---As for saying that it would create "an imbalance" in a relationship because the man doesn't have to change his name - what kind of a relationship do people have where that would be a problem?---astra

the kind of relationship where you feel that taking your partner's name signifies commitment, or where it actually is a form of commitment because it is bound with costs in case of divorce. then, it logically means that you commit more than he does. and that's the imbalance - you are in a relationship to which you commit more than your partner does.
relationships sadly often don't last forever, no matter how committed you are. a researcher at my centre is getting divorced. she changed her name when she got married and started publishing in her new name. now she has "costs" of divorce that her partner doesn't have. so yes, for us academics, changing our name can lead to situations where we are more "committed" to the relationship (read dependent on it) than our partner is.

i find it hard to ask a question during the session, but less to approach the person afterwards: "i didn't get a chance to say this during the session, but i was just wondering if you could tell me...?" that also gives me the opportunity to introduce myself by name. and yes, fellow PhDers: they are (some of them, anyway) the future top people in the field. best to get to know them now before they are famous. networking is, economically speaking, a long-term investment. you cannot know beforehand which connections will eventually pay out. while it is important to have some "strong" connections (i.e. friends), do also consider the "strength of weak ties" (coined by Granovetter). the theory and some evidence implies that it is a large network of people you know just a little, rather than strong ties to a few close friends, that will eventually make a positive difference for your career. (sorry if this sounds instrumental/rationa and all)

after all, he profits more from the relationship (statistically: men with female partners live longer than single men; women with male partners live less long than single women), and from the family (a family is positive for men's careers, negative for women's careers). but at the end of the day, i think there is no "right solution" - just the solution that fits best for your individual situation. my thoughts might not apply at all to your situation.

what does annoy me much is that this is an issue, like the question of "kids or not", that is still so very much an issue that women have to deal with, consider, find a solution for. or am i wrong? are there men on here who have put considerable thought to the question of how they would manage to avoid career repercussions if they took their wife's name? about what it would mean to them in respect to commitment? about what they would think if their kids didn't share their name?

so what about the solution of keeping a professional, maiden name and a new family name for everything else?
i am a bit worried that it might not always be so easy to distinguish clearly between professional and private. what if i go into politics? what if i do volunteering? what if i start a neighbourhood self-help group on issues i cover in my research? what if i publish a paper together with my partner?

i don't have any solutions. my hunch is to stick with what i've got and help make it different/easier for the next generation. one thought is that if anyone changes their name (in switzerland, it is not possible for both to keep the exact former name), it should be the man.

so what about commitment to a partner/new family?
a) i think there are other ways to commit than by sharing a name.b)if i take my partner's name, i commit more than he does, creating an imbalance. c)i do not think the wellbeing of a family depends on everyone sharing the same surname. d)and yes, i want to commit to the relationship/family, but: my identity should not dissolve into the relationship/family. i believe that the only way that i can share my life with my partner is if i HAVE a life to share, a life apart from my partner/family. same counts for my identity - only way i can be a true part of the family is if i AM a full person by myself.

ah, the name question.

like olivia, i am put off by the point that women are harder to trace. since most registers (phone directories etc.) work by family name, if you change your name, anyone who you forget to tell won't be able to find you anymore. when we look at history, we often don't realise that woman A who did something amazing is actually the same as woman B, because she has a different name. maybe today, in the age of facebook etc., things are different - the name matters less. i still think, in the longer term, it will matter. i believe that one reason why women are historically less visible is exactly this.

why should i take a man's name? well, i already have a man's name (my father's). so why not? what's better about my father's name?
a) i was born with it - it requires no changing, thus no "tracing" problems. b) if it becomes my children's name, for them it won't be their father's name but rather their mother's name.

and yes, you can get reductions if you are a low-income person. i've looked at the forms. it's quite hard to qualify. you can't have a partner (married or not) who earns even a meagre income. you have to explain why your parents etc. can't help you. your ESRC studentship might already be too much for you to qualify.

swantje, being a citizen or not does not really matter (i'm a citizen who has been living abroad too). my british mum kept telling me i should get free NHS glasses once i got here. but things aren't like that anymore. my local optician has a range of cheap glasses, but they are only cheap because they are actually cheap. the cheapest i could get for my eyes would cost me about 50£ total. however, if i want to avoid walking around with glasses as thick as bottle-bottoms, the absolutely cheapest i could get would be around 200£. so i would suggest you get glasses from fielmann while you can! (there's no fielmann in this country). oh, and even a simple sight-test, that would be free many places in switzerland, will cost you (i had quotes between 15£ and 40£). but you need a prescription - else you cannot buy glasses nor contact lenses.

juno - i had root canals, and some time later, (incidentially on the evening before my 30th birthday) one tooth actually broke off. (that really made me feel old). had it fixed up the cheap way, about a year later it broke off again. since then have been living with a broken tooth (luckily not visible). cause fixing it up the proper way would cost, umm, they said something in the area of between one and two thirds of my very generous 12-months-scholarship.

so my advice is: do get the thing done now, to prevent the breaking off. it would cost you much more later, if it needs to be fixed.

hi, i'm shani, i'm 32 (i think - tend to forget and confuse my age), i'm in london, and approaching the end of my second year in my sociology/anthropology of medicine PhD. i've been on here since about february 2007, i'm half swiss half british and thus do not qualify for funding more often than not.

way to go! congratulations!

hello PinkNeuron, welcome back! i hope things have improved with your family's health.

sounds like you're going strong! keep it up!

just a question: didn't your supervisor originally imply that there was some funding available for your project? has that option completely dissappeared now?

i've been with my partner for 7 years. he started his PhD about 5 years ago, i started mine about 20 months ago, and we're still going strong. what has been a strain is the situation that he is now employed as lecturer, very busy doing all the lecturing-business and should be finishing up the PhD at the same time. sometme within the next months i'd like to have a free weekend together, and then maybe even - how presumptuos of me - some holidays!

the wenner gren foundation covers specifically fieldwork costs. quite competitive though.

i can't keep up with all this rhyming. (can't even spell it) but i'm still winning.