Bridget Moynahan/Tom Brady baby name game

Moongirl · August 28th, 2007, 06:12 PM

Bridget’s Baby Name Revenge
Tuesday August 28, 2007

Peter Kramer/Getty Images; Jon Kopaloff/FilmMagic.com

Tom Brady was mostly absent during Bridget Moynahan’s pregnancy with their child (born August 22), and now that’s not the only thing that’s missing. The actress, 36, decided not to include her ex’s surname when naming her son.

A rep for the actress has released a statement officially announcing the child’s name as John Edward Thomas Moynahan.

Someone should tell that to the New England Patriots! During their game against the Carolina Panthers on August 24, announcers congratulated the 30-year-old quarterback and told the crowd in Charlotte, North Carolina, that the boy was named Jonathan Brady.

Meanwhile, Moynahan’s camp insists that all is well.

“She is thankful for a healthy baby and is excited about being a mother,” says Moynahan’s rep in the statement, who adds that the actress “was very pleased that the father, Tom Brady, was able to be there for the birth.”

Check back tomorrow for more on Tom and Bridget’s baby drama, directly from the pages of Us Weekly!

CherryDarling · August 28th, 2007, 06:14 PM

Hmm...

carrie2008 · August 28th, 2007, 06:15 PM

Well if he wasn't there most of the time why not let the name be up to her...

WitchHazelEyed · August 28th, 2007, 06:16 PM

Tom Brady should go talk to that gazelle he's dating if he wants a baby with his last name!

PaperDoll · August 28th, 2007, 06:18 PM

I dont blame her. If he didnt care enough to be there he shouldnt care his name isnt included.

PrettyGirl · August 28th, 2007, 07:16 PM

That's stupid. Bridget gives her baby Tom's first and middle name in 'honor' of her former lover, but she doesn't give the child his father's last name? What's the point in that?

She got pregnant, she chose to have it, she made it known to the world that Tom Brady's the father and you know she's going to ask for child support. That child deserves to have his father's name. Tom never denied that child and he went out of his way to be there for the birth. Tom and Bridget's relationship ended before she knew she was pregnant and just because they didn't marry doesn't mean their son shouldn't have his father's name. It's not like Tom Brady pulled an Eddie Murphy on her...you want the man to be there for the baby but because he didn't marry you, you have to 'pay the man back' by not giving his child his name?

I already see this kid being used as a 'pawn' between these two.

Moongirl · August 28th, 2007, 08:05 PM

In California, if the couple is not legally married, the father must sign a declaration of paternity in order for mom to add his name to the birth certificate, or to use his last name. If he wasn't present at the time the baby was registered, she may have had to use her last name, and petition to add his later.

WitchHazelEyed · August 28th, 2007, 08:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PrettyGirl

That's stupid. Bridget gives her baby Tom's first and middle name in 'honor' of her former lover, but she doesn't give the child his father's last name? What's the point in that?

She got pregnant, she chose to have it, she made it known to the world that Tom Brady's the father and you know she's going to ask for child support. That child deserves to have his father's name. Tom never denied that child and he went out of his way to be there for the birth. Tom and Bridget's relationship ended before she knew she was pregnant and just because they didn't marry doesn't mean their son shouldn't have his father's name. It's not like Tom Brady pulled an Eddie Murphy on her...you want the man to be there for the baby but because he didn't marry you, you have to 'pay the man back' by not giving his child his name?

I already see this kid being used as a 'pawn' between these two.

Seriously? Oh silly me! I forgot that having a dick means that your kids get your last name, if you so choose. Sorry, but what's wrong with a woman wanting her child to have her last name? You act like it's a man's god-given right to tack on their last name to any offspring they might have while they're whoring it up.

purple rain · August 28th, 2007, 08:06 PM

I think Bridget is being vindictive. I can understand if she felt humiliated and alone in her pregnancy while her ex dated a supermodel, but this just seems to be a petty move to spite Tom for leaving her. The last poster is right. I suspect Bridget will use her child in power games with Tom if she is already pulling this naming crap. Tom flew out to be there for the birth, has expressed interest in being in his child's life; it's not like he's an absentee father, so I think that child should have his name.

msdebagain · August 28th, 2007, 08:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moongirl

In California, if the couple is not legally married, the father must sign a declaration of paternity in order for mom to add his name to the birth certificate, or to use his last name. If he wasn't present at the time the baby was registered, she may have had to use her last name, and petition to add his later.

is that something new? i'm in CA and my son had my bf's last name (which i changed when i came to my senses) and it was all my word.

PrettyGirl · August 28th, 2007, 08:27 PM

^Exactly. It's not about having a 'dick'. It's about being fair. You want a man in your child's life, you want him to be there for the birth, you want him to recognize the child as his own and yet, when a man does all this, there are still some women who refuse to give the child his rightful family name. Bridget's romantic relationship with Tom ended, but the relationship between this baby and his father just started. She has no right to rob this baby of his birth name because his mom was angry at his dad at the time. That's an entirely separate issue.

I live in California and you can give your child any last name you want. So, believe me, Bridget wasn't forced to give her child her last name--she gave it to him because she wanted to. And, as previously stated by Purple Rain above, I think it is vindictive. If Bridget didn't want anything to do with Tom, she wouldn't have wanted him there period, wouldn't have included 'Thomas Edward' in the kid's name and wouldn't want a penny from him. I'm sure Tom isn't the only one who's moved on. I'm sure in a few months we'll see Bridget dating. When relationships are over, when people are single, that's what they do--they date.

Tom Brady hasn't denied the child at all. He didn't pull an Eddie Murphy on Bridget, didn't ask for a DNA test and he hasn't bad-mouthed her either. He has taken responsibility for this kid, said publicly he and his family were excited about the impending birth. So yeah, with that in mind, I think the child should have his father's last name. This guy basically dropped the new girlfriend and and an entire NFL team to fly to L.A. and be at his son's birth and I'm almost sure he's going to give Bridget financial assistance. That's more than what most loser men would do nowadays.

Don't ask a man to recognize his child, be there for the birth, be part of it's life and then when he does so, you then punish the man by deciding not to give his firstborn child his last name. That's wrong.

nwgirl · August 28th, 2007, 08:32 PM

If you're not married (and never have been), you can give the kid either name. What's the big deal about not using the daddy's last name?

WitchHazelEyed · August 28th, 2007, 08:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PrettyGirl

^Exactly. It's not about having a 'dick'. It's about being fair. You want a man in your child's life, you want him to be there for the birth, you want him to recognize the child as his own and yet, when a man does all this, there are still some women who refuse to give the child his rightful family name. Bridget's romantic relationship with Tom ended, but the relationship between this baby and his father just started. She has no right to rob this baby of his birth name because his mom was angry at his dad at the time. That's an entirely separate issue.

I live in California and you can give your child any last name you want. So, believe me, Bridget wasn't forced to give her child her last name--she gave it to him because she wanted to. And, as previously stated by the poster above, I think it is vindictive. If she didn't want anything to do with Tom, she wouldn't have wanted him there period, wouldn't have included 'Thomas Edward' in the kid's name and wouldn't want a penny from him. Believe me, in no time we'll see Bridget dating.

Tom Brady hasn't denied the child at all. He didn't pull an Eddie Murphy on Bridget, didn't ask for a DNA test and he hasn't bad-mouthed her. He has taken responsibility. So yeah, with that in mind, I think the child should have his father's last name. This guy basically dropped the new girlfriend and and an entire NFL team to fly to L.A. and be at his son's birth and I'm almost sure he's going to give Bridget financial assistance. That's more than what most loser men would do nowadays.

Don't ask a man to recognize his child, be there for the birth, be part of it's life and then when he does so, you then punish the man by deciding not to give his firstborn child his last name. That's wrong.

Point being: I don't think she's "punishing" him. She included his first name. Why do you think it's punishment for her to allow the child to have her own last name? Guess what? He has to be there for that child (at least financially) not because he has his name but because he has his DNA. And he should drop everything he has to be at his son's birth. Bridget shouldn't have to name her child what Tom wants just because he actually cares about the kid! It's her kid too and she has every right to give him her last name.
I just don't think the exclusion of his last name is grounds to assume she's punishing him. Hell, she included 2/3 of them right?

PrettyGirl · August 28th, 2007, 08:48 PM

If you're not married, you don't need to take anyone else's name. That's true. That's your choice. Even if you're married you can keep your maiden name, but that's an adult making the decision for herself. But what does your marital status have to do with your child's birthright? What does that have to do with his relationship with his father?

A woman's first connection to her baby is usually during pregnancy. She loves it immediately. A man's is usually at birth and the name. They share that now. A woman knows her child is hers because she carries it. For men, when a child carries his name, that's a strong connection too. Usually that proves to them it's theirs too.

In a nutshell, let's put it this way: I would wonder why I didn't have my father's name. Unless I was adopted or the man was missing in action and abandoned my mother, I'd want to know WHY my mom thought my father wasn't worthy enough, why she thought I shouldn't have my father's name. If this man wasn't good enough, then what does that say about me? (the offspring?). The message it sends out is negative. I think it does more harm to a child than good and I also think society looks at your child in a negative manner. When I was in school, the kids who didn't have their father's name were kids who never knew their dad because the guy was either unknown or their dad's were in prison and basically gone. That is so sad. The whole stigma attached to that is unfair to a child IMO.

Bridget Moynahan's baby doesn't have a loser father. His father is successful. His father makes a good living. His father is a record-breaking icon in the sports world. That baby deserves to have that connection to his dad. He was carried by his mother who obviously loves him, but he deserves to have that connection to his father too. The fact his mother isn't married is irrelevant. That's still his dad--a dad who was there and wants to be there. The kid deserves his history too...give it Moynahan-Brady or whatever, but don't take the kid's paternal name from him.

PaintTheTownRed · August 28th, 2007, 08:57 PM

I don't know, some women love their last name. I kept mine when I got hitched because I have a pretty cool name. I don't think a child should automatically get the father's name, it should be up to both the parents to decide.