3 Choices, Each with its Own Dilemma!

I have just a couple of months until the arrival of my 2nd boy. My 1st boy’s middle name is [name]River[/name], but I’d love to use that as my second’s first name because I love it more and more. Is that okay? I also love [name]Levi[/name], but my mother’s dog was named [name]Levi[/name] by its breeder, but she’ll change it for me if need be. Lastly, I love [name]Lachlan[/name]…but my husband thinks it’s nerdy. Any advice??? Thanks!

The only way I think it would be acceptable to use [name]River[/name] again would be if your firstchild was deceased and you were honoring his memory by naming your second baby after him. I think each child should have an individual name. Since dh doesn’t like [name]Lachlan[/name] perhaps you should consider having your mom change her dog’s name and then you could use [name]Levi[/name]. Does dh [name]Love[/name] [name]Levi[/name] or does he not really care for it either?

I agree that [name]Levi[/name]'s obstacle is the easiest to overcome. I also think it’s the handsomest of the names!

By the way, if you adore [name]River[/name], maybe you could start using it as a nn for your older son sometimes, since it is his middle name. Or, maybe you could teach the new baby to call his older brother [name]River[/name] and that could be a special name between the two of them (you might then also want to consider having your older son call his younger brother by his middle name as well).

I agree that [name]Levi[/name]'s obstacle is the easiest to overcome. It’s imperative that your husband not hate the name, and I think that using [name]River[/name] again is unnecessary. It’s good that you love it, but you’ve already used it once, and I think it’s important for children to have a name that is uniquely theirs. I liked jlm’s suggestion of having the baby call your older son [name]River[/name], and I think it would be really cute if the new baby also had a nature names. Something like…
[name]Levi[/name] [name]Forest[/name]
[name]Levi[/name] [name]Aspen[/name]
[name]Levi[/name] [name]Linden[/name]
[name]Levi[/name] [name]Ash[/name]
[name]Levi[/name] [name]Rowan[/name]
[name]Levi[/name] [name]Bear[/name] (different of course, but I like it:)
[name]Levi[/name] [name]Juniper[/name]

I think if your mother changes the dog’s name and you name your child [name]Levi[/name], the name will cease to be associated with a dog and will from then on be associated with your child.

I have known people who have repeated their first child’s middle name for their second child’s surname, but I am in the camp that believes each child should have a distinct name.

Alternatives to [name]Lachlan[/name] (which I love btw!)


[name]Lachlan[/name] is a standout favourite in Australia where I live, well loved by one and all, it is close to No 1 here. I think it is a really handsome name. If I were you I would push for this one.

I don’t think you should use [name]River[/name] again, why not look into some nature names or names of rivers you may like eg [name]Hudson[/name].

[name]Levi[/name] is okay but I don’t love it.

I know I’m going against the current here, but I love [name]River[/name] as a name. If you and your husband both love it, I wouldn’t rule it out. BTW, what is your older son’s name?

I think it is okay to name your 2nd son [name]River[/name]. It would be a special bond between your two boys. You could tell the older one that the baby was named after him. It might make your older son feel closer and more protective of his little brother. Maybe if you have a 3rd, you could name the third one after the second’s middle name. It could be a nice tradition for your family.