Leah writes:

My husband and I are hoping you can help us with a naming decision that is causing us a lot of trepidation. I have been reading your posts for a while now, and have yet to come across another problem like it. It is the kind of problem adoptive parents of older children face, and I’m wondering if your readers wouldn’t have some helpful insight, as well.

We have been incredibly blessed to have guardianship of two beautiful, young children who are not biologically related to us. Recently, their biological parents’ rights were terminated, which opens the door for us to adopt them. We are thrilled.

The problem is that both children have names that we are not very fond of. We have already settled that the younger child, an infant, will be renamed at the time of adoption. Our conundrum lies with the older sibling, who is a twenty seven month old girl.

Because I would like to maintain her anonymity, I will refer to her as D’Ahnyttah Rose (pronounced Donetta Rose). This name mirrors her given name in many ways, and the issues with her name as we see them follow:

1. It is difficult to spell. I often have to spell it 3 or 4 times to people before they get it right.
2. The pronunciation of her name is not obvious. If her name is printed somewhere people always have to ask how it is pronounced, which gets tedious.
3. She was given her name by someone who, for all intents and purposes, abandoned her, so I feel like the name has a lot of baggage associated with it.
4. Her middle name is for a biological relative who is now incarcerated for a violent crime.

We really can’t see leaving her name as it is now. So these are our options, as we see them:

1. Change her first name so that it is phonetically correct (i.e. Donetta), keep her middle name and leave it at that.
2. Change her first name to something that is similar to her given name but more pleasing to us (Donna or maybe even Danielle), although we aren’t really in love with any of the obvious options.
3. Using a derivative nickname (like Nettie) may be an option, as there are a couple of nice choices, but we still don’t LOVE any of them.
4. Use her middle name, which we like quite a bit. We are, however, very concerned about the negative association.
5. Choose an entirely new name (i.e. Hazel Grace) as we have for her sibling.

Of course there are lots of other things to consider, the least of which being is it even OK to rename a two year old? I know we can, but I am concerned that it may further confuse our daughter, or at least take some serious getting used to on her part. Everything else aside, the ultimate goal is to come to a decision that causes the least amount of stress to her in the long run.

It’s difficult: I can offer an opinion, but I don’t feel I have enough personal experience with it to be confident in that opinion. If a group of people who had had their names changed at adoption told me that it was a terrible mistake, I’d change my opinion on the subject immediately. And of course the particulars of the individual situation factor into it hugely.

But after that lead-in, I will say that it seems okay to me as long as the child is quite young. SPIN seems important: a name-change could seem like it’s a way to erase or hide the old self or the old family (and in fact adults do sometimes change their names for those very reasons)—or it can be seen as a mark of bonding/transition/welcoming into a new family (as when any new baby is named, or as when a person takes a new surname at marriage, or as when a person takes a new name as part of a religious or cultural transition).

Age two still seems okay to me (my nephew is two, and I can picture his parents changing his name without traumatizing him), though I’d try to make the transition easier by not switching all at once. Depending on the personality and age of the child, I might come up with a story: something along the lines of “Now that you are in our family forever, you will have your special new name!”—or books on adoption may have other tried-and-true suggestions. With a two-year-old, I might save the stories for later questions and instead just start calling the child by both names for awhile: D’Ahnyttah-Hazel for awhile, then maybe Hazel-D’Ahnyttah, then sometimes dropping the D’Ahnyttah and sometimes still including it, then eventually dropping the D’Ahnyttah entirely around the time she starts referring to herself by the new name and/or responding to it consistently and without wrinkled brows.

Let’s talk for a minute about the middle name. If it honors a relative currently incarcerated for a violent crime, that in itself doesn’t put me off. Circumstances matter tremendously: the type of crime, the situation surrounding it, the type of person the relative is. And of course that’s getting well outside the scope of what would be appropriate to discuss on the blog. I will give a couple of examples, though, to demonstrate the kind of thing I mean. In one situation, let’s say the relative in question had been badly and hurtfully wronged by a spouse and had attacked that spouse in a one-time, out-of-character fit of passion, but that this person was otherwise a wonderful and loving person with strong family connections, someone likely to be involved in your child’s life in the years to come. Well, then, their name is still good, and I wouldn’t even mind moving it to the first name position. Let’s say instead that the relative in question is a manipulative mooching person with a long history of betrayals and bad deeds that finally culminated in a robbery that went wrong and ended with a terrible injury to an innocent person, and yet this relative is still acting self-pitying about the whole thing and trying to mooch money out of relatives. Well, then, I’m inclined to ditch the name. The line is probably here: can you tell this relative’s story in a way that doesn’t make the child embarrassed to have the name? That is, can this be, “Yes, Rose was the name of your aunt when you were born”? Or must the violent crime come into it, and is the violent crime an upsetting one that would make the child feel tainted by association?

I like your idea of searching for a name that has some connection to the original name. That is, if the child’s name really were D’Ahnyttah Rose, changing it to something like Etta Rose seems like a very nice compromise. I think I’d abandon the goal of being in love with the name in this case, since so many other goals need to take precedence. I think if I were you, my goal would be to find a name that solved the main issues while also being a big leap up the spectrum of my own taste in names.

I think I’m drawn most to any solution that feels like a compromise. For example, if I picture you instead focusing on finding a first name you’re in love with, then I like the idea of keeping D’Ahnyttah as the middle name. Names can be so tied in with identity that even though she’s only two I wonder if later on she might prefer to still own some of her original name. With other questions that involved adoptions, I notice I pretty much always come down on the side of keeping the original name (ideally with original spelling) in the name SOMEWHERE: even though there is baggage associated with the child’s origins, the child might feel those origins are still his or her property, and/or that those origins don’t reflect badly on the name or on herself/himself.

If you like the middle name, one option is to switch the middle and first. Rose D’Ahnyttah.

One factor to consider here is that her sibling will be completely renamed. I’m not sure what effect that will have later on: right now, of course, the infant doesn’t care at all; when the girls are older and hearing their stories and asking questions, it might factor in. If you change one sister’s name completely but only partly change the other’s, probably it’s plenty of explanation to say, “Because Hazel was older and knew her name, but Olive was only a baby and didn’t know her name yet.”

Or one possibility to consider is to make the same decision for both girls’ names: former first names in the middle name position, with new first names for both, for example; or D’Ahnyttah Rose and Neveah Grace become Etta Rose and Norah Grace, or Rose D’Ahnyttah and Grace Neveah. Again, I would rank LOVE of the name rather low here, and aim mostly for the relief of a name I liked Significantly Better. Or perhaps both girls could be given entirely new full names, with the love of the name ranking high: they are the daughters you love, and you are giving them names you love.

I really don’t know what would be best. It’s so hard to know what the girls themselves will think of things later: this whole thing could be a big shrug to them, or it could be of huge symbolic importance to them (with any of the choices leaving plenty of room for either positive or negative symbolism, so that your choice can be spun as The Wrong One no matter WHAT you chose to do), and we can’t know that ahead of time. And it’s not as if The Right Way To Do Adoption is carved in stone for us anywhere: situations are different, and the current feelings about What Is Best change all the time and never do fit everyone anyway, and different people see different actions as symbolizing different things. None of us has an answer that is right for all people in all situations.

I notice my opinion shifts around quite a bit when I imagine “what generally seems right” versus “how I might feel if it were me.” When I’m thinking generally about what seems important, I feel like it’s a good idea to keep their original names in their names somewhere. But if I picture it being actually me making the decision about actual children I love, it suddenly gets more challenging: my actual inclination is to make those babies MINE by naming them. Or wait, what if I imagine a good future relationship with the children’s starting family? Then I like the idea of tying our families together: a name from them, a name from us. Or what if the original names are special to me because those were the names the children had when I grew to love them? I might want that part of our history together represented. Or what if I imagine adopting my nephew and niece? Then I want them to keep their own names, because those names are THEIRS and part of who they ARE. It’s confusing.

I think this all goes back to spin. I think that ANY decision you make about the names can be made with love and loving intentions and loving symbolism, and that the important thing is to communicate that love and those intentions and that symbolism when you tell the girls their naming stories.

Update (and photo!) on Baby Boy Virus-with-a-K, Brother to Henry Palmer!
Update on Baby Name to Discuss: Maelynn!
Update (and photo!) on Baby Boy or Girl Sauce-a-man, Sibling to Russell (Russ)!

Cassie writes:

Hello. My name is Cassie. I’m pregnant with my 3rd child. My husband, Will, and I have Abigail Kelley Davis, 11 and William Parker Davis, Jr. ‘Park’, who is 9. Baby 3 was a surprise.
Both of our other children have full family names. My daughter was named after a great aunt and my grandmothers maiden name, both on my fathers side. Obviously my son is a Jr and my husband was named after his grandfather on his moms side. So now here we are trying to come up with names. Family names. With families with a lot of input. And my mother really wants us to use a name from her side, since we have not. We are not finding out what we are having so we will need to have both names prepared. What I need help with is the girls name. If a boy, we will incorporate the name Harrison, although probably not call him that. That was my maternal grandmothers maiden name. Other boy names we are toying with are Holmes, Bateman (Bates), and Lawson, all from my husbands fathers side and Bonner from my husbands mothers side.
But the girl names in my family are horrendous for the most part. Of course we have plenty of ancestors named Mary, Elizabeth, Susanna, Sarah and the like. But I don’t want something so common. When we named Abigail, we didn’t know anyone named that. Now there are so many ‘Abbie’s’. Of course we could go with my grandmothers names, Thera or Jimmie Lee, but I think not! So for a list of somewhat decent eligible female names, here goes:
Reese (middle name- husbands great grandfather)
Hallie (husbands great aunt)
McConnell ‘Connell’- ( husbands grandmothers maiden name)
Margaret (husbands great great aunt)- could shorten to Maggie, which is my maternal grandmothers sisters name.
Anna Walden (my great great grandmother – on my moms side)
Estella (my maternal great grandmother)- husband hates this.
Mary Lizzie- my maternal grandmothers sister.
Everything I come up with either my husband or my mother hates!
My mom loves AnnaKay – her great grandmother Anna with her middle name Kay. He loves Holmes for a boy, she hates it. I know its our child, but as an only child, I would like to use something from her family. Could Harrison be used in a girls name? Please please help me!
So frustrated!

It is outrageous for anyone to insist on being honored by a baby’s name. And in this case, your mother is confused: the two sides of the baby’s family are Yours and Your Husband’s, not Hers and Her Husband’s. One child has been named for Your Side, and one child has been named for Your Husband’s Side; you have covered your family bases.

I agree that it is nice if it works out as fairly as possible. That is, it WOULD be nice to find a name from your husband’s father’s side and/or from your mother’s side, if you’d like to use another honor name. But I find my heart hardens against choosing any name that would result in the honored party feeling it’s only what’s owed to her, rather than reeling back from sentimental shock and surprise.

Speaking of reeling back, the part about which names your mother loves or hates is making me breathe fast. It sounds exactly as if there are three people making this decision: you, your husband, and your mother. I will pause while you write the rest of this paragraph yourself. …No, I want to write it. This is a decision that you and your husband are making. It is very kind and considerate of you both to take your mother’s preferences into account, but right now it sounds as if she’s an equal partner. I think the time has come for something like, “Thanks for all your input, mom; you’ve given Will and me a lot to think about! At this point we’re going to keep the final choice a secret until the baby is here!”

Here’s how I was going to wrap up that paragraph: “And then, frankly, I think I wouldn’t end up using a name from your mother’s family, because it sounds like it’s not going to work out: not only does she want the names to be from her family, she ALSO wants those names to be the ones she likes.” But then I got to this from your letter: “I know its our child, but as an only child, I would like to use something from her family.” All right, fine: if it’s what you want, we can work with that. But remember I’m on your side if you decide it’s impossible. And I definitely don’t think you need to do both the first and middle names from your mom’s family.

The strategy I suggest is this: First use the thanks-now-back-off quote above, or whatever version of it is the way you’d actually talk to your mom (including the “no words, just action” version where you stop talking about names with her but without remarking on it). Second, choose the name YOU AND YOUR HUSBAND like best from your mom’s family, without taking her preferences into consideration, unless they involve negative feelings about the family members themselves. Then use that name as either the first or middle name, wherever it works better.

Another strategy is to lay it out before her. “Here’s the problem, Mom. We’d really like to use a name from your side of the family. But you hate the only names we’re willing to use. This means the choices are: (1) Use a name from your side of the family, but a name you don’t like; or (2) Not use a name from your side of the family.” It does sound as if she needs it clarified for her that there is no (3) Use a name from your side of the family that you love and we hate.

If you want to cover your husband’s father’s side and your mother’s side all at once, that might make it easier too: you could use the name from your mother’s side as the middle name. Kay seems perfect to me: it’s a great middle name anyway.

Hallie Kay Davis; Abbie, Park, and Hallie
Margaret Kay Davis; Abbie, Park, and Maggie

Thera would also make a perfectly nice middle name.

You asked if Harrison could be used in a girl’s name, and I think it could certainly go in the middle, especially since Abigail’s middle name is also a family surname. Margaret Harrison Davis, Hallie Harrison Davis—sure.

I notice you’ve got Susanna in your “way too common” list, but that one’s pretty unusual for today’s babies: it’s just barely in the Top 1000. Mary, too, is downright distinctive: there was a Mary in my son’s kindergarten class and it was actually startling. It can feel common because it used to be common—and the Social Security rankings are confusing for this name in particular, because of how often it’s given as a first name for religious reasons but then not used in daily life.

I’d lean heavily toward using Susanna. It’s lovely and distinctive and unusual, while sounding familiar enough that it isn’t a problem with Abigail. Then I’d use a middle name from your husband’s father’s side: Reese or Margaret or Hallie or McConnell or whatever you like best.

Actually, I think I’d lean even more heavily toward using Mary. I think you’d be pleasantly surprised by how unusual people would find it, and the traditional nickname Molly would be so sweet with Abbie. Mary McConnell Davis, nickname Molly. I love that so much, I almost feel queasy.

For a boy, I think Harrison is great: Abbie, Park, and Harris. It’s too bad Lawson and Harrison both end in -son, because it you’d rather not call him Harrison, I think Lawson is a great first name. But I think in this case I’d be inclined to shrug and say “We’re not going to call him by first and middle anyway,” and use Lawson Harrison Davis, since as soon as the birth announcements have gone out he’ll just be Lawson Davis.

I would avoid Bateman/Bates. Partly it’s because Bateman makes me think immediately of Batman. But also, I had a male co-worker with the surname Bates, and “Master Bates” came up…a lot. Perhaps it would not be so bad as a first name—or perhaps it would be worse. Maybe it would work as a middle name: Harrison Bateman Davis is nice.

I think I might consider Holmes as a middle name, too, because the thought of all those Sherlock and homeboy/homes jokes and references make me feel weary to even think about. Harrison Holmes is pretty adorable.

Rachel writes:

We are expecting our third boy soon – due date is September 19th, and we are having a terrible time deciding on a name. Our sons are named Griffin Winship and Graydon Winship (we call him Grady). We didn’t intentionally go with two Gr names, we just happened to like them both. We didn’t plan on having a third child, and now we are feeling that we are stuck with a Gr (or at least a G) name. In fact, my six-year-old is insistent they must remain the “G brothers:)”. We want something unique, unusual – not Grant or Graham, etc. One name my husband really liked was Grogan (not sure where he got it), but then we discovered what it meant on Urban Dictionary, so that choice was out:). Names we have considered are Gibson and Grantham (although that would likely turn into Grant).

Any help would be appreciated!

I’m not sure where to draw the unique/unusual line here. The name Graydon/Grayden isn’t in the Top 1000, but the recent and current popularity of Grayson/Greyson and of the Aiden/Brayden/Caden/Hayden/Jaden/Rayden/Zayden group makes it feel familiar. The name Griffin was #220 in 2012, comparable to Grant at #163 and Graham at #215.

I’d like to suggest Gordon, an underused G name. It’s just barely in the Top 1000 as of 2012 (and falling), it’s similar in sound to Grogan, and it has an R sound in it without being another Gr- name. It may, however, be too similar in sound to Graydon: it’s almost a rearrangement of the same sounds, with one vowel change.

Gideon would work better. It was #390 in 2012. Gideon Winship; Griffin, Graydon, and Gideon.

Normally I would suggest George, but I suspect the recent birth of the little prince has knocked that one off the list.

I suggest Gable. It’s not in the Top 1000 for 2012, nor has it been anytime recently. Gable Winship; Griffin, Graydon, and Gable.

Or Gulliver. Despite its similarity to the popular name Oliver, it isn’t in the Social Security Administrations’s database at all for 2012. Gulliver Winship; Griffin, Graydon, and Gulliver.

I like Gus a lot. It surprises me not to see it in the Top 1000 for 2012, but that may be that it’s more often given in a longer form: Angus, August, Augustus, etc. Gus Winship; Griffin, Graydon, and Gus.

Garrett is nice, and it’s another that has a strong R sound in the middle even though it doesn’t start with Gr-. It was #213 in 2012, and falling. Garrett Winship; Griffin, Graydon, and Garrett.

For something less common, Garrison is just barely in the Top 1000 and falling, and also has the inner R sound. Garrison Winship; Griffin, Graydon, and Garrison.

Karen writes:

I found your site while desperately searching for inspiration for naming our Baby Girl #2 who is due in less than 3 weeks! I have read a lot of your naming advice, and I tend to LOVE your responses!

My name is Karen, and my husband is Paul. We have one daughter, Addison Hope (Addie). Our last name is similar to Langley but rhymes with Ashley. Ashley with an “L” at the beginning as I tell people hearing it for the first time. Our last name presents the first naming challenge. So many beautiful girl names end in “L” or with the “lee” or “lyn” sound. This is just too much with our last name. Clearly, a name like Lily is out. We have agreed to avoid the “L” sound in the name–or at the least, the name shouldn’t start or end with “L” or end with “lee” or “lyn.” However, the first syllable could end with “L” (as in Shelby or Sylvia, for example), but that’s about it.

The second challenge is finding something that will match with Addison (Addie). The girls will be two and half years apart. I don’t want them to sound like twins. I certainly don’t want the names to rhyme (Addison and Madison), and I don’t really want the name to start with an “A.” We do want something that can be shortened. We love Addison’s name because she has a cute nickname to go by for as long as she chooses but also has a longer, more serious-sounding name for when she is older. I would like the same for baby girl #2.

A third challenge is finding something that is uncommon but not terribly unusual or unfamiliar. I know Addison is a rather popular name, but I would prefer that baby girl’s name at least not be in the top 5 or 10 of the most popular names. I want something “special” but not made up. I also like unisex names but really only those that are more often used for girls. Names like Blake and Logan, while sometimes used for girls, are still boy names in my book.

We are considering several names including:

Savannah (which, for me, could only be shortened to Savy which my husband isn’t crazy about)
Gracyn (Gracie/Grace/Gray, but it seems contrived, and spelling it the “boy” way of Grayson is just too “boy”)
Emery (Emmy for short. The “emery board” connection bugs me a bit, but we both really like the name)
Ivy (which can’t be shortened but is similar to Ives, a family surname)
Nora (which I LOVE, but my husband does not. It could be short for several longer names, but he really doesn’t like any of them either)

Your input and suggestions would be greatly appreciated! Thanks for considering our question.

This IS a challenge! I keep thinking of possibilities, getting halfway through the sentence mentioning them, and realizing they end in -ley or -son, or start with A, or are loaded with L sounds. I saw Emery and thought, “Ooo, I wonder if they’d like Ellery?”—but it has an -ee ending AND too much L. So I thought, “Wait, what’s that other one?…Everly!”—but that ends in -ly. “Emerson! It’s perfect, unisex but more for girls, and the cute nickname Emmie!”—but it’s another -son. “Emlyn!”—ends in -lyn. “Jocelyn, nickname Joss!”—ends in -lyn. “Campbell! It’s perfect, unisex but more for girls, and the cute nickname Cammie!”—but it ends in -ll. “Harper!”—no nicknames. “Finley!”—ends in -ley. “Quinn!”—no nickname. “Reese!”—no nickname. “Hollis/Holly or Ellis/Ellie!”—both currently used more often for boys, and too much L. “Morgan! Unisex/girls, and great with surname and sister name!”—no nickname. “Reagan!”—no nickname. “Rowan!”—no nickname. “Teagan!”—no nickname. “Callan, nickname Callie!”—but Callie has too much L, and Callan is used more often for boys. It’s possible that with such a tricky surname, another preference will need to go.

Maybe Delaney? It has the nickname Lanie, and it’s a surname name like Addison. I’m not sure about it with the surname, but I think it works, and I like how the sister names sound together: Addison and Delaney. Oh, but Lanie with the surname isn’t great.

Padgett would be adorable, but it’s so much less common than the name Addison, and no good nickname.

Kerrigan. Addison and Kerrigan; Addie and Kerri.

I keep coming back to Harper. It doesn’t have a good nickname, true, but I love Addison and Harper together, and I also love Harper with your surname. Harper Grace, maybe.

From your list, Gracyn and Emery seem like the best options, and I think either of those would solve the difficult challenge. Ives would make a pleasing middle name. Or Emery Grace would be nice.