Where Have All the Debbies Gone?
New Baby Name List Reveals American Trends

By Jeff Eason

When I was a kid in elementary school, there were certain girls names that were so popular that invariably there would be at least two girls of that name in any given class. Using the tried-but-true method of adding that person’s last name initial, we would call them Nancy L. and Nancy K. Or perhaps Debbie B. and Debbie T. It was a system that worked in every instance except when the two same-named gals shared a last initial. Then we would have to go for the gusto and say the whole name out loud as in Linda Miller and Linda Moretz.

According to the latest figures on baby names in the United States, the names that were the most popular for my generation have been completely replaced by new names. It is a brave new world where Emilys and Madisons walk the earth in such numbers that they will be the ones to have their last name’s initial attached in the classroom.

Last week the Social Security Administration released the Top 1000 List of Baby Names for 2004 and to mine eyes it was a shocker. Every class I ever attended was filled to the rafters with Lindas, Debbies, Nancys and Susans. Now Linda has dropped down to #422 on the most popular girls’ name list. Nancy checks in at #289 and Deborah has dropped all the way to #645. But the real eye-opener—for me at least—was that Susan had fallen to #565. In my day, we had legions of Susans! In some areas of the country, every other girl was named Susan! How could there possibly be 564 girls’ names more popular than Susan?!

Other popular girls names from my generation are faring little better. Julie is holding its own at #261 but Sandy is now at #802 and Tracy (#944) is in danger of falling out of the Top Thousand list altogether! What names could possibly replace traditional favorites like Sharon (#506), Donna (#781) and Brenda (#201) in the Top One Hundred?

Well, it turns out that if you are under five years of age and reading this (congratulations on that, I must say), there’s a good chance that your name is Emily. For the past five years in a row Emily has been the most popular name for baby girls while Jacob (also spelled Jakob) has been the most popular name for boys. Their overwhelming popularity is part of the general trend in America of parents going back to old-fashioned names. The name Emily dropped out of the top hundred most popular names for girls in 1917 and didn’t return until 1974. Since that time, Emily—a name once associated with spinster aunts and fragile 19th century poets—has been making a beeline for the top spot on the list.

According to the Social Security Administration’s new list of most popular baby names, chances are slim that this sonogram depicts a Linda, Susan or Tracy.

Jacob, on the other hand, is old-fashioned to the point of being Old Testament. For that matter, all of 2004’s top ten boys’ names (or a form of them) can be found in the Bible. They are (in order) Jacob, Michael, Joshua, Matthew, Ethan, Andrew, Daniel, William, Joseph and Christopher. On second thought, I’m not sure if there is a William in the Bible (The Song of Bill? The Epistles of St. Willy?).

I believe that this trend of going back to the old-fashioned names is a natural backlash to the free-spirited 1970s and 80s when new parents just made up bizarre names for their kids. They channeled the smoky ghosts of the American west and named their offspring things like Cheyenne and Sierra. They took a walk in the woods and decided their kids would have names such as River and Moss and Glen (actually Glen is both traditional and woodsy). They listened to way too much Fleetwood Mac and named their daughters Gypsy, Crystal and Rhiannan.

Who would’ve thought that those antique names that we associate with our grandmothers would climb back up the charts? Last year the name Abigail was the sixth most popular name for baby girls in the USA while Olivia came in fourth. Even the old-fashioned name Lily checked in at a respectable #52.

My favorite comeback story, however, is reserved for the name Emma. During the decade of the 1880s, it was the third most popular name for girls in the country. By the turn of the century it had fallen to #13. In 1942 it dropped out of the top one hundred altogether. Emmas were starting to get scarce. The trend for poor Emma continued until 1976—the year of our country’s bicentennial—when it dropped to #463 on the baby girl name list. But then something magical happened. After a few years of fluctuation, Emma began her comeback in 1982 when she climbed up to #412. During the late eighties Emma accelerated her climb and reached #130 by 1990. By 2000 Emma was sitting pretty at #17. Just when it looked like things couldn’t get better for Emma, the new baby on the hit TV sitcom Friends was named Emma in 2002. That clinched it! Emma shot straight up through the top ten and has been perched at number two for the past two years!

Now, if Emma could just figure out a way to get rid of Emily…hmmm.