So the annual list of most popular baby names has been released and those of us with impending arrivals sit up and take notice. George will doubtless rank very highly next year though it’s not a name on our shortlist. But as we don’t know what we’re having, we have three different name combinations to contemplate and research.
The Mumsnet consensus on twin names is that they have to sit together well like siblings , so Tyler and India wouldn’t go together as rentagob Katie Hopkins would doubtless agree. That said, the names shouldn’t be matchy-matchy (so my adoration of alliteration is a naming no-no here).
In terms of popularity, I’m not too bothered by this – the boys are in the top hundred and DH and I are both in the top ten now but weren’t when we were born. DS2 will spend his life spelling both his names – our surname is not too unusual but isn’t spelt as it sounds.
But we are still pretty much nowhere on names. For one thing we used up all our boys’s names on DS1 and 2 (seven between them <blush>) but also it has really seemed too early. While we do have a long list of girls’s names leftover from last time there are none that we both entirely agree on so we’re keeping mum for now.
Along with the released stats comes the other news that we’re currently experiencing a baby boom with the highest birth rate since 1972. Naturally, the pundits are trying to work out the reason for this. Did the Jubilympic summer of 2012 really mean that lots of folk were getting jiggy with it? The royal baby is apparently another factor – because one couple in London got pregnant, the rest of the nation decide to do so too?! Hmm. I remain unconvinced on that one.
I think it’s much more likely to be the credit crunch – less going out means more early nights. People aren’t all that imaginative when it comes to pastimes really. Our NCT group was made up of lots of teachers – and all the other November babies in our group were the result of a snow day…