[Note to readers: Typically I stick to letters that are from one of the parents of the baby in question. However, in this case the father of the baby left his question as a comment on another post. Then shortly afterward, the letter from the grandmother appeared. Since the letter was in letter form, and because it did a better job of laying out the issue, and because I’m not sure it would be okay to take a comment on a post and turn it into another post, I used the letter.]
Swistle,
I have a problem in my family at this moment. The issue is that my son wants to name his first born, being a son, after himself. Example is this, lets say my husbands name is John Doe Smith II and my son is John Doe Smith III. My son wants to name his son John Doe Smith III Jr.
My son and Daughter-in -Law have checked this out legally and found out that you can have two suffixes in your name.
My husband believes that naming the baby with the two suffixes would end the family name.
What are your thoughts on this?Thank you for your opinion on this matter,
Happy Gam Gam
WHY do they want to do this? Are they serious, or are they trying to be clever/funny, or do they not understand how this works?
An example of being serious: If your son feels his grandfather was a deplorable man, and absolutely does not want to name a child after him, but DOES still want to name a child after himself. I could see how your son naming a child John Doe Smith IV is naming the child, in essence, after his grandfather; naming a child John Doe Smith III Jr. says specifically “This child is NOT named after my grandfather and is NOT named after my father, but is ONLY named after me.”
An example of trying to be clever/funny (courtesy of Paul, who came up with this parallel): “It’s the 4th anniversary of my 39th birthday!” There is already a way to count the 4th anniversary of a 39th birthday, and it is to say “43th birthday.” But you COULD say 4th anniversary of 39th birthday, just as you can say III Jr. instead of IV. I wouldn’t do it on any legal paperwork, but it makes a good joke to post on Facebook.
An example of truly not understanding how this works: Perhaps your son and daughter-in-law don’t understand the suffix system, and don’t know what Sr./Jr./III/IV/V/etc. mean or how they’re used. The suffix “IV” (the Roman numeral for “4”) is the way we abbreviate/symbolize the concept “the Jr. of someone who is a III”—i.e., the fourth bearer of the name. If it is indeed legal to have two suffixes, your son could be named John Doe Smith Jr. Jr. instead of John Doe Smith III—but he isn’t, because that is not the way the system works: instead of “Jr. Jr.” we say “III”. And instead of “Jr. Jr. Jr.” we say “IV”. It isn’t a matter of the legal number of suffixes, it’s a matter of How the Suffix System Works.
Whatever the motivation, if he chooses to use III Jr. for his son, that does not necessarily end the family name. Your grandson, upon reaching adulthood and having a son of his own, could name his son John Doe Smith V, or John Doe Smith III Jr. Jr., or even Howard Joseph Smith Jr., and there would be no Name Police to leap out from the shrubbery and tell him he couldn’t. My guess is that anyone named John Doe Smith III Jr. would grow up so sick of the confusion and explanations that he would gladly ditch the tradition, but there’s no reason he has to.
Oh dear. This was done on F*R*I*E*N*D*S, as a joke–Phoebe’s brother, Frank Jr., named his son Frank Jr., Jr., to the dismay of his wife. The joke was meant to cast Frank Jr. in a very unintelligent light.
Even if your son is doing this as a joke, and not out of truly not understanding how namesake-sharing works, I suspect he and his wife (and probably the baby, till he figures out how to drop one of the suffixes) will be judged for this. Would it help to point this out to him?
There’s also the band Jr. Jr., formerly known as Dale Earnhardt Jr. Jr. Also a joke…
Agreed on the confusion thing. I think others would be perplexed, and most would think it’s either a joke, or the parents were clueless. Neither seems like a positive reaction.
I am simply appalled that one would do this, for real. Even IF the point is that he wants to name his son after himself specifically, this is all kinds of wrong. Go about it a different way: legally name him your nickname, or give him one of your names and let him have another of his own. I hope they’re not trying to be clever or funny, because this is neither.
This is really unfortunate. Of course, OP, you want to prioritize having a good relationship with your son, daughter-in-law, and grandkids above all else. But it would be useful for someone else whom they respect to point out that they’ll make their kid into a laughingstock. John Doe Smith IV sounds incredibly distinguished. John Doe Smith III Jr. sounds like the child of really immature parents, and sadly it’s not just the parents who would be judged. That would place a burden on little Johnny too.
And what’s the payoff? His parents get a good laugh? I love a good joke, but the risk-to-benefit here sounds pretty unfavorable.
There are no Name Police, but I hereby nominate Swistle as Name Police Chief.
Seconded!
I agree that it is awkward and strange and would not recommend anyone naming a child III Jr. However, I would advise the letter writer to be vary cautious and careful how you address this with your son and DIL, up to not saying a word aside from how delighted you are they are having a child and that you will shower him with love no matter what name they choose for him. I imagine there is a LOT of family pressure to carry on the name for a 4th generation and I don’t think you or your husband should put forth any more encouragement to do so. I do hope they decide to use IV, or just one of the names, or Dad’s nickname, or an entirely new name rather than III Jr., though!
I am of no help here but this did bring back a funny memory for me.
A friend in high school was a junior and had a long, hyphenated last name. He was strangely insistant that people use his full last name, including the “Jr.” when referring to him.
Of course, his buddies decided to have a little fun with it and dubbed him “Firstname Lastname-Lastname Jr., The Third, Over-easy con Salsa” and would only refer to him by this name or the shortened version, FLLJR3-Over Easy con Salsa, or sometimes just FLLJR3. It caught on and I’m not sure I ever heard anyone call him by his real name after that besides teachers and parents. Haha. Poor guy.
If he wants to end the family name, why not name him something completely different?? Am I missing something?
As far as we know, he doesn’t want to end the family name. The letter-writer’s husband (father to the father of the baby) worries that doing two suffixes will end the family name.
Oh! I misread that too!
If he wants to name the baby after himself but doesn’t want to use IV, can’t they use just the first name (and surname of course) and choose a different middle name? I was pretty sure that it was the EXACT name that used the suffix. So John Doe Smith IV would be correct in this instance, but John James Smith would just be John James Smith. Or, I know that lots of Jrs and IIIs and such are actually referred to by a nickname to distinguish them from the other owners of the name within the family. Does your son do this? If so, could he use the nickname version of his name for his son? Then he would be named after him but separate from the naming tradition.
Also, from a boring practical perspective, this will cause so much confusion. Especially with lenders, credit reporting agencies, all that stuff. No one will understand the double suffix, they’ll assume there should be one, take their pick, and things will always be confused. My husband and his father have the same first name, middle initial, last name, and there are constant mix ups. I’m glad we all have good credit, because their accounts, etc are constantly turning up on our credit reports and vice versa.
I’m going to assume this is serious.
I believe your Son and Daughter-in-Law are feeling intense pressure to carry on this naming tradition, one they feel “forced” into by previous generations, and are subtlely expressing their displeasure.
They want to name their ‘own’ child, but feel they can’t, so have come up with a “compromise”. This way they still have some say/control over the name while keeping everybody happy. Right? Unfortunately, through this process, their choice comes across as a bit confusing and slightly ignorant. But maybe that is their point!
If this IS the case I really feel for them. Imagine the worry this must be causing them both at a time when they should be celebrating!
I think someone with the suffixes III Jr. would have a hard time being taken seriously in life. Making a mockery of your child doesn’t bring light to the parents’ distaste in the tradition, it only makes them look foolish.
They’re better off discontinuing the name completely.
Swistle, don’t the suffixes change when people pass away?
So if the OPs father-in-law (the first John Doe Smith) is deceased, then doesn’t her husband become John D Smith I, her son John D Smith II and the grandchild-to-be John D Smith III ?
They are SUPPOSED to, yes, but you and I and Miss Manners are among the very few who know this. Everyone else treats their handmedown names as only royalty/popes are supposed to, by keeping the suffixes permanently.
While I agree and totally see the logic that it should be left to popes and kings, I think that the US govt does not. My husband’s birth certificate and all other official IDs have his III suffix on it. So it’s his forever, I guess.
I agree! My brother is a “II” and his and my father’s mail and important documents are already totally confusing. It would be awful paperwork wise if my brother’s name actually turned into my father’s name.
Also, I’m just not sure how to take this letter. I mean, they’ve all done it nicely and correct so far, why is the fourth one in line so difficult?
If the letter writers son is not ignorant, arrogant, or cruel, then I would conclude he and and his wife are rebelling against the pressure to use the family name.
The letter writer should make it clear to her son and daughter-in-law that this is their baby to name and that there are other ways to keep the family name alive or honor Dad. Then let it go.
I like a distinct relatives solution to this problem. Let’s say the name used in the family was Robert Arthur Smith. It was used for generations. Grandpa was called Art and the Dad was called Bob. My relative did not want to name her oldest son Robert Arthur but also did want the family name to die. They selected something like Mark Robert Arthur as their sons name. Mark went on name his oldest son Robert Arthur (called Rob). Rob recently married and it will be interesting to see what choice he makes.
The letter writer should make sure her son and daughter in law feel they have options with their child’s name and whatever they choose , the baby will be adored by his grandparents.
I was all set to write about how no one should name their kid III, Jr. but then realized that it’s not your child to name. My husband is a III, and we got a considerable amount of passive aggressive pressure to name our son IV. I think that you really do need to stay out of this completely. I remember every little thing my in-laws said about our naming decision, before and after our son was born (without the IV suffix). I love them still, but I remember.
There’s a chance they are trolling you. If not, hopefully they will choose something else, but I don’t think you should be the one to try to change their minds.
It also occurred to me that the son and his wife have no intention of actually carrying on the John Doe Smith naming tradition. Instead of being honest about it, they’ve thrown out a ridiculous sounding option to determine the reactions of the LW and her husband. Or, in the hopes that when they do give the baby a name that is not John Doe everyone will feel relieved because it will be better than III Jr.
If they are serious and really are considering John Doe Smith III Jr., then I’m going to use some harsher than usual language in the hopes it will give them pause. It sounds ignorant and uneducated. And it is not the parents who will spend their lives sounding ignorant and uneducated (they will be mostly free of this burden once their son is an adult). Their child will be the one to carry this burden of having people judge him for a ridiculous name his entire life. He’ll be the one having to correct people and explain and perhaps roll his eyes about how foolish his parents were-and he will do this for the rest of his life. If the LW’s son and his wife want to carry on this tradition, then they need to follow established/expected patterns when doing so. Otherwise, they need to pick another name completely.
First thought was that Swistle was being punked. (Letter writer must be trying to start a Orange Jello style baby naming urban legend. ) Next thought was that the letter writer was being punked. (Her son must be pulling an early April fools joke.) Third thought was that Trey was passive aggressively trying to tell his parents he didn’t want to continue the tradition. Last thought, is Trey a total moron?
Dear Trey – if you are for reals, ask yourself this: do you want people who hear your kid’s name to think that you are f*ing with them, pulling their leg, being a passive agressive pr!ck, or likely to take off your shoes to count to twenty? No? Then don’t do the double suffix.
I’m going to try to focus on the original poster’s issue rather than get into all of the many other good reasons that a III Jr. should not happen:
“My husband believes that naming the baby with the two suffixes would end the family name.”
This only happens if the little III Jr. doesn’t want to carry on the name. Your son can name his child anything he wants, and your grandson can name his child anything he wants. That’s the beauty (and curse, sometimes) of living in a free society.
I agree with other posters. Stay out of this one and let his friends talk him out of this terrible decision.
Devils advocate opinion: I’m not really sure how this is all that different than using something non-traditional in the middle, like Danger, or Bob instead of Robert. A suffix really really almost never comes up in day to day life, unless the suffix-ee chooses to make a point of it (and then, being a IV comes with plenty of its own cultural baggage). Obviously, it’s important that the parents understand going in that they’re doing something unconventional…but it sounds like the kid is getting a very classic, usable name with a slightly wry or homey twist. There are worse things.
I wondered if they were trying to find a way for IV to be called Junior. In which case name baby IV and just call him Junior. People will figure that out very quickly – Junior doesn’t have to have a Jr. None of the III Jr. silliness is needed.
The naming tradition will continue if everyone is worth honoring, not if this one is named IV or III Jr.
If everyone is worth honoring and the name is palatable.
I’m a mixture of feelings on this one.
Of course, III Jr, is – as all the others pointed out – at best cumbersome, at worst déclassé. But I’m also on board with Kerry’s advocacy for the devil.
But I’m mostly irritated by “would end the family name.” It reminds me of the comment thread of this post: http://www.swistle.com/2016/02/27/have-fun/ , where “comment-maker” comes up. The parents-to-be are perfectly aware that their suggestion would end the pattern; that is very likely the point. The grandparents-to-be should take the hint*.
I think a single, “Y’know, it really would mean a lot to us if you continued the pattern but we understand completely if you go a different route,” is a mature, honest, acceptable thing to say. It is clear and does not require a response, possibly an awkward one. If the request has been made or HINTED more than once, then I believe an apology is owed to the parents-to-be.
*Suggestions for a coping thoughts: 1) You will get much credit for being cool parents/grandparents if you go with the flow. Your relationship with the parents-to-be is MUCH more important than getting a say in the name of the new arrival. 2) Fashions change. Check NameVoyager to see what has happened to the name. Has it become very unpopular? Too popular? Would you want to have or to give an overly popular or unpopular name? 3) When Jr. and III were named, these would have seemed much more common-place, even charming. However, in the current climate, IV will come across both as unusual and pretentious, though admittedly some will find it a nice nod to tradition. Think of unusual and pretentious names for people in your generation to have or to have given to their children. Would you want to have such a name? Would you want to give such a name?
Wait wait wait. Baby’s father left this question as a comment on another post? Did he give us any clues as to why this is a question??
Unfortunately no: just asked if he could do it, and if anyone could tell him why not.
Could someone share a link to the comment thread too? I’d find it helpful to peruse both.
Do you mean to the place where the father left his comment? I did not leave the comment there, since it was an off-topic comment on someone else’s name question.
Oh, I see! Hence no link to begin with.
Oh boy. I would HATE to be John Doe Smith III Jr. First, it seems like a paperwork nightmare. All these naming traditions started long before Social Security (in the US) and credit reports, and the like, and oh boy what a mess this would make of it and the kid would either be confused with his grandfather or father on the regular, I would imagine. In fact, I just saw a program (60 Minutes, maybe?) about people being declared dead by the government and what a pain in the rear it was for them to fixed to the point that one woman interviewed would obtain a new certified letter from SSA every six months saying she was who she said she was and she wasn’t dead. Second, while not necessarily “wrong” per se, I would have assumed it was a joke if I saw it out and about and would probably comment on it similarly.
Parents, if you’re out there reading this, please either give this kid his own name or name him after his father with a new middle name, ie John Alexander Smith. He’ll still be a “John Smith” which should be enough for anyone, but he’ll also have a very tiny sliver of name just for himself.
But what if the future John Doe Smith III Jr. wants to name his son after himself? Would the son be John Doe Smith III Jr. II?
They could also rearrange, so instead of John Doe Smith, make it Doe John Smith.