Naming children - should the state step in?

Belz... said:
You can't have English-only signs, to my knowledge. You can have English signs if French is also there, usually bigger, but I'm not sure if that last one still applies.
Click to expand...

You can have English only signs if you're, say, advertising for an English medium (e.g. a TV-station). There are finer points in the rules that people don't know of.

Anyway, sort of back to topic, back 20 years ago in places like France, there were rules like "you can only name your kids after saints or historical people/heroes". The slightly more lenient rule in Québec still allows for any saint's name, and there's a whole lot of towns named "Saint(e)-something" in Québec, and if you're looking for an allowed original name, you just need to find a sign saying "Saint-...". There are some pretty funky names: Anaclet, Athanase, Cléophas, Elzéar, Épiphane, Onésime, Tharcisius... If I have a son, I should name him Tharcisius.
 
Just curious: For those of you in countries with 'approved names' lists, are there provisions for REMOVING names from the list?
 
Mr.D said:
Just curious: For those of you in countries with 'approved names' lists, are there provisions for REMOVING names from the list?
Click to expand...

Checked the laws.

In Denmark, it appears not. The ministry for families (yes, we have that) is responsible for maintaining the list, and I can't say if they decide to strike names, but there is nothing specific in the name law about it.

I think there could be two reasons for doing it:

1) The name is no longer used.

2) Recent events have somehow seriously compromised the name.

However, I don't think it happens (for instance, you are free to name your son Osama).

There is a surname list also, and there is a number of 'open' names, which anybody may take. The criterion for being an open name is that at least 2,000 people carry it. However, once a name has entered the open list, it is not taken off, even if the number of users may later drop below 2,000.

Otherwise, you can take a surname based on family relations, and a number of other rules.

I suppose it all seems very elaborate, but it is actually a quite permissive system, judging from the (first-) names that are on the list. I think you will have to exercise considerable imagination to pick a name that will not be allowed.

Hans
 
Jorghnassen said:
Anyway, sort of back to topic, back 20 years ago in places like France, there were rules like "you can only name your kids after saints or historical people/heroes".
Click to expand...

The law has been changed in 1993, and last modified in 2006 (Code civil, art. 57) as follows (my translation):

"The parents choose the child's name(s). [...] The civil officer immediately notes the chosen names on the birth registry.

When (the officer thinks) those names, or one of them, alone or in association with the other names or with the family name, look detrimental to the child's interests [...] the official immediately notifies the public prosecutor who can transfer the case to a family court.

The judge can supress the offending name(s) and ask the parents to pick another, failing that he can attribute another name himself."


In most cases, the officer at the registry office (and more often the nurses at the maternity) will try to dissuade the parents from picking too much an outlandish name, or persuade them to wait until they are sober, and it doesn't go any further.

When it goes all the way to the family court, things can be hotly disputed.
In a very few cases, civil officers and judges have refused some names and tried to bully the parents into choosing something that agrees with their taste, political or religious views, which is highly problematic.

There was a case a few years ago about a girl being named Mégane, which is also a car brand, that was fortunately won by the parents, and others about clearly racist mayors refusing names that didn't sound French enough (read mostly "Arabic and African").

However, all in all, it allows for a wide variety of names and most of the time the interventions by the autorities can be considered in the interest of the kids.
 
I can't believe I'd forgotten about this clip from Adam Hiills an Aussie comic, discussing US names



It's safe for work
 
Government -- is there nothing they aren't well-suited to do when someone can stir up a mob?

​
fire_marshall_bill.jpg
 
Last edited:
Flo said:
The law has been changed in 1993, and last modified in 2006 (Code civil, art. 57) as follows (my translation):
Click to expand...

So I was right by guessing the old law was still around 20 years ago... Neat. I knew it had been changed, I just couldn't remember when. I first learned about it reading the early Thorgal albums, where there was a comment by the author saying that unfortunately, Thorgal and Aaricia were made up names, not taken from scandinavian history, so parents in France couldn't named their children after them. It also meant that rules in Québec, though more lenient then, as expected, had their roots from the French civil code.
 
Jorghnassen said:
So I was right by guessing the old law was still around 20 years ago... Neat. I knew it had been changed, I just couldn't remember when. I first learned about it reading the early Thorgal albums, where there was a comment by the author saying that unfortunately, Thorgal and Aaricia were made up names, not taken from scandinavian history, so parents in France couldn't named their children after them.
Click to expand...

That's one of the few reasons that could make me regret the old law, tha was quite a crappy comics ... :boxedin: :D


It also meant that rules in Québec, though more lenient then, as expected, had their roots from the French civil code.
Click to expand...

I'll say it before anybody has a chance: many bad things, in Québec and elsewhere, originate from the French civil code ;)
 
Toke said:
???
Guess I am one of those "groupies" who believe the state should try to protect kids against the worst idiocy of their parents. With e.g. a name book.
Click to expand...

Thank you for proving two points: first that state power groupies like to pretend they are the only ones who think parental rights should be removed when parents prove themselves harmful to the children. (The unbridled strawman conceit of the state power groupie) - and secondly the incapacity to conceive of separation of powers between executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government.
 
MRC_Hans said:
Checked the laws.

In Denmark, it appears not. The ministry for families (yes, we have that) is responsible for maintaining the list, and I can't say if they decide to strike names, but there is nothing specific in the name law about it.

I think there could be two reasons for doing it:

1) The name is no longer used.

2) Recent events have somehow seriously compromised the name.

However, I don't think it happens (for instance, you are free to name your son Osama).

There is a surname list also, and there is a number of 'open' names, which anybody may take. The criterion for being an open name is that at least 2,000 people carry it. However, once a name has entered the open list, it is not taken off, even if the number of users may later drop below 2,000.

Otherwise, you can take a surname based on family relations, and a number of other rules.

I suppose it all seems very elaborate, but it is actually a quite permissive system, judging from the (first-) names that are on the list. I think you will have to exercise considerable imagination to pick a name that will not be allowed.

Hans
Click to expand...
????
A list for surnames?
What can be approved by that?
I mean the surnames are already in use by the parents, so they (whether from the father or the mother) will be taken by the child. It's not like a new surname gets chosen with the birth of a new child isn't it? And immigrants get to keep their own surnames?
Or is there something I'm missing?

That said. My father had to fight for my first name, it being a german name. And even as late as in 1968 there was enough of antipathy towards germany (at least in Arnhem, where I was born) for a german name not to be readily acceptable. Only when my father proved that my first name was already used in other parts of the country did it get accepted.

Never got any trouble with my name, by the way.
 
bruto said:
Who is to say when a name is inappropriate? Here in the US, a significant number of African Americans make up names with little or no precedent (my example of Condoleezza Rice being an obvious one). As a complacent white middle class Vermonter, I can observe that it seems a poor idea to saddle a kid with a racially conspicuous name, but they know that when they do it, and who the **** am I, or anyone else, to tell anyone they shouldn't?
Click to expand...
Kobe Bryant was named because his parents liked Kobe beef.
 
AlaskaBushPilot said:
Thank you for proving two points: first that state power groupies like to pretend they are the only ones who think parental rights should be removed when parents prove themselves harmful to the children. (The unbridled strawman conceit of the state power groupie) - and secondly the incapacity to conceive of separation of powers between executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government.
Click to expand...
Again ???

Can you think of others than the government to step in to protect kids, and what does that have to do with the 3 branches?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom