How come naming your baby is not child abuse?

[Undesired Walrus]

It seems to me, that going by the logic of calling your baby, 'A Muslim baby' or a 'Christian baby', giving him a name that is the sole signifier of what he/she is, is surely child abuse?

A person can always fall out with religion, they don't have to sign documents to be free of it.

A person has to do documents to change their name, and if they have a surname changed, they have to feel guilty because of their parents??

[quixotecoyote]

I think you're trying to be sarcastic, but I'd actually agree with you.

I'd think it would be healthy if a name change was a part of the coming-of-age process. In the meantime, you have to call them something.

[Skeptical Greg]

I think you're trying to be sarcastic, but I'd actually agree with you.

I'd think it would be healthy if a name change was a part of the coming-of-age process. In the meantime, you have to call them something.

Wouldn't that be confusing to have all these kids running around named Something ?:D

[Mid]

Wouldn't that be confusing to have all these kids running around named Something ?:D

How about child 1, 2 etc. Also when child 1 picks a name child 2 could become child 1 so they would feel a bit special too :D

[skeptifem]

i do feel that saying a kid is a certain religion is incorrect- though not abusive. so i dont think its quite the same.

[Safe-Keeper]

While I realize the OP was probably sarcasm, he's not far off. I think it could actually be a good idea to give kids generic first names based on certain attributes and conditions (the way Icelanders give their kids last names based on set rules), for then to have them choose their own names come their coming of age. I wouldn't dislike it at all.

The only problem is that when your coming of age comes around, you've usually gotten used to your name to the degree where you want to just hold on to it. I've always been keen on changing names from Øyvind to Odin (an actual Norwegian name - 1 100 Norsemen currently are named Odin (http://www.norskenavn.no/navn.php?id=632&sok=odin&alle=0)), but never wanted it enough to discard my current name. If I didn't have a real name to begin with, just a placeholder name, it'd have been a lot easier.

So yes, the idea has merit.

A person has to do documents to change their name, and if they have a surname changed, they have to feel guilty because of their parents??This holds true for religion, too. First of all, certain organized religions can be hard to leave. Certain churches require you to write a written statement explaining why you're no longer believing in their version of whatever mythology they adhere to, and that's nothing compared to the Icelandic state church, which is supposedly a nightmare to get out of without drowning in bureaucracy (sp.?). There's a reason why more than 80% of Icelanders are members of the State Lutheran Church even though religion in the country is virtually gone.

And quite often, quitting a certain faith can be very troublesome if you have parents who are ardent believers. So no difference there.

[Ryokan]

A person can always fall out with religion, they don't have to sign documents to be free of it.

I did.

I have a piece of paper, signed by the local pastor, as proof that I'm not a Christian. Wish I had a scanner so I could show it.

[Tricky]

Don't be silly. According to a prominant Danish skeptic who has never been proved wrong, newborn babies are atheist (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=86183).

[Ryokan]

Don't be silly. According to a prominant Danish skeptic who has never been proved wrong, newborn babies are atheist (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=86183).

Not in Norway they aren't, and I have a piece of paper that proves that as well :p

ETA:

The pieces of paper I'm talking about is 1) a certificate that shows I have renounced my membership of the state church, signed by the local pastor and 2) a baptism certificate, used as evidence that I exist, also signed by the local pastor.

[DanishDynamite]

Not in Norway they aren't, and I have a piece of paper that proves that as well :p
I'm curious. What paper are you refering to?

[Ryokan]

I'm curious. What paper are you refering to?

See my edit above.

[Tearout]

Names are also associated with ethnic background and gender. Some people may find that objectionable as well.

Perhaps a neutral system of serial numbers would be more functional.

[DanishDynamite]

See my edit above.
Ok, but those pieces of paper only say something about the influence of the state religion in the issuance of certain state documents, and nothing about whether you were born an atheist or not. :)

[Ryokan]

Ok, but those pieces of paper only say something about the influence of the state religion in the issuance of certain state documents, and nothing about whether you were born an atheist or not. :)

Of course. I wasn't being entirely serious. Although my baptism certificate does say I was a Christian a short time after I was born.

I only keep that paper around because, if you lose all forms of identification, you can use it and a family member to get a new one.

[slingblade]

Too busy to post a linky, but I just read an article about stupid names being illegal in at least one other country...and if you try to name your kid something outrageous* here in the U.S., you can, sometimes, be made to change it.

Sorry, it's horrible, but all I have at the moment is that I've read of such incidents in the news. I'll try to get articles.

EVIDENCES?!?!

(*outrageous being solely someone's opinion, who has the power to make that opinion matter.)

[articulett]

I think you're trying to be sarcastic, but I'd actually agree with you.

I'd think it would be healthy if a name change was a part of the coming-of-age process. In the meantime, you have to call them something.

I remember names I liked from The Cat and The Hat--

"Thing One" and "Thing Two"
(not to mention "Sam I am")

[Foster Zygote]

It aint abuse unless you name a boy "Sue".

[Wolfman]

In the past in China, there actually was a tendency to refer to children simply as "first son", "second daughter", etc. This was even more common with female children, some of whom might never have a name (or at least not one that was used)...they'd simply change from being called "third daughter" to "second wife".

And just last week, the newspapers printed a story about a Chinese couple who want to name their child "@". The Chinese gov't has actually restricted legal names to a specific set of Chinese characters, and excluded almost everything else, but had failed to specifically exclude certain characters on the standard keyboard.

Anyway, in modern China it is quite common for Chinese to change their names when they reach adulthood. They'll generally retain their family name, but will choose a given name that they feel is more suitable to their situation and/or their goals. And whereas in a country like Canada, where parents might get upset over their children changing their names (seeing it as a form of rejection and/or rebellion), in China there is usually little fuss about this.

[quixotecoyote]

In the past in China, there actually was a tendency to refer to children simply as "first son", "second daughter", etc. This was even more common with female children, some of whom might never have a name (or at least not one that was used)...they'd simply change from being called "third daughter" to "second wife".

And just last week, the newspapers printed a story about a Chinese couple who want to name their child "@". The Chinese gov't has actually restricted legal names to a specific set of Chinese characters, and excluded almost everything else, but had failed to specifically exclude certain characters on the standard keyboard.

Anyway, in modern China it is quite common for Chinese to change their names when they reach adulthood. They'll generally retain their family name, but will choose a given name that they feel is more suitable to their situation and/or their goals. And whereas in a country like Canada, where parents might get upset over their children changing their names (seeing it as a form of rejection and/or rebellion), in China there is usually little fuss about this.

See, I thought about mentioning China as I had a half-remembered concept of 'milk-names', but when i checked wikipedia, it told me that after a short period with a temporary name the permanent name was chosen by the parents and grandparents.

[Wolfman]

See, I thought about mentioning China as I had a half-remembered concept of 'milk-names', but when i checked wikipedia, it told me that after a short period with a temporary name the permanent name was chosen by the parents and grandparents.
In pre-Communist China, parents would choose names for all their children, but often (particularly in the case of female children) not use them. I have Chinese friends whose grandmother passed away three years ago. It wasn't until she died that they realized that nobody in the family -- her children, her grandchildren, or even her own husband -- knew what her name was.

In modern China, that is no longer the case. But it is relatively common for a person to have two or three names that are used by different people. One will be the name used by family members and close friends; another used with the general public; another the name they choose for themselves when they become adults; etc.

[Giraffe107]

I actually think the German policy of only being able to name your child a name out of an official 'name book' is a good idea. There are too many kids called ridiculous things, like 'Kangaroo Starship Trooper' (yes a real name), 'Anzac Day' (yes another real name) or anything celebrities call their kids nowadays. This in my opinion child abuse.

[skeptifem]

I actually think the German policy of only being able to name your child a name out of an official 'name book' is a good idea. There are too many kids called ridiculous things, like 'Kangaroo Starship Trooper' (yes a real name), 'Anzac Day' (yes another real name) or anything celebrities call their kids nowadays. This in my opinion child abuse.


who cares what other people name their kids?? there is no way that could ever be child abuse.

[Undesired Walrus]

who cares what other people name their kids?? there is no way that could ever be child abuse.

why not?

[bjornart]

who cares what other people name their kids?? there is no way that could ever be child abuse.

Even if someone named their baby girl from the list of banned words refering to the female genitalia?

[Big Les]

It aint abuse unless you name a boy "Sue".

:D

For what it's worth, I object to both my biblical given name, and the fact that I was baptised.

Mostly because both my parents were atheists...

Go figure.

[hgc]

How about child 1, 2 etc. Also when child 1 picks a name child 2 could become child 1 so they would feel a bit special too :D


Child 1, meet Logan 5.

[baron]

It aint abuse unless you name a boy "Sue".

Or Shirley - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shirley_Crabtree

[Scott Haley]

I've read about court cases in France and New Zealand in which parents were denied the right to give their children weird names. In France they like people to name their kids after Roman Catholic saints, if the parents are of Christian descent. A couple was denied the right to name their child "Zebedee," a biblical name, but not, I assume, a saint recognized by the Roman Catholic church.

Pat and Sheena Wheaton of New Zealand wanted to name their son "4real" (spelled like that) but were denied that by the courts, and plan B is to name their son "Superman." I don't know whether the courts will allow that one.

--Scott

[TragicMonkey]

People should be able to name their kid whatever they want.

And the kid should be able to change his name to whatever he wants.

So if crazy parents name their kid Zebedee Harmonicus Sunshine, he can change it to Edward Andrew Blake. And if boring parents name their kid Mary Margaret Jones she can change it to Xanthella Pikachu Sycorax.

I do not like the idea of the government telling the people what are acceptable names.

[galnoir]

Was it last year that a couple wanted to name their baby Espn, since that was their favorite network?

My husband then suggested we name our yet-unborn child PeBuS.

[BlackCat]

Anyway, in modern China it is quite common for Chinese to change their names when they reach adulthood. They'll generally retain their family name, but will choose a given name that they feel is more suitable to their situation and/or their goals. And whereas in a country like Canada, where parents might get upset over their children changing their names (seeing it as a form of rejection and/or rebellion), in China there is usually little fuss about this.
Ha ha, this is awesome. I changed my name when I was 18. (From a very common name to a less common one, because I hated its commonness.) Although I'm in the US, I can relate to parents getting upset. My father never quite got over my name change (although I have other problems with him), but my mother accepted it quite readily, and even commented that she wished she had my courage, because she, too, hates her name.

I think more people should change their name if they want to. For me, it was empowering to do so, although I admit bias because I hated my given name.

[Orphia Nay]

Some people round these parts named their boys "Archibald" and "Messiah". That always makes me chuckle. I hope the boys do too.

[This Guy]

I think George Foreman had the right idea. Just name them all the same thing. Don't have to worry about calling one the wrong one's name then!

"Oh and yes, the boys are all named George. There is: George Jr., George III, George IV, George V, George VI" (http://www.georgeforeman.com/familyman.html)

I know my Mom would run down the list until she hit the right name when yelling at us.

I was Tommy.., Bill.., Mike! She rarely called me Ruth, thankfully.

[Flo]

I've read about court cases in France and New Zealand in which parents were denied the right to give their children weird names. In France they like people to name their kids after Roman Catholic saints, if the parents are of Christian descent. A couple was denied the right to name their child "Zebedee," a biblical name, but not, I assume, a saint recognized by the Roman Catholic church.

Pat and Sheena Wheaton of New Zealand wanted to name their son "4real" (spelled like that) but were denied that by the courts, and plan B is to name their son "Superman." I don't know whether the courts will allow that one.

--Scott


In France, the law has been changed in 1993 (law n° 93-22 of 8 January 1993) and there's no limitation to the names that can be chosen by the parents. However, should this name be considered contrary to the interests of the child (typically a name that can reasonnably be expected to lead to ridicule, rude puns, or association with a particularly horrible criminal, etc.), the official in charge of registering births declarations can signal it to the state prosecutor who can then contest the parents' choice into court.

In most of the very obvious cases ("Hitler", father so clearly drunk that he doesn't realise the joke isn't that funny and he'll regret it the next day, etc.),
the court will force a change of name, if it goes that far. In less clear cases (old biblical names, strange-foreign-sounding names), parents are mostly allowed to go on.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

People should be able to name their kid whatever they want.

And the kid should be able to change his name to whatever he wants.

So if crazy parents name their kid Zebedee Harmonicus Sunshine, he can change it to Edward Andrew Blake. And if boring parents name their kid Mary Margaret Jones she can change it to Xanthella Pikachu Sycorax.

I do not like the idea of the government telling the people what are acceptable names.
QFT

[Damien Evans]

QFT

QFT?

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

QFT?
Quoted For Truth; see also Quoted For Emphasis (QFE). Not to be confused with QED.

[Blue Mountain]

Then there's Ian Donald Calvin Euclid Zappa, who was registered under that name when the registrar refused to accept the oneFrank and Gail wanted to give him. At about age seven, the boy discovered the name by which he had been known all his life wasn't his legal name, so his Dad hired an attorney to have it legally changed to Dweezil.

[bjornart]

Quoted For Truth; see also Quoted For Emphasis (QFE). Not to be confused with QED.
"me too" to good for you, huh?

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

"me too" to good for you, huh?

ME TOO!

[skeptifem]

Even if someone named their baby girl from the list of banned words refering to the female genitalia?


that would suck, but its not abuse. abuse produces specific psychological effects in children, its something a name simply cannot do.

[Flo]

that would suck, but its not abuse. abuse produces specific psychological effects in children, its something a name simply cannot do.

So I suppose being the butt of jokes at school, at work, from friends, etc., doesn't produce psychological effects ... :rolleyes:

[Rasmus]

I actually think the German policy of only being able to name your child a name out of an official 'name book' is a good idea.

The 'book' does contain all names, though. There is at least one institution in Germany that will compile expert opinions on wether a certain word is actually a name.

The name does have to identify the child's gender, unless it is a common name. (So you could name your child 'Chris' or 'Alex' e.g. assuming that the short forms are permissable.)

The name is indeed forbidden to invoke ridicule from others.

Also, it may not be tied to "evil". Wikipedia (http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vornamen#Namensgebung_in_Deutschland) gives 'Judas' as an example for a forbidden name. (Which personally makes me wonder if it is the official stance of the German government that cooperation with the government/police against law breakers is evil ... Also, what if the parents were Atheists, or Satanists, even?)

[Mashuna]

How about child 1, 2 etc. Also when child 1 picks a name child 2 could become child 1 so they would feel a bit special too :D

Like the Italians call their sons Primo, Secundo etc?

[bjornart]

ME TOO!


lawl :D

[bjornart]

that would suck, but its not abuse. abuse produces specific psychological effects in children, its something a name simply cannot do.
Not directly no. But the "a rose by any other name"-statement isn't a truth, and parents are responsible for their children beyond the immediate.

[Undesired Walrus]

People have got a bit carried away in recent months, thus the sarcasm of my thread. I didn't expect it to create so much debate.

I wanted to show that if you believe that calling your baby a Muslim baby, a Christian baby, or a Hindu baby is child abuse, you really need to grow tougher skins and stop getting your pants in a twist. It might be a bit imposing, but it simply degrades, without any remorse or thought, the real abuse of children who are raped, beaten, and taunted from the day of their birth. And yes, I do consider circumcision to be an aspect of abuse, but on the wide scale of things.....

I was born catholic, my nephew was born catholic recently. I figured it out by the age of 14. He will most likely too.

I think people have got far too excited recently by a very charismatic and romantic Dawkins, who, to be honest, really isn't that intellegent. He gets in arguments with the people you would like to argue, but thats it really.

[Steven Howard]

I think people have got far too excited recently by a very charismatic and romantic Dawkins, who, to be honest, really isn't that intellegent.

Wait. What?

[Undesired Walrus]

Wait. What?

He's a great guy, but I do think we have got carried away.
He's very well scholared in the cosmos, evolution and scientific reason, but unfortunatly is just not all that intelligent. He simply is a figure, for people who are a bit elitist to guffaw and him being rude and rational to crazy religous morons, rather then do it themselves.

He also brings up Atheistic arguments that are years and years old. And, on top of that, creates horrible contradictions in logic. For example, he often says that the ideas of the universe are far more beautiful and wonderful than the ideas of astrology or religion, and you or I would agree with that. But that is because we, those who are interested, are enthralled by it. We think 'How can anyone not see how wonderful this is, and how much better this is then believing in God?'. Guess what, that is how a lot of people feel about God, and cannot understand how we can feel the same way. It's simple arrogant elitism to tell them their idea is a lesser because we feel it is.

Mahfouz, Rumi, MLK, Hubble, Marx, great thinkers. An mixed bag of the religous and the atheist. But still great thinkers.

[Safe-Keeper]

In Norway, the law (http://www.norskenavn.no/navneloven.php) (<- Norwegian) says that if a name may be a 'significant hindrance' (poorly translated) to the kid, it can't be used. So no naming your kid Hitler, Stalin, Anus, BBC, or GOP.

I really like the Chinese system of changing your name come 18. I think names are more special when you've chosen them yourself. Just a question, how many Chinese, by the age of 18, have grown so attached to their names that they refrain from changing them?

Not in Norway they aren't, and I have a piece of paper that proves that as well :xtongueWhen is the system going to stop enrolling babies into the State Church the moment the leave the womb - when there's a 65% chance they'll grow up to become non-religious? They couldn't choose a political party and favorite food for them, too while they were at it, could they?

Was it last year that a couple wanted to name their baby Espn, since that was their favorite network?They lack creativity. They could've gone for Norwegian Espen (http://www.norskenavn.no/navn.php), meaning God Bear:).

People have got a bit carried away in recent months, thus the sarcasm of my thread. I didn't expect it to create so much debate.You post an interesting premise and don't expect people to pick up on it?

I wanted to show that if you believe that calling your baby a Muslim baby, a Christian baby, or a Hindu baby is child abuse, you really need to grow tougher skins and stop getting your pants in a twist [...]And this was blatantly clear to me and probably the rest of us from post one. In fact, the first reply was 'I think you're trying to be sarcastic', and you further made the obvious more so by your further posts in the thread. Doesn't make the potential for discussion any less sound.

It might be a bit imposing, but it simply degrades, without any remorse or thought, the real abuse of children who are raped, beaten, and taunted from the day of their birth.Does it now? Does it also degrade, without any remorse, to call year-long bullying abuse? I mean, it's not nearly as bad as year-long systematic rape.

What about terrorist attacks that only kill one person? Is it degrading to the 9/11 victims to call that terrorism? Does calling that one single-fatality event terrorism degrade 3000-casualty 9/11? Nope.

Does calling the Falkland War a war degrade, without any remorse or thought, World War II? Nope.

Does calling a Chihuahua a dog degrade the German Shepherd? Nope. [/cheap shot]

Bottom line is I don't feel degraded.

who cares what other people name their kids?? there is no way that could ever be child abuse.So if parents mock their kids from Day 1, that's abuse, but if they make the very name of their kid an insult, it's perfectly OK?

abuse produces specific psychological effects in children, its something a name simply cannot do.Reality disagrees. And, of course, there's the fact that names can produce bullying.

I do not like the idea of the government telling the people what are acceptable names.Neither do I. Until I check reality and realize, once again, that when people are left to their own devices they very frequently engage in mindless idiocy which all too often happens to be harmful to innocents. Humans as a species isn't old enough to take care of themselves, apparently.

And the kid should be able to change his name to whatever he wants.Which I believe would create untold amount of paperwork every time each kid got himself a new hero or got bored of his old name. 'Mario Luigi, nah, they're so 80's, I wanna be Sonic Pikachu now!'.

[a.real.girl]

Ha ha, this is awesome. I changed my name when I was 18. (From a very common name to a less common one, because I hated its commonness.) Although I'm in the US, I can relate to parents getting upset. My father never quite got over my name change (although I have other problems with him), but my mother accepted it quite readily, and even commented that she wished she had my courage, because she, too, hates her name.

I think more people should change their name if they want to. For me, it was empowering to do so, although I admit bias because I hated my given name.

I changed my name from something common to something much less so as well...although I don't think I can fairly say I hated my given name. My folks were fine with it, although I don't know if it would have mattered if they weren't.

Anyhow, in regard to the OP, this sentiment is one Richard Dawkins suggests in The Root of All Evil (or maybe The God Delusion) that identifying your child as a believer is abusive. But names are just names...you can reject those just as easily as anything else if they don't work for you. Anyway, it's an interesting perspective.

-A

[Jas]

Too busy to post a linky, but I just read an article about stupid names being illegal in at least one other country...and if you try to name your kid something outrageous* here in the U.S., you can, sometimes, be made to change it.


I believe that there's a rule about that in Quebec, if I recall. Not so much a rule, but the name basically has to be approved by.... someone. I'm guessing a union member.

I changed my name from something common to something much less so as well...although I don't think I can fairly say I hated my given name. My folks were fine with it, although I don't know if it would have mattered if they weren't.

I didn't so much change my name as I go by a nickname that's stuck. On the plus side, I'm usually the only one with that name.

[malbui]

In France, the law has been changed in 1993 (law n° 93-22 of 8 January 1993) and there's no limitation to the names that can be chosen by the parents. However, should this name be considered contrary to the interests of the child (typically a name that can reasonnably be expected to lead to ridicule, rude puns, or association with a particularly horrible criminal, etc.), the official in charge of registering births declarations can signal it to the state prosecutor who can then contest the parents' choice into court.

In most of the very obvious cases ("Hitler", father so clearly drunk that he doesn't realise the joke isn't that funny and he'll regret it the next day, etc.),
the court will force a change of name, if it goes that far. In less clear cases (old biblical names, strange-foreign-sounding names), parents are mostly allowed to go on.


I'm a long way from being a lawyer, but isn't there also the condition that the name can only contain characters from the standard French alphabet? I seem to recall a case somewhere down in the south-west where it was determined that there was a problem with unusually accented characters. Not that that's hugely important, though.

[Wolfman]

I really like the Chinese system of changing your name come 18. I think names are more special when you've chosen them yourself. Just a question, how many Chinese, by the age of 18, have grown so attached to their names that they refrain from changing them?
Ah...its not quite like that. There is no 'official' age for changing names, they can do it at any age they want; and generally, the name is not officially changed (their ID cards, passports, etc., will still use the name their parents gave to them).

It is just a matter that on a personal level, they use the new name that they've chosen for themselves.