Hi!

We just read your blog regarding how to use a suffix and need your help. I am so confused.

This is story…my husband’s (Todd Anthony Surname) father (Frank Edward Surname) was named after his great grandfathers brother (Frank Edward Surname). We had a baby 2 weeks ago and named him Frank Edward Surname III (on his birth certificate) after confirming with several family members. After doing some additional research we are finding different rules, customs, and advice all over the internet.

At this point we think the baby should be Frank Edward Surname II as his grandfather never used a suffix and there was such a large gap between Franks. Any advice?

Much appreciated!

Renee

I think this is one of those happy situations where it really doesn’t matter what you do, and you can go with what seems right to you. Suffixes are designed to prevent confusion and to draw attention to a naming tradition. As you’ve found, opinions are all over the place about how they ought to be used. The government does not consider them part of the legal name even when they are on the birth certificate (though you may find an individual clerk who begs to differ, and may need to call for his/her supervisor); you can use them or not, depending on your own preferences.

In this particular case, my own slight preference would be to have used no suffix. It doesn’t seem necessary for avoiding confusion, and in fact contributes to confusion since your husband is not Frank Edward Surname Jr. and your father-in-law did not use the II. It also may set up pressure for your son to continue the tradition with his own child—though the winding route the name has taken is likely to lessen the pressure considerably or entirely.

My second choice would be to keep it as a III. He is the third Frank Edward Surname in his family tree, and the suffix draws attention to the honor element of the name. Though Jr. is reserved for a child whose parent has the identical name, II and III and IV and so on can be used to designate the descendants of an identically-named ancestor outside the direct line (either because of skipped generations or because of sideways jumps).

My least favorite choice would be to change it to a II. Your husband’s father didn’t use the II, but he was the second Frank Edward Surname so it was available to him to use if he wanted to, or if his parents had wanted to use it. Making your son a II because the suffix went unused last time seems odd at best, and at worst seems to deliberately kick one of the previous Frank Edward Surnames out of the mix.

I’m unclear as to whether your father-in-law was named for his own great-grandfather’s brother or for your husband’s great-grandfather’s brother. But even if there was a biggish gap between the first two Franks, the gap between the second and third skips only one generation, which is when suffixes such as II and III commonly come into play. If you want your baby to be named after his grandfather (your husband’s dad) and you don’t mind either way about the more distant ancestor, then I suppose I would ask your father-in-law if he considers himself the second Frank Edward Surname or not; if he does, then use III; if he doesn’t, then use II.

But it sounds as if your family agrees that the baby should be a III, and that’s the suffix that seems most right to me if you’re going to use one, so if I were you I would just leave it as it is.