Arkansas mom sells the naming rights to her unborn son

by Jeffery Racheff

Lavonne Drummond of Smackover, Arkansas, is self-admittedly broke, unemployed and looking for a way to provide for her six-going-on-seven kids. She’s also not really trying to get a job. After all, she says, not many employers are looking to hire women who are eight months pregnant. So as she was thinking recently of a way to make some quick money, and at the same time trying to come up with a name for her new baby, a light bulb went off in her head: why not sell the kid’s name on Ebay?

And now that’s exactly what she’s doing. The bid to name Madame Drummond’s lucky 7th child is currently at  $6,800, a far cry from the “$20,000 – $25,000” she requested in order to buy a new car for the family. Ebay actually took the auction down the first four times she put it up, citing the fact that no item is actually for sale and that it violates a policy that prohibits the sale of anything promoting  “giveaways, lotteries, sweepstakes, random drawing, raffles, contests or prizes.” Still, Drummond was persistent, and the auction’s fifth and “final” listing officially ends tomorrow at 7 am PDT.

Now the first question one might ask is what kind of mother would sell her kid’s name? However, the better one might be what kind of company or person would actually buy it? For a sponsor, there are an infinite number of things that could go wrong with this. The only solid thing the world knows about the kid so far is that it’s male, and that he comes from a family where the only role model he has is willing to hawk his identity to the highest bidder. Whoever buys his name will have to deal with that fact.

Then, of course, his unknowable future must be considered. What if he turns out to be a criminal? Or what if he’s perfectly fine but a few life choices makes the whole thing a joke? He could be called Axe Body Spray and  have really bad B.O., or KFC and grow up to be a vegetarian. What if Nestle wins the auction and, heaven forbid, he ends up with diabetes? What if, one day, he wants to open up a business that competes with his namesake?

The point is a large company not only runs the risk of looking insensitive and evil by purchasing a human being’s naming rights, but also like a fool when little “Grey Goose Drummond” turns out to be a hard-lining teetotaler. A brand name is designed to attach an idea to a product and make it enticing to consumers. Since people are not products, their names carry a human quality that doesn’t typically translate to the world of advertising. The fact that you’re named “Scott” or “Sally” will never tell me what kind of person you are. But if you’re named WalMart, people might make some assumptions. That’s why baby naming should be left to parents, not corporations.

But of course there’s no sense in criticizing a mother who, in the end, is just trying to come up with a way to support her children. If Lavonne Drummond was smart, she would sell the kid’s name in installment blocks to separate companies. His goo goo days could be sponsored by Gerber, his toddler years by Tonka, and his teenagedom by Clearasil or something. It’ll cause quite the identity crisis, but after that he’ll be an adult and can legally name himself something cooler and more lucrative, like “OPEC” or “Ted Turner Is The Coolest.”