Can I legally embed a newline character in my child’s registered name?
Description
Screenshot of a Stack Exchange question page with the headline, “Can I legally include a line break in my child's name?” The post shows 14 up-votes on the left and has been viewed 2 k times. Body text reads: “Ethics aside, is it legal (or even possible) to include a line break (newline) in my child's name? Preferably at the end of the child's first name, directly after the last letter. So instead of (for example) the name ‘John Doe’, the name would always be written out ‘John Doe’. And then when the first name only is written out the line break would have to be included, such as ‘My child's first name is John and his last name is Doe’. If this is legal, how would I go about making sure the line break is included on the name section of the birth certificate?” Tags shown below the question are “name” and “birth-certificate.” The right sidebar credits user Paul Omar with 257 reputation. Visually it mimics typical Stack Overflow styling - white background, light gray text boxes, upvote arrow, and blue link fonts. Technically, the humor arises from treating human names like strings, testing boundary conditions for newline characters, and highlighting real-world input-validation edge cases that databases, forms, and legal systems rarely anticipate
Comments
37Comment deleted
Go ahead and name him “Evan\n” - just remember to set his middle name to “\r” so at least one of the state’s COBOL birth-registry batch jobs survives the encounter
Someone's been maintaining legacy government systems for too long and knows exactly which COBOL programs from 1973 will throw a segfault when parsing birth certificates - this is either the ultimate pen test or the most elaborate way to ensure your kid never gets their name spelled correctly on any official document
This is the inevitable result of spending 20 years debugging why production systems fail on unexpected input: you start wondering if you can inject a \n into the civil registry database. Bonus points if they're also considering whether to use \r\n for Windows compatibility with the hospital's legacy system, or planning a fallback to Unicode line separator (U+2028) if the registrar's validation logic rejects ASCII control characters. The real question isn't whether it's legal - it's whether the birth certificate form uses proper parameterized queries or if this is actually an SQLi vector: "Robert'); DROP TABLE Students;--"
Name the kid "John\nDoe" - CRLF injection as a parenting style. The hospital EMR thinks you had twins, the DMV issues two records, and every CSV export quietly proves who still doesn’t quote fields
John\nDoe: Proves even birth registries need better VARCHAR sanitization than most enterprise CRMs
“John␍␊Doe” isn’t a name, it’s a red‑team test case - HTTP response splitting, CSV formula injection, and log forging, all triggered by a birth announcement
John <br> Doe Comment deleted
Null Doe Comment deleted
"John\n Doe" Comment deleted
\n bro. Or \r\n if you're using Windows rather than an actual OS Comment deleted
What is the actual OS? Comment deleted
OS/2 Comment deleted
That's not the actual one, only half of it Comment deleted
lies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OS/2 Comment deleted
You can't argue when it's literally defined in it's name Comment deleted
idk I’m just a monkey Comment deleted
🐧 Comment deleted
Nah man read carefully. I didn't ask about a working model of OS for no-lifers. The question was about actual OS Comment deleted
Easy, just write John Doe Comment deleted
ah, this is the slippery road. if this would be allowed, we'll see real life little Bobby Tables in the future Comment deleted
old but gold Comment deleted
😂 🤣 😂 Comment deleted
How a line break is supposted to match the legal name pattern? /([a-z-]+[ ])*[a-z-]/i Comment deleted
Why'd you put space in brackets? Comment deleted
Why would you not? It's a valid expression Comment deleted
well, it is, but feels redundant.. Comment deleted
it looks kind of nice, it's somewhat readable Comment deleted
obfuscate Comment deleted
No, it is all about readability; and expandability, too (for adding alternative word separators if needed). Comment deleted
this can't be the legal name pattern because then just a singular dash would be legal Comment deleted
/([a-z]|[a-z][a-z -][a-z])+/i Comment deleted
OH NO Comment deleted
Is that a nullbyte? Comment deleted
it sure is Comment deleted
So he is now just John? Comment deleted
Why names can only be strings Comment deleted
Let's give trees some chance Comment deleted