Would you overlook a child for adoption based on their name?

[daenerys]

Hi there! Nameberry creeper here, haven't actually posted until now, but I couldn't resist posting about this! I just came across an article in the Daily Mail about the decline of adoption due to parents unwilling to adopt children with unique or misspelled names, such as "Chrystal" or "Chardonnay". Thought this was an interesting topic for Nameberry.

Some of the names mentioned in the article include:
Chardonnay
Champagne
Rubie
Emmarald
Jayde
Chrystal
Gemma-Mai
Courtney-Mai
Alexia-Mai
Lily-Mai
Shania-Rae

The link to the article for those interested in reading it - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...hardonnay.html

So the question is - would you forgo adopting a child with an unusual moniker that wasn't your style?

[whit32]

That story is so heartbreaking :-( I can't imagine turning away a child because I don't like that name! I do agree with the author though. Those kids deserve a fresh start, and if that includes a new name, then so be it. I mean, if it is so important for them to stay in touch with their birth family, then why have they been taken away in the first place. If it is safer for them to be taken away, then it is safer for them to be completely separated from the family who put them in this situation. Maybe if they found a compromise, like the child had to have the same initials, but the name itself could change. I don't know. It is such a horrible thing for those kids that a bunch of governmental nonsense is getting in the way of their futures.

[augusta_lee]

This is absolutely insane. First of all, changing a child's birth name is enormously unethical. Second of all, any parent who's going to turn away a child based on their name doesn't deserve to have kids. Period. Also, I completely doubt the veracity of this story. Healthy infants for adoption are INCREDIBLY rare. No couple is going to turn them away because of their name.

[maebear24]

Morally, forgoing a child due to the unfortunate name they were given by their birth parents is totally not ok. And besides, if you are looking to adopt you have probably been anticipating the moment for so long, that the last thing that worries you is the name of the child.

When it comes to renaming the child there are some double standards. If that child is over the age of 18months-2yrs then changing the name is just not an option. By that age a child has begun to incorporate their name into their identity and changing it would be immensely confusing (especially for a child who is already going through the upheaval of becoming a part of a new family). However, if the child is a very young baby (under 18months or especially under 1year) then changing the name poses no major problem as they won't ever remember having a different name, and it would then be up to the discretion of the adoptive family. That is just my view.

[augusta_lee]

I feel like changing a child's name at whatever age is an ethical issue. By changing the name given to them by their first parents, you're erasing that connection as well as robbing them of the only thing in the world that's truly theirs. I feel especially strongly about this in terms of international adoption. It's just wrong. And I'm saying this as someone who plans to adopt.

[holbs]

Wow, that is really interesting, thanks for sharing.

I have to disagree with some pp's, here, I think as an adoptive parent you should be allowed to change your new child's name, especially if they are under 2. And with the differences in the class system in Britain, it really could put them at a disadvantage to have a name like Chardonnay or Chrystal, especially if the parents put them in public (private to the US) school. I do think its a shame people are letting that stop them though, I would hope, if it was impossible to change the baby's name, you'd find a way around it, such as always calling them by a middle name or a nickname or something.

[thetxbelle]

Wow, that is really interesting, thanks for sharing.

I have to disagree with some pp's, here, I think as an adoptive parent you should be allowed to change your new child's name, especially if they are under 2.

Im an adoptee, my name was kind of changed in the sense that my birth mother had named me but no one about this me until years later. The nurse I stayed with until my parents picked me up at 3 months also called me something else and when my parents picked me up at 3 months they changed my name. I have no issues with this as I was never officially named. If they had changed an official name I would be angry.

A name may be the only thing you receive from your biological parents, even if you are only 3 days old to change it is to change part of your childs identity or reject it all together especially if they are older.

You want to give them a new name and stick the old one in the middle? That's fine but if my birth mother had named me Chardonnay I would rather have Chardonnay as a middle than nothing from her at all. I wouldn't care how difficult it might be in school it's a gift nothing could ever replace. I wouldnt want someone to take it from me.

Adoptive parents will never be able to fully understand how important it can be to have some connection to the life we had with our birthparents, even if we only knew them after birth for 10 minutes we spent 9 months with them developing one of the closest most intimate bonds that occurs in a human life. If they named us love us enough to not take that away.

[daenerys]

This is absolutely insane. First of all, changing a child's birth name is enormously unethical. Second of all, any parent who's going to turn away a child based on their name doesn't deserve to have kids. Period. Also, I completely doubt the veracity of this story. Healthy infants for adoption are INCREDIBLY rare. No couple is going to turn them away because of their name.

Of course those willingly to adopt are very unlikely to turn away a child based on their name. My question was directed towards Nameberry users because they're passionate about names. I've read so many posts about yooneek names! I don't want so much to get into the ethics of changing an adopted child's name, but rather want to know how unique/misspelled of a name are Nameberries willing to live with, especially if they didn't name their child themselves and couldn't rename them.

[thetxbelle]

@daenyrs I called and asked my mother this question (you're never too old to call mom lol) her response was "I could live with whatever name you had but I couldnt live without you." I would hope other adoptive parents would have similar answers

[daisy451]

Never. Anyone willing to turn a child away because of their name shouldn't be a parent. I think past a certain age, maybe around 2, the name shouldn't be changed at all. Before that age, I think it's alright to move the birth name to the middle. I have heard of older children (6+ or so) picking a new name for themselves upon adoption, which I think is fine. But I wouldn't remove a birth name completely even if the child was a baby, no matter how bad the name was. I'm sure that the vast majority of birth parents love their children very much and circumstances prevent them from parenting. I wouldn't want to take the one thing the child has from them away completely for my own selfish reasons.

I think this article was insensitive to birth parents. It was written very much from the perspective of an adoptive parent, with little consideration for birth parents. It portrays them as nothing more than criminals and crackheads, when in actuality they've done something incredibly selfless in offering their child a better life through adoption. I think that strength should be commended.