These Shocking Baby Names Have Been Officially Banned

on July 18, 2011 at 12:33 PM

Lucifer When it comes to the government getting involved in child rearing, I'm usually of the step-away-from-the-kid school of thought, but sometimes intervention is necessary for the sake of the kid. Take baby names for instance. While deciding what name to bestow upon one's child is a parent's right and privilege, when parents want to call their kid "Lucifer," they really should be stopped.

Some names are just stupid, but others are mean and really could border on some kind of mental abuse. In New Zealand, at least, the government is putting a stop to such nonsense. Currently, there are 102 names on the government's list of those it has rejected in the past two years, including Lucifer.

Others that haven't made the cut in New Zealand include names like: "89," "/" (Slash?), "Mr.," and "Messiah." All pretty good calls I'd say. Countries around the world have banned all sorts of names as well, most of which seem like merciful rulings. The problem, however, is that when you try to regulate names, there's huge room for interpretation in what's good taste.

It seems New Zealand has also rejected names that sound too much like titles such as: "Baron," "Bishop," "Duke," "General," "Judge," "Justice," "King," and "Knight." That seems a little too aggressive in my opinion. The council also balked at, though later accepted, names like "Fanny" and "Nevaeh" (heaven spelled backwards), which seems crazy as they're pretty popular names.

And I guess that's why even though I'd like to see some people stopped from giving their children ridiculous names, it seems more problematic to start determining what a ridiculous name actually is. I suppose a couple little Lucifers running around is a small price to pay for the freedom we have in this country to name our kids "Apple" and the like ... for those not named Lucifer at least.

Which baby names would you like to see outlawed? Do you think governments should outlaw certain names?

Image via Omar Omar/Flickr

About the author Julie Ryan Evans

can be found writing from coffee houses wherever she may be. The quality of her days is largely influenced by the seat she nabs and whether a protein plate is available.

Filed Under: baby prep, baby names

Comments (91)

RanaAurora

on Jul 18, 2011 at 12:37 PM

I think they're going way too extreme.

Report this comment

Kediset

on Jul 18, 2011 at 12:44 PM

why do they have to ban titles? I'd at least feel better if I can give myself a title even if I'm not really that title. :P It'd make me feel better about not ever being someone with an official royal title ;3

anyways... there's so many unfortunate names out there it'd be hard to pick just one

PonyChaser

on Jul 18, 2011 at 12:49 PM

Overstepping by the government. Who are they to tell you that you can't bestow a certain name? Let's consider "Lucifer" for a moment. For Christians, this would be an awful name, akin to raising the devil on a pedestal. But what if the parents are Athiests? What if they simply don't believe in the Christian Dogma which assigns a particular characteristic to a name? What if they just like the sound of the name? What if it's a family name?

I question the sanity of those White Supremacists who named their kid Adolph Hitler. But barring other incidents of child abuse or neglect (which, I believe actually were involved), should those parents be banned from naming their child Adolph? And following that train of thought, some people think that Malcom X wasn't a hero, but a rabble rouser. Should African American parents be banned from naming their children Malcom Xavier, or whatever? If that happened, you can be sure the screams of "racism" would be loud and justified.

Are there parents who give their kids stupid names? Absolutely (Pilot Inspektor? Really??). And yes they should be figuratively (and sometimes literally) slapped upside the head for it. But for the government to step in, wasting valuable resources and money they don't have... that's too much.

gottalovemal

on Jul 18, 2011 at 12:51 PM

I had no idea that names could be denied by the Gov. That bothers me =/ I think ppl who name their kids ridiculous names are mean and stupid but thats a right!! I know my daughters name is not crazy (Charlotte) but I would be pissed if I had known that it's her name pending the governments apporoval

Suzi

on Jul 18, 2011 at 12:56 PM

Lucifer is light bringer; Satan is adversary. Don't confuse the two names because of christian beliefs.

EgoSumLamia

on Jul 18, 2011 at 12:57 PM

Thanks PonyChaser, i always appreciate someone speaking up for us non-Judeans. While I wouldn't name my child Lucifer, due to the stigma christianity has applied to it, most don't realize it means "bringer of light or light bringer" Regardless, the less governemnt the better, don't they have anything better to do?

EvalynCarnate

on Jul 18, 2011 at 12:59 PM

Nonsense.

Facebook comment from Laura Walter Pryst

on Jul 18, 2011 at 1:02 PM

The only ones that make sense to ban are the ones that include symbols and that is ONLY because of limitations of certain computer programs...which really should just be updated to be able to use symbols. I don't think it's the government's business what people name their kids. You can't legislate good taste and common sense.

Facebook comment from Jaime Swift Sundin

on Jul 18, 2011 at 1:07 PM

Wow whats next there going to tell you that your only aloud to have one or two kids too and if you get pregnant your forced to get an abortion???? Might sound extreme to some but when do are rights start and the governments rights in our business end?????

Facebook comment from Nora Chambers

There was a huge thing a few years back in New Zealand, the courts stepped in and let the little girl change her name...her parents had named her Tula does the hula in Hawaii (or something along those lines, I know it started with Tula does the Hula). I can totally understand them stepping in for something like that.