Last name mystery -- solved!! *Spoiler* : LUSENET : ER Discussions : One Thread

Well, Doug's babies *DO* have his last name!! That thrilled me beyond belief. And he's been SEEING them!? Would like to be witness to that myself...

-- Arianne (, April 13, 2000


OK......I have a aquestion that pertains to last names on a birth form... can the Mother choose to give the child any last name she wishes on the the birth certificate? If the parents are not married is their any law on that, or consent needed? I think it is great that they are the Ross twins.....and that we finally know that!

-- Deb (, April 14, 2000.

I believe you have to have consent from the other parent before giving the child his name, the hospital probably contacted Doug for verification.

-- Joy (, April 14, 2000.

I don't know what the rules are, but I know this. A friend of mine, trying to keep her own last name, had an inordinate amount of trouble making the hospital understand that her baby was to have his fathers name. It was their policy to give babies their mother's last name. She went for a checkup a month or so later and their was some major confusion about the name:

"Hi, I'm here for an appointment. The name is Jones, Mike Jones" "We don't have an appointment for anyone under that name." "Aarrgh!!! Try Mike Smith."

Get the picture? She had other troubles with it as well, she finally gave up and changed her name to her husbands.

-- (, April 14, 2000.

Here is my understanding (my cousin is a single mom whose child has the father's last name). If you put the father's name on the birth cert. then the child can have the father's last name (I don't know if it has the father's last name by default if his name is on the cert.). That way you can collect child support payments from the father as well (unless he fights that). I think different states may have different laws. It is all very confusing. I had been curious as to the status of Carol's twins.

-- amanda (, April 14, 2000.

Different states have different laws, I think. In the state of Florida, the baby can only have the father's last name if the father signs the birth certificate. At least that's how it was when my nephew was born in 1986 (my sister wasn't married to his father at the time).

-- Shawn Sanders (, April 14, 2000.

My husband and I both kept our names, and we are constantly amazed at how often we have to explain that WE HAVE DIFFERENT NAMES. We find that smiling and explaining it politely and firmly usually resolves the issue!

-- M.C. (, April 14, 2000.

i dont remember having to have the fathers consent for the last just fill out the papers and put what you want on it.

-- Alexis (, April 14, 2000.

I'm glad that the babies' last name is Ross, but it doesn't go very well with their first names: Kate Ross & Tess Ross--it's almost a tongue twister. Katherine Ross and Tessa Ross sound much better-- maybe those are their "legal" names.

-- Carin (, April 14, 2000.

Carol's Catholic, isn't she? Maybe their "legal" names are Katharine and Theresa. Just a thought.

-- Arianne (, April 15, 2000.

I really...reeeeeaaaaalllly....don't like the fact that she named her children Ross. What an incredibly patriarchal thing for her to do. I mean, she is raising both of these children by herself yet it is his lineage that is considered more important? Aaargggghh!

-- Rusty Priske (, April 17, 2000.

In the state of ohio, the father must be present to sign the birth certificate or the children HAVE to take the mother's last name by law. the mom cant just put anything she wants....i dont know illinois law though.

-- dawn (, April 20, 2000.

Rusty, I believe that Carol giving her daughters' their father's last name indicates that, deep-down, she wants to or plans to raise them with him. There have been subtle and not-so-subtle signs since last year that Carol is not over Doug and doesn't plan to be -- her refusing to have a hysterectomy points to the fact that she wants more children, very likely she may want to have these children with Doug.

-- Arianne (, April 24, 2000.

Arianne...that has to be right. Why else would she give her children Doug's name if she didn't intend for them to be in his life? Also, I loved the fact that she didn't want the hystorectomy (sp?); she was willing to take the risk she that she could have more children. I wonder if Mark picked up on that and was thinking of Doug.

-- Elaine (, April 24, 2000.

Elaine, I think you're correct about Mark picking up on that. Obviously, he knows that Carol misses Doug and at that point knew something about the situation (anybody else wonder if Mark already knew from Doug that Carol wasn't returning the phone calls? Something in the way he asked made me feel he already knew the answer). Not only did Mark feel strongly that Carol, as a nurse, knows the risk and has a right to take it if she so wishes, he may also have realized that it's important to her (and many people) for the father to be there for the birth of the children, if possible. Since this wasn't done the first time and it most likely will be something both Doug & Carol will regret in the future if not already. Mark (who may or may not have been present for the birth of Rachel, I don't believe we were ever told) knows that Carol's young enough to have more children and would probably wish to do so with Doug, hoping that the next time they can experience the birth together. JMHO. If that made

-- Arianne (, April 24, 2000.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ