha Karma Dragon..... let's just say he was very happy his parents changed it!

paganmom

It depends, if the baby is 2 months old then he will not know that his name was changed. I the baby is 2 years old that could potentially be very confusing.

Randy B

The question was posted 27 minutes ago and already over 30 answers? Boy, some questions really strike a nerve.

Both of my daughters names were changed upon their adoption. Our oldest was changed from what we thought was a very ethnic name from overseas to one with ties to the country she was born in but with a more western sound. The youngest has essentially the same name however we shortened it just a bit, again because we didn't like the sound of what she was given (actually, any one of the three versions she was given by her birth mother at the hospital when she was still high and since she put even a fourth name down on the registry paperwork we didn't feel compelled to keep any of them but we did).

We only did this given the ages of the children when they came to us (8 months and 4 days respectively) and we wouldn't have done it officially if they were older. We would have kept them on the papers but just used something different as a "nick name".

If people agree with it...great. If people don't agree with it...thats fair. Its our call and we made it.

Emanon

I was adopted at 24 months and my parent's changed my name completely. 39 years later I have had no problems with it at all. I certainly don't remember being called "Jennifer Lynn" ever.

brooke

Well I wouldn't
It just wouldn't feel right to change a name that it's real parents gave it.
I would just leave it the way it is
:)

JoHn S.

I think it depends on the child's age, the relationship with the biological family and the child's wishes.

If the child is old enough to recognize their name, I think it's probably best not to change it.

If you have a relationship with the biological family, work with them for a name you all like.

If the child is old enough to express their desire, 'nuff said.

Opedial

I know this makes me unpopular...but....

We adopted three children ages 4,5,6. We debated this issue for a very long time. In the end we decided to alter all of the children's names.

The eldest child we kept his first name and gave him my husband's name as his middle name.

The other two we moved their original names to the middle names and gave them new first names.

We talked to them about it, and told them we woudl still call them their original names, no problem. They themselves decided to go by their new names. Maybe they were just trying to please us, but if anyone tries to call them by their "old" names, they correct them vehmently.

We will be respectful as they grow, and remind them we can call them whatever they like. We have all their old lifebooks and other and will never pretend that the names were not changed,,,,we are into opennedss and honesty.

For us and our kids, I think this really works for our family, but as they say time will tell and we shall see. If it was a mistake, we will own up to it, but right now I can tell you they love having their new names, they lvoe the feeling that we are a part of that process, as well as their old mom names part of them too. They have said this, that we are all one big family. (hopefully first mom will be able to be in the picture at some point)

So that's it, bring on the thumb's down, but this is what we did, and we think this works.

tish_part deux

self-serving. doesn't benefit the child.

ETA: i recently "adopted" *don't fall out of your chairs, folks* a BOXER PUPPY. i did NOT change his name, because this was the name he'd known and responded to. i only wish people showed that much respect for their human children.

DevonChaos

Never. A name is a gift from the natural mother, and the adoptive parents should do all they can to make the adoption for the child, not for themselves. The name should stay. Babies know their names much earlier on than most people think. They've already lost their family, at least let them keep the name.

To the answerer who said something about the baby having a "new life"... Ignorant! The baby is not a clean slate. They have a life and a heritage that is indelible. Changing the name isn't going to make the baby "belong" to the parents any more than keeping the name the same.

Band RULES!!!

I know a guy who has a different names than what his parents gave him-he doesn't like it because it's too unique, i don't know if he likes it at all, but he's adopted, and it's a secret what his name is, which i think means that he doesn't like his real name. I don't really think people have a right to change an odopted child's name, honestly even though i LOVE the name he goes by, it's so cool :)

kateiskate is getting married

I think the child should keep his or her name.

H******

I'm going to disagree with those who say it's no big deal to change a baby's name because they won't know.

I was adopted as a baby and I know! It meant alot to me to know that my adoptive parents honored and kept my given name.

If a child has a name, why change it? I think people who do that are claiming 'ownership' of their kids and headed for a fall; you don't own your children and the relationship between you will be closer if you honor who they are and where they come from, and that includes not dispensing with their name!

Anha S

I think that every effort should be made to keep the name (barring something insulting) whether the child is 2 months, 2 years, whatever. I think it is an important part of the child's history, and should be honoured.

å°é»ƒ

I'll break the monotomy here and say: why not *ADD* instead of *CHANGE*?

What's wrong with keeping their original name and adding an English one to it?

MamaKate is an Aunt!

I think in infant adoption (which I dislike) it is a slap in the face to the first parents if they have named the child. These things should be talked about and agreed on before the adoption is final. Even four people can agree on a couple of names - bands and law firms do it all the time.

In older children, I think it should be a child's choice to legally change their first and middle names. There is no reason why APs can't call a child by whatever name or nickname they choose while keeping at least a part of the child's original name.

Re-naming a child just because you can smacks of ownership to me - unless a child has a truly horrid name that could be construed in a negative way and cause harm to the child.

JMHO.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: