One of Elwood's recent posts included a mention of name changes, so I thought I would post some potentially useful info here for him and anyone else who might be interested.
For those of you who didn't know, California has previously allowed a person to legally change hir name by the "usage method," whereby the person just starts using the new name (get a notarized document, though) and notifies everyone of the change. This method has been complicated by 9/11 and the prevalence of identity theft. However, the method is apparently still legal in California (and, presumably, in other states).
Nolo Press puts out a book called How to Change Your Name in California. It's written by Lisa Sedano and Emily Doskow. If you are contemplating a California name change, this book can be very helpful. However, the most recent edition, which was published in 2008 (12th edition), no longer recommends or discusses the usage method. I believe that the previous two editions still do, but don't quote me on this. I might be completely wrong. The two previous editions definitely (eleventh came out in 2006, and tenth came out in 2003) do contain info about how 9/11 has affected name changes, but I'm not sure what info these editions contain regarding the usage method.
You can buy the 2008 book new on Amazon, but you should be able to find older editions online and in public libraries. Google Books has preview of the twelfth edition if you want to look inside the latest version of the book.
I am disturbed that recent events have made the usage method a lot less viable--at least, Sedano and Doskow have indicated as much--but I was thinking that some people might still be interested in finding out more about this method. I am not advocating the usage method, just stating that it has existed and apparently still does exist. It is quite possible that in these post-9/11 times, certain agencies (like the U.S. Guvmint, for example) will not accept a name change document that lacks the authority of the court. I just don't know. It would be bloody unfair, but that's the Fed for you. On the other hand, perhaps the usage method could be employed as a short-term solution for someone who has just started the court name-change process.
BUT...you can also change your name in California (and other states) when you marry. I mean, you can marry someone and create a whole new name--first, middle, and last. This might be tougher in some states, but it might be a cheap and easy way for someone to do a name change. Again, I'm not advocating it, just pointing out that it might be an option for a few people in particular situations. And I have no idea how much it costs to get a quickie divorce, but the marriage license route is pretty much instantaneous. Perhaps we should set up a network for pre-change MTFs and FTMs to get together and marry each other in certain states, and kill two birds with one stone! (Okay, I do get these crazy ideas...if both parties change their names, I can see all sorts of red flags going up for the county offices that handle marriages. Or maybe not.)
Let me just say that I have used an older version of the abovementioned book (for the usage method, in fact), and I loved it. It has a high reputation.
I guess I am lucky. I changed my name through the usage method well before 9/11, and I was legally married a few years ago, so it looks like I am covered on two fronts. I didn't have some narrow-minded judge denying me my masculine name, and the usage method was really cheap (so was the marriage, by the way, although I did have to put my name down under BRIDE, which required some emotional trauma for me...still, I needed the medical insurance offered by my partner, so I swallowed my fury and filled out the freaking form).
I guess it costs hundreds of dollars and quite a bit of time to go the court route for name changes. Still, I suspect that nearly everyone will prefer that method because it is the tried-and-true method. But there might be alternatives for a few of you.
