Judge Changes Baby's Name

This wouldn't have happened if the parents hadn't been fighting about the name. Evidently one parent does NOT want the name Messiah. That wasn't expressed in the article, and to me, that's the most important part of the equation. Instead of using a religious reasoning, the judge should have stuck to the issue of the disagreement between the parents. Just because the mom wants the name doesn't mean she should get her way just because she's the mom. The father should have say as well.

Seems like naming a kid Messiah is a lot of responsibility. But since he hasn't come yet, perhaps Martin will be the one. Hard to say if it is a sillier name than Brooklyn or Bronx though. Or North.

ETA - King, Prince and Baron are dog names, not kid names. Same for Princess, Duke and Muffin

Why stop there? Let's get rid of names like Apple, Blue, Suri, North, etc...why is it okay for celebs to pick absolutely ridiculous names but normal people can't?

I think all parents should use their noggin when naming their kids, but the judge had no right to change the baby's first name.

ETA: Did anyone actually read the article?
The court date was about the LAST name. The judge took it upon herself to pass religious judgement about the first name & change it.
"Title" is not the issue. Baron, Queen, King have all been used.
Religious judgement is the issue.

When the parents have to go to court over their babies last name, because their "legal relationship is unclear"? The baby's first name might be the least of their worries!

(Um, but technically, I don't think a judge has the right to make a ruling based on her own religious beliefs.)

Messiah is NOT a NAME - it's a TITLE.

While I do not agree with the judge infringing like that - the parents are really freaking "out there"....I wonder if the mom is going through PTD?

The Dad did NOT like the name - he wanted something else...they have two other children - with "normal" names. They were FEUDING and needed a court to settle several differences.....

I don't think Messiah's that bad. I just watched a documentary on Wavy Gravy, and he named his son Howdy Do Good Gravy. The son said he spent his 13th birthday, the first day he was legally allowed, in court changing his name to Jordan.

Is Messiah a name, or a title?

I'm not sure that it's really any more obnoxious than a boy named King (although jazz player Joe "King" Oliver earned his title) or Prince or Baron or any other titled name. I will say, though, that I am not looking forward to the day I hear a mom yelling "Princess! Five more minutes!" at the park. ick. Queen Latifah gave herself her name to empower women, who she perceived to be denigrated repeatedly in the rap world. Not a bad reason, really. But it was her choice.

Judges judge. Considering the parents couldn't agree on the name, my guess is that Messiah has more things to worry about than not having a name which could be highly offensive to some. I guess we are all free to be as ridiculous as we like. Should we wear it with pride? Hell no!

The parents went to court over the last name of the child, not the first. His last name was his mother's surname, Martin. The father wanted it to be his surname, McCullough. The first name Messiah was not being debated or argued by the parents.

The judge specifically said she changed the first name based on her own religious opinions. That is a violation of constitutional law and will almost certainly be overthrown at appeals court.

As for the name itself, Messiah ranks #387 in the top popular names in the USA. My own name doesn't even rank in the top 1000.

(Check your own name at thttp://www.socialsecurity.gov/cgi-bin/babyname.cgi. The HowManyOfMe site is obsolete as it hasn't been updated since 2000.)

What's the point of saying Messiah is a "title" and not a "name"? Apple is a fruit, Blue is a color and North is a location. I didn't read the article but my point is, you can name your kid whatever you want, lots of people name their kids names that are not 'technically' a name. In the event that the parents don't agree, I think mom trumps dad. For it to get to the point to go to court about it, pathetic. JMO.

I think people are making a bigger deal about the Judge's commentary than was intended. The fact is they were fighting over who's last name was used so she gave the child the mom's last name as the first and the dad's last name as the last. Seems like a pretty good compromise.

Then the media gets involved....everything goes to heck

Stupid names seem to be a right so yeah, I don't see this as an issue for the court but then they brought the name before the court, it isn't like this judge saw the name and attacked.

I think it's sad that people don't figure things out like compatibility before they have sex and kids and then end up in court for what ever reason.

According to

http://www.howmanyofme.com

Messiah is used less than 14 times as a first name in the US while
Martin is used 344,905 times as a first name.

I'm not crazy about either of those choices.

At least the judge didn't name him John Doe (it seems there are 223 people in the US who have that name).

I'm with AZneomom - I'm the one who did all the work of carrying the kid around in my body for nine months, then pushing it out through my lady bits, I'm the one who should decide what to call the little darling. And if I want to name it Adolf Jeffrey Dahmer Hitler or Messiah Allah Beelzebub Cuthulu, that's MY prerogative.

Angi:
I didn't even tell my daughter's dad that I was pregnant until I had decided that I was going to have her. Had I chosen to abort, he would never have been told that I was ever pregnant.
I didn't tell him when I went into labor. I ddin't want him at the hospital. I called him after she and I came home and told him he could come viosit his daughter.
I didn't consult him about her name. I picked out the name I wanted, and that's what went on the birth certificate.

I think if there's any disagreement, the mother wins. She carried that child inside of her for 9 months and gave birth to him. It's not like she named him Adolf Hitler, or something else with a negative connotation. Total judicial overreach, in my opinion.

Actually, I have a friend whose son is named Messiah. She calls him Siah, and he's adorable. Lots of kids have unusual names. Who cares?

Nope, definitely not the government's job to tell us what we can or cannot name our kids. It is a shame the adults had to go to court for the last name at all, as they kinda opened themselves up to this intrusion.

If it comes out of my body, I get to name it!! I don't care what the dad thinks and certainly not what a judge thinks. Frankly I don't care what anyone thinks about a name unless there is no mom in the picture. The person who carries it and births it gets final say on the name, full stop. If the kiddo is adopted, above logic would clearly not apply.

I think the mom is ridiculous for naming her kid that, but it's her kid, her choice. The judge was totally out of line.

Just another reason why you should not take what you hear/read in the media as gospel truth. They are in business to make money and they do that by sensationalizing stories.

As to your question, I don't think the judge should have changed the first name. It was not what they were there for and I believe the judge abused his/her discretion by doing that. I bet if the unhappy parent appeals, the court of appeal will order that the name be changed back.

The case is being appealed and will be overturned in a heartbeat. "Messiah" is actually pretty high up in the name popularity rankings for recent years. Judges, as do people in any profession, sometimes mess up at their job.

Added: the parents were in court to decide the baby's LAST name, not first name. The judge completely overstepped her bounds by ruling on a question that wasn't being presented to the court. THEN she added to her indiscretion by making a completely religion based statement about the appropriateness of the name.
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-judge-messiah...

I think she was completely out of line and should not have interjected her personal religious opinion on a ruling that had nothing to do with the child's first name. It was supposed to be a decision about the last name only, and you only have to look to Hollywood to find worse names for a child. I hope the mother gets her appeal and it gets thrown the heck out. I also hope they are able to change judges if she puts that much personal influence in her other decisions like visitation and child support.

ETA:

I did notice that she used both sir names, but honestly WHY she changed his first name is still entirely out of line. Her ruling was supposed to be for the last name. She was wrong to change his first name as well (there was nothing in the article indicating that the kid's first name was a problem to the parents) and she cited her own religious preferences. Wrong, wrong, wrong. My kid has 2 last names in her name. There was no reason the judge had to mess with his first name.

And edit again that I was not aware that the father didn't like the name. But the kid is 7 months old now. He was named. Let it go.

As a judge it is her place to decide on the EXACT ISSUE in front of her. nothing more ... nothing less. And her personal beliefs should NEVER EVER EVER EVER be brought into it ... judgement should be based on the letter of the law. END OF STORY.

The mother is already appealing the decision from what I read.

And I COMPLETELY disagree that the mother has the final say in everything related to the child because "she carried it and pushed it out".

I don't think they should change the first names unless the name can cause harm to the child later on. There was a similar case I think in NJ where one of the children's names was Adolf Hitler (last name here) and the siblings were similar.

Those children would be tormented for the rest of their lives with names like that.