Comments on: Open Thread Question: Is Naming a Child “Adolf Hitler” Child Abuse?

By: Paul

Paul — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 20:33:29 +0000

What about the situation where two people are born around the same time are given the same name? There must have been more than one Adolf Hitler in Germany at that time.

It’s not the parents’ fault in such a case, but the individual sharing this name may hold his name in contempt.

In some places of the United States, simply having a French name guarantees torment by one’s peers. Should you hold the parents responsible for their child’s torment resulting from the name?

The Adolf Hitler situation is an extreme[ly oversimplified] case of racial and ethnic bias in the United States. I would suspect that such a name wouldn’t be as big of an issue in other countries around the world, but may be a bigger issue in other countries.

By: Maurice

Maurice — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 05:09:10 +0000

Well, it seems people are happy to call their kids Adolf and Ghengis and Himler and whatever else. So go ahead, knock yourselves out. Just don’t whinge, bitch, complain and cry ‘bullying’ when your child gets teased at school. Now to thomasblair’s comment, most people know that when a name is mentioned they are referring to that person. I guess you needed to be told that eh?

By: Norm

Norm — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 04:22:22 +0000

So I guess if it is abuse then we should have sympathy that little Adolf has poor parents. So in effect Adolf would get cut more slack for his name rather than more grief because of it. Oh wait… the public isn’t smart enough to figure that out.

By: Akston

Akston — Wed, 17 Dec 2008 16:25:15 +0000

One man’s abuse is another’s tribute. Many people despise what Adolf Hitler did, myself included. Some don’t.

Kids can’t choose names for themselves at birth any more than they choose their religion. Some religions are more common than others as well. If we let popularity decide what names are abusive, should we also determine which religious beliefs are unpopular enough to constitute “abuse” when passing them on to one’s children?

There is a wide array of behaviors, beliefs, and self-identifications parents pass on to their children which I find personally objectionable. What makes me a better arbiter of those choices than the parents?

By: tarran

tarran — Wed, 17 Dec 2008 16:07:44 +0000

That name is also why the war lasted so long and cost so many lives.

People also name their kids after Winston Churchill, FDR and Truman who arguably also prolonged the war with their demands for unconditional surrender. Yet we don’t consider that child abuse.

The parents aren’t doing the kids any favors by giving them those names. The parents also have pretty bad taste. I don’t think we can really do anything about it other than to boycott them.

By: SKV

SKV — Wed, 17 Dec 2008 15:56:12 +0000

Adolf Hitler are couple words that strongly associated with negative meaning. Do parent have right to name kid like Bloody Killer or Dirty A-s?
Parents failed to recognize impact of such name on their kid. Parents must consider kid well being rather use him to manifest their believes at his expense. BTW that what Hitler did at expense of his nation.

By: ottar

ottar — Wed, 17 Dec 2008 14:03:45 +0000

Is it child abuse? OF COURSE it is. Even asking the question is retarded.

By: thomasblair

thomasblair — Wed, 17 Dec 2008 13:43:41 +0000

Maurice,

That name is also why the war lasted so long and cost so many lives.

Nonsense. An individual person perpetrated those atrocities, not a name. There were people with that same name before WWII and since and none of them have been genocidal tyrants.

By: Maurice

Maurice — Wed, 17 Dec 2008 07:39:10 +0000

That name is unique for a reason. That name is also why the war lasted so long and cost so many lives. As a parent, you have to ask yourself how such a name will affect my childs life. And while I don’t think it is child abuse, it certainly is gross negligence on behalf of the parents. The father in question said we as a people should look forward not back, then tells us that the boots he wears were worn by a soldier in ww2. Only fools collect and display relics from war. All it is to us former soldiers is a reminder of some hardware that caused some poor bastard a whole lot of pain. I think he should wake up to himself, or come and see me and I’ll wake him up for free.

By: pinky

pinky — Wed, 17 Dec 2008 05:58:13 +0000

Whatever you want to call it, it is going to bring abuse on the child so I will neologize a medical term and call it abuse by proxy! What kind of rights do the parents have to open their kid to that kind of abuse and crap he’s going to suffer his whole life? Because their idea is greater than the child’s feelings.

By: Chris

Chris — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 22:23:09 +0000

If it ever becomes illegal to be an asshole, it means the time for revolution has come… and unfortunately, most likely passed.

By: Paul

Paul — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 21:20:20 +0000

Child abuse? Not immediately. However the life-altering consequences of such a decision will be a socio- and psychological disadvantage.

I would argue that it’s criminal negligence.