These popular baby names are too ‘ugly, old-fashioned, weird,’ grandparents say — the ones they hate the most, revealed

New York Post - May 1st, 2025

A recent survey conducted by Mumsnet reveals that one in five grandparents are unhappy with the name chosen for their grandchild, with top disliked names including Aurora, Charlotte, and Finn. Complaints range from names being considered ugly or too weird, to reminding them of someone they dislike. Interestingly, some grandparents admitted to not accepting the chosen name even over time, and a small percentage have had disputes with their children over these choices, sometimes leading to temporary fallout or strained relationships.

This study highlights the generational divide in naming preferences and the complexities involved in naming a child. While 69% of grandparents believe they have the right to voice their opinions, 38% of parents feel it’s none of their business. The survey underscores the emotional and social challenges new parents face in name selection, often navigating family expectations alongside personal preferences. Mumsnet Founder Justine Roberts emphasizes that these naming disputes may serve as a precursor to future parenting challenges, suggesting that new parents brace themselves for ongoing negotiations with family over various child-rearing decisions.

Parenting Family Relationships Mumsnet Grandparents Baby Names

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

5.4

Moderately Fair

Read with skepticism

The article provides an interesting look at generational differences in baby naming preferences, drawing on a survey by Mumsnet. While it is clear and engaging, the article's accuracy is somewhat compromised by a lack of direct evidence for specific claims and percentages. The focus on grandparents' perspectives offers some balance, but more input from parents would provide a fuller picture. Source quality and transparency are areas needing improvement, as the lack of direct survey links or methodological details limits credibility. Despite these weaknesses, the article remains readable and relevant, appealing to those interested in family dynamics and cultural trends. Its potential impact is more personal than societal, offering insights into family naming practices rather than driving broader change.

Accuracy

The story makes several claims about a survey conducted by Mumsnet regarding grandparents' opinions on their grandchildren's names. While the general theme aligns with previous surveys and discussions, specific details such as the exact disliked names and percentages lack direct verification. For instance, names like Aurora, Charlotte, and Noah are consistent with past findings, but Finn and certain reaction percentages are not directly corroborated by available data. This suggests some factual basis but also highlights areas needing further verification.

Balance

The article primarily focuses on the perspective of grandparents and their opinions on baby names, with some input from parents. It does provide a range of viewpoints, including those of grandparents who feel entitled to their opinions and parents who disagree. However, it leans slightly towards the grandparents' perspective, with more detailed accounts of their reactions and opinions. The inclusion of a statement from Mumsnet's founder provides some balance, but the article could benefit from more parent perspectives to provide a fuller picture.

Clarity

The article is generally clear and easy to understand, with a straightforward presentation of the survey results and reactions from grandparents. The language is simple and accessible, making it easy for a general audience to follow. The structure is logical, starting with the survey's findings and then exploring reactions and opinions. However, the lack of detailed explanations about the survey's methodology slightly detracts from overall clarity, as readers may question the basis of the claims.

Source quality

The primary source of the article is a survey conducted by Mumsnet, which is a reputable platform for parenting discussions. However, the article does not provide direct access to the survey data or additional sources that could corroborate the claims. The reliance on a single source without direct links or detailed methodology reduces the overall credibility and reliability of the information presented. Including more diverse sources or expert opinions would enhance the article's authority.

Transparency

The article lacks transparency regarding the survey's methodology, such as how the data was collected, the demographic details of respondents, or how the survey was conducted. This omission makes it difficult for readers to assess the validity of the claims. While the article cites Mumsnet as the source, it does not provide a direct link to the survey or explain any potential biases or conflicts of interest, which are crucial for understanding the context and reliability of the findings.