A mum has spoken out about an 'awkward' dilemma she is facing as she wants to change her new-born baby's name, but her mother-in-law has already had it tattooed on her. Sharing her predicament on parenting forum, Mumsnet, in the popular Am I Being Unreasonable (AIBU) thread, the new mum said she feels "awful".
While asking for advice from fellow mums in the forum, she revealed her mother-in-law "immediately" got the baby's name inked on her arm, despite the infant being just two weeks old. But is torn over what to do about the "nightmare" situation since she now wants to change her baby's original name because it 'no long feels right for him'.
The mum and her partner both agree they've had a "change of heart" and are keen to swap their son's name. They claim they did not know about the mother-in-law's tattoo plans and are unsure about how to handle things, Liverpool Echo reports.
READ MORE: Man sparks debate after faking injury to jump 'insane' airport queue
In a post simply titled "MIL tattooed DS's name...", the mum wrote: "We have just had a baby two weeks ago, MIL immediately tattooed baby boy's name on her arm. However, we have since had a change of heart re the name... What a nightmare!
"We didn't ask her to, or knew she was doing it, it's obviously really sweet of her to do it so that's not the problem it's more just now we don't want to call him that. I feel awful! How on earth do we handle this? I'm really trying to talk myself into keeping the name, but it doesn't sit right..."
More than 100 people commented on the post with their thoughts on the situation. One user suggested: "Can you use that as the middle name so she can just add the "new" first name to the front?"
A second said: "It's really not your problem, to be honest. It was entirely her decision, and not something most people would do. You're entirely within your rights to change your minds, it's still very early days and you're only getting to know him."
A third wrote: "Oh yikes. Perhaps she should have waited until you registered baby.... Erm... can you live with that name or does it just really not work?"
"I agree with suggestion to keep it as a middle name- you liked it enough so maybe it will work better as a middle? She could then add his name to the tattoo. To be honest she was a bit premature to do it after only 2 weeks but I definitely would not want to upset my MIL so I'd try to find a compromise." Another added.
Someone else put: "No way would I keep a name I didn't actually want to use because someone had decided to tattoo it on their body. Use the name you like. She can have laser removal or a cover up."
What are your thoughts on what the mum should do? Let us know in the comments below.
Another quipped: "That's so funny! Can I be there when you tell her you're changing his name? I'll bring some nice biscuits." And another said: "She's daft for doing it so quickly, she could have waited. He's your son so if you prefer a different name then go for it."
"I'm struggling to believe this actually, but if it's true, it's her problem, not yours. You can't give your child a name you no longer like, simply to avoid upsetting some loon who got a tattoo done!" Said another.
One Mumsnet user asked if her mother-in-law already had tattoos, to which the mum replied: "Yes she has all her kids and gc's [grandchildren's] names already. It's not massive but it's right near her wrist, and has its own area, there's no mistaking it's there! I can't handle this level of awkward, I'm really not good with stuff like this."
In another follow up comment, the mum added: "Hahaha it is slightly funny, but I also just feel so bad for her. The name absolutely doesn't work especially as my dd [dear daughter] pointed out it sounds like a certain body part that is less than ideal. Even as a middle name isn't really an option but we would keep it for her I guess, just not as a first name."
READ NEXT:
