Should the government restrict what we can call our children?

[Sarahkka]

I'd say a silly name (one needing intervention if I were incharge of names) would be something offensive like calling a child hitler or fucker. My child has a questionable name when it comes to unusual names, he is called Elvin which means elf friend, we call him elfie. I can see that his name is unusual but I don't think it is offensive.

Elvis is allowed in Sweden, there are 1743 men called elvis in sweden (that is lots for a small population)

my son's middle name was not on the list (we live in sweden) the name is brian which is my grandpa's name. They checked that it was an actual name and that it didn't mean anything rude and we were allowed to choose an "off list" name.

In sweden the list has stopped people making up the spelling of names like "our daughter is going to be called bryoknee because we want something unique" I think that is a good thing, there is no need to spell names in random ways just to try and be unique I think it would just give the child a lifetime of correcting people.

I find that incredible - that the government would impose a restriction (based on whose taste exactly?) for something like spelling. If I want to spell or pronounce my child's name a certain way, that is my right and privilege. Some bureaucrat who doesn't like or agree with my choice should have absolutely no say in the matter. No matter how pretentious or obnoxious anyone thinks it is.

 

[Sarahkka]

But isn't this all hugely subjective?
Is this really something that requires legislation?
Do we actually need a law for the .00001% of parents who would choose a profanity for a name?
I grew up in a very "flower-child" area and had all sorts of friends named things like Rainbow, Sunshine, Cosmos, etc.
Back in the 80s, when I was growing up, those could have been reason to bully. I don't remember that being much of an issue, quite honestly.
And 20 years later, those names wouldn't even raise an eyebrow.
So where do you draw the line? Just profanity?
It's a pretty big can of worms, I think.

Surely even one child being called Brfxxccxxmnpcccclllmmnprxvclmnckssqlbb11116 (which was one of the refused names in Sweden) is one child too many? I don't think anyone is arguing that you should have to pick from a list of approved names. More that as a society we have a obligation to protect children even if that mean protecting them from what presumably their parents think is a joke. I don't think that this requires a law per se, but I do think that registrars should have a right to mount an objection in exceptional circumstances; which then can go to a judge or panel.

When you look at names which are passed and refused in the UK this system seems to work particularly well there are people with unconventional names - Superman, Gandalf, Arsenal etc but no Bollockface or 12345437965s, which seems fair enough to me.

No, I really don't think that choice should be restricted because of a very few examples of silly behaviour.
Really, the only exception I can see to this rule is profanities, but even then, what if you get a name from someone who has immigrated, a name that sounds profane in the new country and language? Should they be restricted from giving their child a name that is relevant to their culture and family?
Even the "silly" names that have numbers, etc. If they are chosen with care and reason, it isn't okay to forbid them because they are unusual.
If they are that bad, the child can choose to change them.

 

[Lina]

How about names that mean something offensive in host country?, should we ban people from calling their child a name that has a positive meaning for them? Or if there is another nutter who decides to kill many, will his/her name also end up on the ban list?

I'm with Sarahkka on this one, the whole idea seems ill-thought-out.

 

[NellyLou]

But isn't this all hugely subjective?
Is this really something that requires legislation?
Do we actually need a law for the .00001% of parents who would choose a profanity for a name?
I grew up in a very "flower-child" area and had all sorts of friends named things like Rainbow, Sunshine, Cosmos, etc.
Back in the 80s, when I was growing up, those could have been reason to bully. I don't remember that being much of an issue, quite honestly.
And 20 years later, those names wouldn't even raise an eyebrow.
So where do you draw the line? Just profanity?
It's a pretty big can of worms, I think.

Surely even one child being called Brfxxccxxmnpcccclllmmnprxvclmnckssqlbb11116 (which was one of the refused names in Sweden) is one child too many? I don't think anyone is arguing that you should have to pick from a list of approved names. More that as a society we have a obligation to protect children even if that mean protecting them from what presumably their parents think is a joke. I don't think that this requires a law per se, but I do think that registrars should have a right to mount an objection in exceptional circumstances; which then can go to a judge or panel.

When you look at names which are passed and refused in the UK this system seems to work particularly well there are people with unconventional names - Superman, Gandalf, Arsenal etc but no Bollockface or 12345437965s, which seems fair enough to me.

No, I really don't think that choice should be restricted because of a very few examples of silly behaviour.
Really, the only exception I can see to this rule is profanities, but even then, what if you get a name from someone who has immigrated, a name that sounds profane in the new country and language? Should they be restricted from giving their child a name that is relevant to their culture and family?
Even the "silly" names that have numbers, etc. If they are chosen with care and reason, it isn't okay to forbid them because they are unusual.
If they are that bad, the child can choose to change them.

I dissagree. I really don't think it's fair to a child to name them bjblkdnwiajripwar and say it's pronounced Jon, or anything else really crazy. I don't mean different names, I mean really crazy names. I certainly don't think there should be a list of names to choose from, just a way for really crazy names to be refused. I really think there is a big difference between unusual and something ridiculous. It's not right that a child should have to wait until they are old enough to change their name because their parents named them Anus https://ca.shine.yahoo.com/10-illegal-baby-names.html

 

[staralfur]

As much as I personally am not a fan of "unique" spellings for names I don't think that should be limited.

But if, say, someone decided they wanted to name their kid Motherf*cker Jones, fully knowing what it means, there's no way that should be okay in my opinion. And I would say that's questionable parenting at the very least.

 

[Rhi_Rhi1]

After reading some of the name choices in the "baby name section" on here; YES and pass the law quick ahaha x

 

[lovie]

My experience of living in a country where you have to have a name approved or choose a pre approved name is that there is less of a snobbery about choosing a unique name. People do give their children unusual names but they don't feel the need to change spellings just because they want to stand out. I don't always agree with the way Sweden encourages conformity but when it comes to names it is more fair for the children. A child called Emily for example will have different assumptions made about them by teachers, in interviews and by friends than a chold called EmAli.

 

[Pearls18]

After reading some of the name choices in the "baby name section" on here; YES and pass the law quick ahaha x

Oh no I posted mine in there last week hope you aren't referring to me haha!!x

 

[RaspberryK]

too funny.
I save all my wacko names for future pets... because my family would probably lock me away if I called my lo Jupiter or Luna

X

 

[Dragonfly]

I was going to say no, takes away freedom of choice but then some of the names which I find totally not right like swear words and letters and numbers. Makes me question what type of parents they will be if they are going to do that to a child. This shouldnt even be a law here because people shouldnt name children horrible things like that. But seems some do. So yes I agree with that law.

 

[fantastica]

too funny.
I save all my wacko names for future pets... because my family would probably lock me away if I called my lo Jupiter or Luna

X

We met a little boy at baby swimming when Jacob and him were around 4months and he was called Jupiter, at first I thought it was 'unusual' but he really suited it!


Agree with absolutely everything Sarahkka says. Maybe profanities could be the only exception, but surely the people who would do that are seriously in the minority, it just seems pointless. The fact they can limit what spelling someone can use is shocking.

What if something has a different meaning where you are living? Should you not be allowed it then? There's a pretty common name in english which means something quite rude in Italian but I can't for the life of me remember which one it is!!!

 

[RaspberryK]

too funny.
I save all my wacko names for future pets... because my family would probably lock me away if I called my lo Jupiter or Luna

X

We met a little boy at baby swimming when Jacob and him were around 4months and he was called Jupiter, at first I thought it was 'unusual' but he really suited it!


Agree with absolutely everything Sarahkka says. Maybe profanities could be the only exception, but surely the people who would do that are seriously in the minority, it just seems pointless. The fact they can limit what spelling someone can use is shocking.

What if something has a different meaning where you are living? Should you not be allowed it then? There's a pretty common name in english which means something quite rude in Italian but I can't for the life of me remember which one it is!!!

I absolutely love the name Jupiter and Jupiter was visible when he was conceived...

X

 

[vaniilla]

I think parents should be given some credit, we're not all going around calling our children picket fence and post office, it's a very small minority of normal people that go all out on names and the child can change it when they grow up - the only people this would effect really is pretentious 'celebrities'.

I think unless it's something offensive then the government should have no say. Everybody has different tastes, to some traditional names are awful and others can't imagine using anything but, it does not however make one name right or wrong - what are names in the first place?

 

[Natsku]

But its unfair on the child if they hate their name and can't change it til they're an adult. My OH hated his name (admittedly it was his last name not his first so wasn't his parent's fault) and was bullied because of it and as soon as he was old enough he changed his name but it had a lasting effect on him.

 

[fantastica]

But that could be the case with any traditional names as well, it is just so unlikely that that many parents would actually give their child such a horrendous name that it would need intervention!

Raspberry K - that is so cool about Jupiter being visible!!

 

[vaniilla]

but isn't it a self-perpetuating problem? if unique names and spellings are banned then they will always remain taboo, of-course children will be bullied if they are brought up to think that some names are more acceptable than others. Why would we rather ban then try to change prejudice around names?

 

[Natsku]

There's a difference between just non-traditional names like Jupiter for example and really far out names or stupid names like Vagina or Chlamydia - the law should protect children from names like that. I think the alternative spelling of names isn't such an issue in English speaking countries as it doesn't strictly change the pronunciation so don't think they need a law for that (although I do hate those names most of the time)

 

[robinator]

but isn't it a self-perpetuating problem? if unique names and spellings are banned then they will always remain taboo, of-course children will be bullied if they are brought up to think that some names are more acceptable than others. Why would we rather ban then try to change prejudice around names?

While I see your point, I don't agree that the responsibility of social change should rest on the small shoulders of an innocent child. There are other ways to make a statement.

 

[Natsku]

but isn't it a self-perpetuating problem? if unique names and spellings are banned then they will always remain taboo, of-course children will be bullied if they are brought up to think that some names are more acceptable than others. Why would we rather ban then try to change prejudice around names?

While I see your point, I don't agree that the responsibility of social change should rest on the small shoulders of an innocent child. There are other ways to make a statement.

I agree with this as well, it shouldn't be up to a child to change attitudes unless its by their own choice.

 

[Randianne]

There's a difference between just non-traditional names like Jupiter for example and really far out names or stupid names like Vagina or Chlamydia - the law should protect children from names like that. I think the alternative spelling of names isn't such an issue in English speaking countries as it doesn't strictly change the pronunciation so don't think they need a law for that (although I do hate those names most of the time)

The problem with that is that in countries like the US, we have so many different cultures represented that you can't make sweeping bans on names. Something that is considered a beautiful and traditional name to one culture could be offensive in another. Who gets to decide which culture is wrong?

For instance: Hymen is a traditional Hebrew boy's name. It's also the English word for a vaginal membrane. Should a Jewish family not be able to name their son a name that has been a part of their culture for thousands of years just because the current English speakers could find it offensive?