Baby Name Laws: What Different Countries Actually Allow

The United Kingdom sets almost no rules

There is no list of permitted names in the United Kingdom and no naming committee. A birth in England and Wales must be registered within 42 days, and the registrar records the forenames the parents give. In Scotland the period is 21 days. Registrars can decline entries in narrow circumstances, but the working assumption in British law is free choice, and there is no statutory list of forbidden names to consult.

What Britain does regulate is change rather than choice. Under section 13 of the Births and Deaths Registration Act 1953, a child's forename can be altered within twelve months of registration; after that a deed poll is required. That is the whole of the ordinary framework.

Iceland: a register of approved names

Iceland's Personal Names Act, Lög um mannanöfn no. 45/1996, is the strictest system commonly cited and it works differently from the way it is usually described. Iceland maintains a register of personal names, the mannanafnaskrá. If a name proposed for a child is not on that register, the Act provides that the matter is referred to the naming committee, the mannanafnanefnd, rather than simply refused, and the national registry Þjóðskrá Íslands does not record it until the question is resolved. It is an approval process, not a blacklist, and names are added to the register when approved.

Denmark: approved lists, published and searchable

Denmark's family law agency, Familieretshuset, administers and publishes the name lists. Its approved first names list can be searched directly, filtered by girls', boys' or unisex names, and by length or letters. It also publishes a list of "free" surnames, defined as those borne by more than 2,000 people, which anyone may adopt on application. A name outside the approved list is not automatically refused; it goes through an approval route. The lists are updated continuously.

Sweden: a test, not a list

Sweden's Lag (2016:1013) om personnamn takes the opposite approach. Section 26 requires that every child be given one or more first names, with the application made within three months of birth. Section 28 then sets the only limits: a first name may be acquired only if it cannot cause offence, cannot be assumed to lead to discomfort for the person who will bear it, and is not for some other reason unsuitable as a first name. There is no approved list at all — just three tests applied by the tax agency, Skatteverket, which handles registration.

Spain: free choice with three exceptions

Spain's Ley 20/2011 del Registro Civil states the principle in the heading of article 51: free choice of the given name. The article then sets out three limitations, and expressly requires that they be interpreted restrictively. No more than two simple names or one compound name may be recorded. Names contrary to the dignity of the person may not be imposed, nor names that make identification confusing. And a child may not be given the name of a living sibling with identical surnames. Since a 2023 amendment, the article states explicitly that whether a name corresponds to the person's sex or sexual identity is not relevant to whether identification is confusing.

How to read the lists of "banned" names

Articles listing banned baby names are largely recycled anecdotes, and they are unreliable for three reasons. First, a name refused once by one registrar is not the same as a name banned by law; most of the famous examples are individual decisions, sometimes overturned. Second, the rules change — Spain's article 51 was amended in 2023, and any list written before that is wrong on a point of substance. Third, the systems are structurally different, so "banned" is the wrong word for most of them: Iceland and Denmark run approval processes, Sweden runs a suitability test, and Spain runs a numerical limit plus a dignity test.

If a country's rules matter to you, go to that country's registrar or statute. The registrars publish this material themselves, and it is usually clearer than the summaries.

Two things almost every list gets wrong

Approved lists are not closed lists

Iceland and Denmark are routinely described as having fixed lists of permitted names. Both publish lists, and both have a route for names that are not on them. The Icelandic Act sends an unlisted name to the naming committee; the Danish agency updates its lists continuously and takes applications. The practical effect is a delay and a decision, not a permanent bar, and the lists grow.

Surname rules are stricter than first-name rules almost everywhere

The heavier regulation is usually on surnames rather than forenames, because surnames carry inheritance, lineage and identification. Denmark's free-surname list works on a threshold of more than 2,000 bearers. Sweden's Act devotes most of its sections to surnames, including a bar on newly formed surnames that could be confused with an existing family name. Spain's civil registry law governs the order of the two surnames a child receives. If you are reading about naming law because of a surname question, the first-name rules will not answer it.

What this means in practice for British parents

Two situations come up. If your child may hold another nationality, the other country's rules can apply when the birth is registered or transcribed there, and a name that is unproblematic in Britain may need approval elsewhere. Check before registering, not after, because the British registration is the one that will be presented.

The second is scripts and accents. British registration will record accented characters, but many systems downstream will not, and a passport or airline booking may strip them. That is not a legal limit; it is an administrative one, and it applies regardless of what any statute says. Names that depend on a diacritic to be read correctly will meet it repeatedly.

Finally, remember that a naming convention is not a naming law. Many families follow patterns — patronymics, two surnames, a grandparent's name in a fixed position — that no statute requires and no registrar enforces. Those conventions are worth understanding on their own terms rather than being read as restrictions.