Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The OP will totally destroy her relationship with her husband's family if she pushes this. And as other posters pointed out, this is her husband's name. If she rejects the name, she rejects him.
Not "your body, your baby, your choice." It is also his baby.
Agreed.
So if it is THEIR baby why does his choice get precedence.
Arbitrarily saying that any thing is going to be one partners way is a problem. OP stated her husband wouldn't even consider any other names. That means that he says she has NO say in the name of her child. That is ridiculous.
The OP will totally destroy her relationship with her husband's family if she pushes this. And as other posters pointed out, this is her husband's name. If she rejects the name, she rejects him.
Bull****.
If her husband values her and her choice he will entertain her opinion.
Seriously, what if they both had naming traditions in their families, would he be rejecting her if he wanted to name the baby and vice versa?
His family tradition does not outweigh her RIGHT to have a say in the name of the child she brought into the world.
If her husband values her and her choice he will entertain her opinion.
Seriously, what if they both had naming traditions in their families, would he be rejecting her if he wanted to name the baby and vice versa?
His family tradition does not outweigh her RIGHT to have a say in the name of the child she brought into the world.
Not in a perfect world, no. I agree with with what you're saying in principle.
Why is she just now telling him she has no intention of naming their child after him? She must have known all along how much it meant to him and it's not fair to pull this now.
Unless she's made it clear prior to the pregnancy and he's just ignored her. Then he's not taken her seriously, and he's wrong. This is a horrible time to get into it.
When you married Henry Louis the V, it never occurred to you what you'd be expected to name the first son?
My exact thought. Even if the thought failed to occur before marriage, how about the last what, seven years? I believe in compromising, but if the OP married this man with full knowledge that this was an important family tradition to him, agreed to marry and have children with him anyway, then suddenly decided to change the plan, that's not fair to him. However, if for some strange reason she DIDN'T know (although I don't know how she couldn't) and he just jumped in out of nowhere with the insistence that they name the baby Henry and wouldn't budge, that wouldn't be fair either.
And for the record, I don't see anything wrong with the name Henry. And there's plenty of nicknames. I'm curious as to what the OP calls her husband, and if she "cringes" when she hears that too.
I would go with the family tradition. The name has meaning and history. It's hard to counter all of that with a name picked out of a hat. I think that any name given to a child will grow on a parent because it's a part of their child and the love and adoration for that child will make the name so much better. I also think the idea of the wife choosing nickname is good one. That said, I predict it will be a girl.
I wonder whether the child would be upset not to be the IV? Or if he'll be relieved? Just an interesting thought, not that you could guess.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.