Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: THURSDAY, March 23, 1995 TAG: 9503230043
SECTION: EXTRA PAGE: 1 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: LISA K. GARCIA STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: LENGTH: Long
The relationship, that is, with her married name. Within six months she changed her name back to Dwyer.
After several checks were returned by the bank because she signed them ``Sharon Dwyer,'' she said she knew she was having trouble changing names.
``It's been 20 years, and we still get mail addressed to the Michael Lambur Family,'' Dwyer said, referring to friends and relatives seemingly resistant to her decision.
Hers was a thoughtful decision process that had many repercussions for Dwyer - many negative. A woman recently asked Dwyer if she felt ``less committed'' to her husband since she did not take his name.
Examining the reasoning of couples' decisions to choose an alternate naming system when they marry is the topic of Dwyer's dissertation. She is a doctoral candidate in Virginia Tech's family and child development program, where she hopes to add to the scant research on the topic.
Her preliminary findings show that choosing names is a very personal and complex decision. However, the result is so public. People feel compelled to critique the choice.
Dwyer said the dominant system in our society is ``so pervasive it's almost invisible.''
That system is called ``patronymic.''
``Early laws in the United States were influenced by both English and French legal traditions,'' Dwyer explained. ``Common law merged the identity of the wife with that of the husband. By marriage, man and woman became one person in the eyes of the law, and that one was the man.
``The legal existence of the woman was suspended during marriage, or at least consolidated, collapsed, into that of her husband. The woman was viewed as [being] under the protection and cover of the man. This condition was called her coverture.''
Dwyer calls the system a ``Pandora's box.'' Once the topic is opened up, problems can follow.
``It comes around again when you name kids,'' she said. (Dwyer's son's name is Garrett Francis Dwyer Lambur.)
The common-law surname rule established patrilineality. Basically, that means that children carry the father's last name. The mother's maiden name remains relatively hidden in today's society - so much so that credit card companies have picked up on this fact and are using it as a password for customer accounts.
Patrilineality ``continues not by law but by practice and usage under the structural persistence of historical tradition and social norms,'' Dwyer said.
As early as 1920, Lucy Stone formed the Lucy Stone League to encourage women to keep their last names when they married. That idea may be even more appealing today when 90 percent of the population marries. Half of those couples divorce, and most who divorce will re-marry.
That equates into at least three different names for women who follow the traditional naming system.
The traditional system is not enforced by Virginia law, but there are plenty of people who believe it was. And one Virginia judge treated it as such.
In 1975, two women went to court to change their names back to their original names. Both were married, and both of their husbands supported the idea. Neither had children, but both couples agreed that any born would be given the father's last name.
The judge denied the request, writing that there was ``no compelling need for a change of name.'' The proposed name change went against ``society's substantial interest in the easy identification of married'' people, and the women's unborn children ``would be substantially burdened in explaining to their peers why they did not have their mother's name and why their mother and father had different names.''
The higher court disagreed.
Dwyer pointed out that Virginia laws are strongly rooted in English common law, which says people can use any name they choose as long as it is not for criminal reasons, such as avoiding creditors. This clenched the case for the women who wanted to use a different name - their maiden name.
Dwyer sums up the importance of a name at group discussions she leads by asking audience members to pick a symbol to represent themselves. No one can come up with anything, except his or her name.
``Names are like pictures, they represent us when we're not even there,'' she said.
Women who use different names from their husbands may find it encourages individuality, said Dwyer.
``Using a different name may be a potential identity source for women which stays with them - within and between roles, through relationships and across time - and may be important as it affects their distinct sense of self.
``It's a question we can't ask about men.''
Dwyer is still seeking couples to interview. For her disseration, she is interested in couples who married and made no changes to their names, but for future research she also would like to interview couples who chose other options. If you would like to be interviewed, call and leave a message for Dwyer at 231-8997.
by CNB