Double-barrel name is not all it’s cracked up to be

Ifear modern marriage etiquette may not be all it’s cracked up to be. A fascinating new study by the London Mint Office has revealed that while fewer brides are changing their names to their husband’s, one in 10 young men now combine their own surname with their bride’s to create a new double-barrelled surname that they both share.

Double-barrelled surnames are a mixed blessing. And I should know. My own name comes not from a marriage contract but my late Irish grandfather who, as far as I can tell, just made it up.

After my own nuptials, my husband bravely raised the idea of us, along with our daughter, all sharing the same last name. I enthusiastically agreed, reached for a coin, and asked him: “Heads or tails?” I explained that if it meant so much to him, we could toss a coin and, if he won, I would change my name to his; if I won, he would be Mr Hartleybrewer for ever more.

He’s never mentioned it since. Combining names seems the ideal solution. Except I’m not sure these forward-thinking couples have really thought things through. It’s fine when Jane Brown marries John Smith to become the Brown-smiths, but what happens if everyone does it and their beloved daughter ends up marrying Paul Jones-taylor, the child of another achingly modern marriage, and they have to become the Brown-smith-jones-taylors?

And when THEIR children marry, they could easily end up with EIGHT surnames apiece. Pretty soon, no one will have time to get married because the vows will take a month to say.

Can’t we all just remember who is married to whom without everyone having to change their names? After 10 years of marriage, I’ve never once accidentally gone home with the wrong husband at the end of the night. Well, not yet anyway.