So a baby boy is about to be born. He will be Anthony Steven B_______ the fifth.
My daughter wants to change the middle name to Scott. Does that take away the ability for this little guy to carry on the tradition?
I’m afraid so: the suffixes Jr., III, IV, etc., are only used if the name is exactly the same. However, I will note that the name police will not leap out and prevent her from doing it. And I think it’s sweet of her to want to honor her side of the family as well as her husband’s (if I’m making the correct assumption here based on your email address). It might make for a nice compromise and/or a gentle way to break the tradition: give the baby his father’s first name and surname, but use his mother’s father’s name for the middle and drop the V suffix.
Another option is to use the exact name and the suffix, but call him Scott. I went to school with a boy whose name was something like Howard Duke Polman IV, and he went by Scott. And I know a child whose name is something like Richard Paul Sampson IV, and he goes by Jack. When there are a lot of people in a family with the exact same name, nicknames get scarce and everyone gets more understanding of workarounds.
Another option is to use the exact name and the suffix, and save Scott for a possible future child. Maybe _____ Scott B_______ (for a boy or a girl), or Scott [mother’s maiden name, or another significant name from the mother’s side] B_______. I’d love to see it become a tradition that if one parent gets to use a naming tradition for one child, the other parent gets nearly full naming rights for the next child.
Kind of sounds like he won’t be Anthony Steven B. the anything if mom wants to name him Anthony Scott B.
As far as compromises go, this one isn’t too bad, as the baby will still be Anthony S. LastName. But technically “the fifth” will need to be dropped. Though I will also point out that while it is not observed as much today, traditionally he wouldn’t be the fifth unless all 4 of the previous Anthony Steven’s were still living.
Another option would be to do 2 middle names-Anthony Steven Scott B. And he could still go by Scott if that is the intention.
I like Swistle’s suggestion of using Scott on the next son. Everyone gets their family names carried on; both children feel special. Win-win!
In Australia (where I live) it is the first and last names that count for juniors and the middle name is irrelevant. Very rarely get iii and iv etc as it is only used while the older party is alive. we also don’t record the junior on the birth certificate and it doesn’t form part of the legal name.
I know the situation is different in the usa I just mention as a point of interest.
Another option is to continue with the tradition, but call him a nickname for the number he is…meaning, you could call him “Tripp” instead of “the 5th”. I’m not sure if anyone has heard of that before? Personally, I’m the 5th generation with my middle name, and I plan to pass it on (even though it’s not my favorite) due to following tradition. I just think it’s important. For you, if you followed the tradition and had another boy (or girl, for that matter) it would be sweet to have your family honored the next time so that each child has special names… This is a hard one, though. Good luck!!
Isn’t ‘trip’ the third? As in triple? I would have thought the fifth would be Quinn?
I don’t know about the “rules” per se, but wanted to share that my husband is a IV where all the members share the same first name and then have a different middle name, but it starts with the same initial (H.) and then same last name. For example Jack H. Smith IV. I think the first two had the same middle name, but then they changed that but kept the initial. Trading in Stephen for Scott does at least keep the same initial if you want to go that route.