Women not taking husband's surname

My dutch cousin told me that woman in Holland do not change their last names during their life time. Woman keep the surname they were born with for life.

Agneta Marianne Harrysson: it is not necessary that you don't agree with the science of genealogy. Indeed Geni isn't a genealogical site but more a social site, with people who use a popular version of what they call genealogy. the discussion re lastnames is a discussion between persons who addict social or legal values against genealogists. Birthnames, baptisednames, adoptednames, marriednames are all lastnames, but the only scientific genealogical name is the birthname. That is not my opinion, but the definition in the official science of genealogy.

Fred - do you have a reference for us on the official science of genealogy? It might be different in Europe. In the US there are no graduate degree granting programs in genealogy. There are some good certificate programs and so on - but nothing equivalent to a doctoral degree or indeed even Master's level. So I tend to look at what academic historians do when they draw charts for use in professional biographies and so forth. And how they "write the name" depends on the kind of chart they are using, but I just was looking at one for the US - and the woman's full names were written out.

Typo in last post, it should have read:

As it was my "stupid" question that started this discussion i feel that qualifies me to offer a further opinion on the topic.

One solution i can see for this issue is removing the [last name/surname] field altogether when adding a profile.
Instead a new profile would only have [first name] [middle name] [birth surname][also known as]. Users would then set their preference to what they prefer, for umarried profiles the automatic display name would be [first - middle - birth], married women could either keep that format or display could be [first - middle - spouse's birthname]. In fact the default display could be linked to the users Geni language preference.

The [birth surname] field would cater for patronyms in cultures without surnames, otherwise they would go in [also known as].

I think that this would make the entering of profile data more unifrom and put the onus of display method back onto individual users. Realistically if a Geni user doesn't know how to reset their display preferences they probably aren't so serious as to really mind how names are displayed, or if they are just a little computer challenged they'd be motivated enough to ask for help.

Further, i THINK my solution could be automatically used to reconfigure existing profiles without users having to manually revisit each one.

What i THINK geni could do is write a script that would visit each profile and compare the current [surname] with the [birth surname] fields. If [birth] is blank the script would copy [surname] into [birth] then remove [surname] field. If [birth] and [surname] fields both contain data then the [surname] field is removed without [birth] being altered, the assumption being that the user who created that profile has either filled in both fields with accurate data or that both fields actually contain the same name.

Remove the gendering issue so all name changing men are accommodated and we're into the realm of the doable. But a question: isn't there a recommended display option setting already?

Actually I need to correct myself. This would not work for that long period of history (which continues in Iceland and other places) where there is no birth surname. So I believe this script could result in ahistorical errors.

Erica.
I am aware that Iceland has no surnames BUT people creating profiles on Geni for Icelanders MUST be entering peoples patronyms somewhere and i'd be willing to bet they tend to use the [surname] field?
Eg. Erik the Red's Master Profile has Thorvaldsson in the [surname] field.

If the script came across profiles without either [birthname] data or [surname] data then removing the [surname] field would not be losing any data would it?

Erica: "Remove the gendering issue so all name changing men are accommodated and we're into the realm of the doable."
Actually, i think that would create a far bigger problem where a couple would be displayed as [Husband][Wife's Family] and [Wife][Husband's Family] THAT would be confusing, no?

Are there cultures where husband taking wife's name is COMMON? If so is an issue, if just a very small minority then changes profile data could be manually altered by manager to represent facts.

We use the display name field in many cultures that did not use surnames and quite recently if not currently. Native Americans as a simple example. African slaves in the US before emancipation in the 1860s. Russian serfs later than that I believe. Won't work.

Alex I have many Anglicized, naturalized names in my tree. The gender is irrelevant to them, but they had one name at birth, a different at death. This is just one of the many reasons we have two fields available and desire for Geni to develop more. But until they can do so, I use the fields as labeled - birth surname, last name. I fill in both fields. I meet the naming conventions established for different areas of the tree. I use display name liberally. And it all seems to work out more or less OK.

That's ok Erica, i have a big box under my desk labelled "Bright Ideas Doomed to Fail".

Well Fred B., there are a little bit to many ways of telling the truth about genealogy, that so far I don't think it's a kind of science.

Alex - I've seen the script idea before.:). If and when Geni is able to provide more naming option fields will be the time for it.

Thankz Erica, so not only a bad idea but an unoriginal one too! I feel much better now :P

:)

It's all about the database and the query to extract and display the data in the way that best suits your own purposes. So truly I agree with "how" you're thinking about it.

More and more I think its about making sure everyone knows how to set their display options.

At least since WWII, women don't take their husband's name in Belgium. Before that, it depends. The official name in public records is the birth name but the husband's name is sometimes used as well.

"More and more I think its about making sure everyone knows how to set their display options."
While i agree that setting display options is the best resolution the fact is that if people in different parts of the tree are filling in the fields differently then your display option settings will go haywire when u move from one section to another, without u necessarily realising it.
The whole trigger for me starting this discussion was the fact that different groups within Geni are advocating filling of profile fields in different manners. I understand their reasons for this but i think that this problem is due to Geni's "inflexible nature" and filling the fields in diffrently in each area is a messy band-aid solution.
But with over 61million profiles in the world tree it's obviously not a big issue in general :)

I really didn't expect this much of a response, especially when George answered my initial question with the very first reply!

LOL.
But, I think we're seeing lots of very interesting considerations here, and we can only learn from that. I bet this is truly the unique consequence of a collaboration site like Geni. We're 'forced' to talk about things. I have a simple philosophy: from 'chaos', the 'better version of the truth' will emerge ;-). To me, that seems true for the 'facts' AND for the way we process them :-)

I truly do not understand the type of civilized arguing going on here. Genealogy (the study of genes) is about where we come from not about where we're at. Current name or names used over a lifetime matter very little compared to the name given at birth by the parents. This is regardless of whose last name is used or if the mother took the father's name at marriage. The registered birth name should be used to identify a person. A father may have 3 children with 3 different mothers but the child's name is given at birth with mother referenced by her birth name and father the same. The problem comes when the casual tree builder comes to a site such as Geni, maybe with new information, and inputs names by married name or some composite. As helpful as they may have been with their unique information, it isn't helpful if it can't be found. I would recommend a short set of introduction pages after someone signs up that basically asks "Are you interested in genealogy or building a family tree?" and then going into "this is how you can get the most out of your A or B".

Hi Jason

You must be fortunate in having ancestors with government birth records! To generalize terribly --- In the US there is "a gap" - the first generations (1600s) may have records in England or the early towns in New England. The later generations (say 1860s on) may as well. So depending on geography etc, the records are gravestones (name at death); census (not reliable for names); tax records (rarely include women); family bibles (if retained); and secondary sources.

Oh - and the all important will data. Which is of course signed with someone's "last name" (which may or may not be the same as "birth surname.")

Jason, would you prefer the arguing degenerated into insults and name calling?
I think your idea of a basic introduction would be a good one but it might be considered something of a turn off for new customers and remember Geni is a commercial enterprise.

And old ones who are having no issues ... :)

I would recommend also set of introductory notes, but in opposite direction.

To teach people that the world exist outside their own area which is quite different, unless of course, those from different cultures do not matter.

No Alex, I appreciate the cordiality of it all, but the back and forth "we don't do it that way" is getting monotonous. I think anyone interested in taking the time to work on their tree and pay for it, would be more than willing to go through a crash course in genealogy. Like Jadra recommended, a quick reference to a country's situation would also be helpful.

Erica, I understand that some birth names would be almost impossible to know based on the lack of records, which is the point at which the mother's lineage becomes unknown and speculation unreliable. But when the mother's birth name is known that should be the primary name in a lineage, family tree, pedigree, etc. I would prefer to see the mother's last name blank if the birth name is unknown so the assumption of her being born with the same name as her married name is not there.

That would work fine for a simple chart but it does not work for a database of 60 million names with an automated match system. Nor is it accurate as a woman or man with an unknown birth surname certainly did have a last name. For my ancestors with unknown birth surnames I prefer to see them displayed as they were known (with a last name). All you have to do is set your Geni display options to "show birth name only" and we are both well pleased.

I think my post was misunderstood, I was refering to the fact that in
Some cultures birth name cease to exist
So, continuing to usebirth name is not acknoledging any
changes in person's life

Jadranka, your post is understood and the main cause of my confusion with the back and forth here. Genealogy is not about changes in name during a person's life, it's about where they came from, hence the "study of genes". It doesn't matter if in some cultures the birth name is no longer used, as I believe you're referring to, pretty much everywhere the married name is the one that becomes the name they are known by but that doesn't change who their parents were. Using the birth name ensures they are known as coming from a set of parents, the link connecting them to a male denotes a new mating partner as it could be rudely defined. The mating pair than have offspring, regardless of male or female, they are given names that they will go by until they have their own partner and it will continue as such. If a woman has 3 husbands and children by each, her reference name (at birth) should not change, only the links to the husbands and subsequent links to children. She does not lose her identity or pedigree because she gets married.