We are getting dangerously close to baby’s arrival and I’m having such a hard time nailing down “THE name.” I’ve always been one of those indecisive people that is afraid that there’s a better option out there somewhere, so this process has been pretty difficult since it’s the first time we’ve gone through it.
First name, hands down, will be [name_m]Brooks[/name_m]. DH has loved that name from the beginning, but it doesn’t have a big backstory or meaning. I’m more of the old fashioned type who prefers that names honor a particular something or someone. The only connection I can make to [name_m]Brooks[/name_m] is that my husband and I spent many happy times when we were dating, connecting over baseball.
DH’s middle name is [name_m]Paul[/name_m], which is conveniently my father’s first name, so [name_m]Brooks[/name_m] [name_m]Paul[/name_m] could be an obvious choice. But does it sound too curt? Something about it just rubbed me funny from the get go… I suppose because they’re both single syllable names.
DH’s first is [name_m]Andrew[/name_m], and my father’s middle is [name_m]Scott[/name_m]. Out of everybody to honor, naming our first son after his father and grandfather just seem the most appropriate to me. So other options include: [name_m]Brooks[/name_m] [name_m]Andrew[/name_m] [name_m]Scott[/name_m], [name_m]Brooks[/name_m] [name_m]Anderson[/name_m] [name_m]Scott[/name_m], or [name_m]Brooks[/name_m] [name_m]Anderson[/name_m] [name_m]Paul[/name_m]. These alleviate the single syllable qualm (which may not even be necessary), but maybe become too clunky?
Sorry for the novel, I’m just having so much trouble with this! I’m likely overthinking it, I know.
I love, love, love [name_m]Brooks[/name_m] and I think [name_m]Brooks[/name_m] [name_m]Paul[/name_m] is fine. I wouldn’t worry that they are both one syllable as they are longer sounding than short choppy names, and after the birth announcement we seldom say both names together anyway. If it bothers you though I would suggest [name_m]Brooks[/name_m] [name_m]Andrew[/name_m] [name_m]Scott[/name_m] which would still honour his father and grandfather and I think it is a wonderful idea.
My favorite is [name_m]Brooks[/name_m] [name_m]Andrew[/name_m] [name_m]Scott[/name_m]. I love it! My second choice would be [name_m]Brooks[/name_m] [name_m]Anderson[/name_m] [name_m]Paul[/name_m]. I don’t love [name_m]Brooks[/name_m] [name_m]Paul[/name_m] but it works fine, especially considering its meaning. You have some great honor names to choose from! Personally, I would go with the one you like the best.
This probably isn’t very helpful, but I like all of those names. [name_m]Andrew[/name_m] is my least favorite of the names, but it honestly sounds great in any combo.
My husband’s name is [name_m]Andrew[/name_m] [name_m]Paul[/name_m]. [name_f]Do[/name_f] you think it would be too repetitive or too much like a “junior” to use [name_m]Andrew[/name_m] [name_m]Paul[/name_m] as middles?
I think [name_m]Brooks[/name_m] [name_m]Andrew[/name_m] [name_m]Scott[/name_m] is the best. It sounds the best and you get to honor two very important people. I agree that [name_m]Brooks[/name_m] [name_m]Paul[/name_m] is quite short sounding; [name_m]Brooks[/name_m] [name_m]Andrew[/name_m] [name_m]Scott[/name_m] alleviates this and achieves your honor goals. I adore [name_m]Brooks[/name_m], by the way!
I don’t think they are too surname heavy, although I absolutely [name_u]LOVE[/name_u] [name_m]Brooks[/name_m] [name_m]Andrew[/name_m] [name_m]Scott[/name_m]. My second choice is [name_m]Brooks[/name_m] [name_m]Anderson[/name_m] [name_m]Paul[/name_m]. Both totally work in my opinion! I’m not crazy about [name_m]Brooks[/name_m] [name_m]Andrew[/name_m] [name_m]Paul[/name_m] - something about the flow feels off to me.
I like [name_m]Brooks[/name_m] [name_m]Paul[/name_m] - maybe a little choppy, but how often is the middle name used?? I wouldn’t hesitate to use it as is. Or instead of using “[name_m]Paul[/name_m]” why not try an international version - [name_m]Pablo[/name_m], [name_m]Pavel[/name_m], [name_m]Paolo[/name_m], etc?? That gets a second syllable and still uses [name_m]Paul[/name_m], sort of. Other options - add a syllable “Paulson” or use a name with the same meaning (bit of a stretch.)
Have you considered Andrrson [name_m]Brooks[/name_m] and then calling him [name_m]Brooks[/name_m]. Our son is [name_u]August[/name_u] [name_u]Reed[/name_u] vs [name_u]Reed[/name_u] [name_u]August[/name_u] because the flow sounded so much better as a 2-1 syllable vs a 1-2. [name_m]Brooks[/name_m] and [name_m]Anderson[/name_m] are both on my list for baby boy three
I’m afraid that if we use a variation of [name_m]Paul[/name_m], it will “water down” the honor factor. I have more variation license for [name_m]Andrew[/name_m], only because baby is also getting my DH’s last name.
I think [name_m]Brooks[/name_m] [name_m]Paul[/name_m] is great! Otherwise I like [name_m]Brooks[/name_m] [name_m]Anderson[/name_m] [name_m]Paul[/name_m].
