Someone asked me today, What is your view about women seizing to bear their fathers name after being married and i replied, why should a lady seize to bear her fathers name because she got married? Who said it should be so? Is it her choice or her husband's choice? or, a choice derived from the general public?

If it is her choice, good. if it is her husband's choice, wrong. if it is the choice derived from the general public, there is no compulsion in it.


As for me, I will not allow my wife change her surname when we get married. She should retain her fathers name, but would add mine as a plus,except she choses to change it to mine herself.

Why must women seize to bear their fathers name because they get married?

Two words: Culture & Tradition

which culture and which tradition? where did this practice derive it sources?

You may find this excerpt interesting " In any case, that incident has raised the issue of the logic behind a married woman’s adoption of her husband’s name as her surname instead of maintaining her father’s name. After all, in many parts of the world, as soon as a woman gets married she simply sheds her father’s name and adopts her husband’s name as her surname instead.

Incidentally the rampancy of this practice, which is said to have emanated from the west, gives the impression that it is a settled issue by all logical, moral and even religious standards. After all, some people who try to justify it argue that since surname in the western culture may not necessarily refer to father’s name, there is no issue in adopting someone else’s name as surname.

Though even if this is the case in the western culture, it does not in any way justify such practice, because surname basically refers to father’s name generally as it is also maintained in Islam.

Therefore, in as much as I wonder the logic behind this practice, I consider it a blatant manifestation of unfairness to both the married woman and her father alike. The father for instance, who had trained and educated her to the moral and academic standard good enough to impress the husband before he married her, is simply relegated by having his name removed as her surname, which constitutes not only an injustice but an insult to him also.

What particularly confirms that it is indeed an insult is the fact that, such name withdrawal/adoption practice is often done subject to the financial, professional or socio-political status of the father compared to the husband and vice versa.

For instance in a situation whereby a husband enjoys better social or financial status and fame, his wife automatically withdraws her father’s name, adopts and indeed flaunts her husband’s name as her surname. However, in case of vice versa, she retains her father’s name as her surname, and only close her friends and relatives may know her husband’s name.

Moreover, one can hardly find a married daughter of a serving or former governor, incumbent or former president, traditional ruler or extremely wealthy man, bearing her husband’s name as her surname, whereas once it is the husband who enjoys one of such statuses, and unless her father is higher than him, she automatically gets rid of her father’s name in favour of her husband’s name.

Interestingly enough, in a situation whereby both the father and the husband’s names are two important to be discarded, she cleverly combines the two names as her surnames, even though the still makes sure that the most prominent between the two names appears more conspicuous.

This identity manipulation obviously exposes a married woman to unnecessary embarrassment especially if she is a public figure, when she has to switch surnames in case of any divorce or her husband’s death, which inevitably gives room for unnecessary inquisition and even interference into her personal life, all of which would have been avoided had she kept her father’s name as her standard and permanent surname.

This is despite the fact that, some women go to the extent of maintaining their former prominent or wealthy husbands’ names as their surnames even after remarrying, unless if they happen to marry equally wealthy or famous husbands again.

Moreover, this practice is also unfair to the married woman herself in the sense that it undermines her natural pride, which her father’s name greatly represents, especially in this increasingly morally bankrupt world where a growing number people are born out of wedlock. Nevertheless, I have never heard any opposition against this phenomenon from women right organizations and activists.

Interestingly enough, in addition to married women, some men and women, whose paternal or maternal grandfathers enjoy better social statuses than their fathers or husbands, cleverly skip their less famous fathers’ or husbands’ names or simply mention them quite ambiguously only to highlight the adopted names of such famous paternal or maternal grandfathers at the expense of the names of their less famous biological fathers. Worse still is how some other people adopt even the names of their mentors, bosses and their benefactors as their surnames.

Anyway, though the prevalence of such practice could be attributed to lack of ample awareness about its implications, there is no sound logic or moral standard let alone religious precept to justify it whatsoever. As a matter of fact, it is to a great extent impossible to rule out the suspicion that, the vast majority of those who do it are motivated by some elements of disdain for their relatively socially or financially disadvantaged biological fathers.

It is noteworthy that, Islam is particularly against this bad practice as there is no circumstance whatsoever allowing a Muslim to intentionally replace his biological father’s name under any pretext. The apostle of Allah; Mohammad, peace and blessing of Allah be upon him was authentically reported to have warned that; “Whoever knowingly adopts someone’s name as his father’s name while he knows that he is not his real father, he will be denied entry into the heaven” {Sahihul-Bukhary, Hadith No. 6385}.

After all, even the wives of the apostle of Allah never adopted his name as their surnames despite being married to the best among the whole creatures. Instead even his wife Safiyya whose Jewish father; Huyay bin Akhtab was particularly notorious for his open enmity against the apostle of Allah, yet she maintained her father’s name as her surname anyway." http://qaddamsidq..ae/2012/10/the-married-womans-surname.html

Oga blims, abeg carry dictionary check the meaning of seize and cease. why you dey embarass yourself like dis nau?

na u sabi oo, if you no fit correct am, leave am like that

bilms: which culture and which tradition? where did this practice derive it sources?

The same source which advised Africans to bow when they are greeting respected elders.

Why is she bearing her fathers name in the first place why not her mothers name

wow, see long epistle over other people's matter.

this is why drug companies will continue to run profitably, since people will always need drugs for their self-induced hypertension which they acquired via gbeborun.

op how far with ya farm na, the cows don comot, abi dem still dey there?

i see you're sufficiently rested now and have moved on to other matters, does that mean the cows have gone.

it'd not a must. my wife still uses are fathers name on official documents including passports with visas. Most times, the legal documentation involved with change of name is very tedious
The only document showing we are married is our marriage certificate and wedding pics.

Hum