A
Rose By Any Other Name Would Smell Just as Sweet:
Maybe Juliet
had it right. Names don't change us. Or do they?
A solid argument can certainly be made in support of the idea that a child will
be influenced by the meaning of his or her name, if that meaning is made to be
significant within the family. For example, in all intents and purposes, "Kuya"
was our oldest's name at the orphanage in the Philippines. (That means big
brother in Tagalog. It is common in Eastern cultures for people to refer to
each other primarily with a title like, auntie, cousin, or littlest brother.)
That's the only name he responded to when I brought him home. We celebrated
it, and still use it. I'm sure by the sly grin on his face that he tries to
hide, but can't, every time we call him "Kuya", that it influenced his ability
to be a nurturing big brother. We don't put him in charge of a dozen babies
here, but we love that he has a caretaker's heart and wraps up Sunflower in a
blanket when he thinks she's cold.
It's a controversial topic, as you'll quickly discover when you broach the
question, "Are you keeping her birth name?" to an adoptive mom. There are
families who staunchly believe that a child should retain his or her birth name
as a first name when adopted. Others don't see any significance at all in the
birth name and whimsically change the child's name to something that they like,
that may or may not have any meaning; the new name just sounds nice.
Personally, I think the answer is somewhere in the middle, and of course the
age of the child has to be taken into consideration. For this post, I'm
speaking of children 0-3, though the concept could work and has worked for many
older children as well.
Let's get this out now: Tim and I are in the "change their names" camp. This is
why:
Think about Abram. God called Abram out of Ur and sent him on a quest to the
Promised Land. God made a covenant with Abram-to give him land and descendants,
and Abram was to follow God. When leaving one life and beginning another, at
the core of an intimate covenant, was a name change. God changed Abram's name to
Abraham.
Then there was Saul. He took a journey down Damascus Road, was struck blind,
taken in by a Christian, convicted and converted. Saul was given a mission,
called to leave behind a life of hatred and hopelessness and begin a new life
with Christ. God changed his name from Saul to Paul at this anointing.
Jacob became Israel. Sarai became Sarah. Esau means hairy. Jacob means
tricky. Peter means rock. I think God places some significance and value in a
name! In addition, He made a habit of changing peoples' names at the
commencement of a new life.
Tim said once, thinking of our children's first lives, "After they get to us,
life gets boring!" True, a warm bed, a family, nutritious food, unconditional
love and commitment may be boring compared to traveling through tribal wars,
scary court hearings and placement delays, Nipa hut life and questionable
tomorrows, but we'll take it! Undoubtedly, our children have left one life with
little to no future and have entered into a new life with hope and promise. A
new covenant between us and them was made, and in this new life, they have begun
the journey to grow into Christian Ambassadors. Sound familiar?
This is why we choose to re-name our children. God did. We get the
significance. Names are a big deal.
"But what about losing their heritage? What about respecting the birth family's
wishes? The children lose so much by leaving their homeland, the least you can
do is keep their name; it's the one thing that they can never lose!" I told you
it was a heated debate...
We, like so many other adoptive families, have found the balance in giving the
children a new first name with meaning, and retaining their birth names as
middle names. Really, one has to consider that sometimes, the birth first name
would make for a very awkward life here in the States. Foreign names can be
difficult to pronounce, have a meaning that is inappropriate here, be a name of
the opposite gender here, etc... And sometimes, families just don't like the
name. There's nothing wrong with that, and I don't think that the family
disgraces the birth family by changing it, especially when it's retained as a
middle name. Surely, the birth family would want the child to have a name that
is functional and appropriate for their child.
We honor our children's birth families in other ways besides just keeping their
birth names in their new official name. Birth family members are never
disrespected in our home. We go out of our way to retain some of our children's
heritages. We eat Filipino food; we say, "Mabuhay" and "Selam" in greeting; J.
could find the Philippines on a map when he was three; and they have traditional
clothes. Is this as good as living in their homelands? No, of course not, but
that's another post! The point is that I don't think changing their birth name
to a new name of meaning to mark a new covenant robs them of their culture
anymore than what is already inevitable by circumstances beyond our control.
So, there you have it. "No," those of you who know the real names of our
children, "that isn't their birth name." We change their names to mark the
significance of their new life, truly a life or death matter for a couple of
them, and retain their birth name as one of their middle names. As a result, all
three of them have strong-though sometimes long :) - names of hope, healing,
faith, and beauty, and if they are influenced at all by their names, as I
suspect people are, then they're off to a good start!
-----------------------------------------
To Read Tiffany's Previous Articles:
- Adoption
Information
- How to Blow Away One of
the World's Darkest Clouds
