1. Parenting
Send to a Friend via Email

Discuss in my forum

Kimberly Powell

Jr. or II?

By June 19, 2006

Follow me on:

In the About Genealogy forum this week, a reader explains that she wants to name her son after her husband's great-great grandfather - a wonderful way to honor his ancestor! The question, however, is whether this would make their son a II - Jacob Miles Burnum or Jacob Miles Burnum II?

In my experience, the use of the term II generally indicates a son who has been named after a family member other than their father, such as a grandfather or an uncle. It is also sometimes used to identify the second male in a line of three with that name, although in that case Junior is usually the preferred term. As to whether it is required or not, I would tend to believe that it isn't. Terms such as Junior, II, III, etc. came into use to distinguish between two family members with the same name, generally implying that these family members are all still living. I believe in the case of little Jacob Miles Burnum, since the ancestor in question is five generations back in the family tree, it is really a matter of personal preference - the II being a formal way to indicate that there was a first, but not required since the great, great grandfather is long deceased.

I'm not an expert in naming etiquette, however, so here's what others have to say on the subject:

From Behind the Name - "Junior is used to distinguish a son with the same name as his father. The following conditions apply:

  1. The Junior must be a son of the father, not a grandson.
  2. The names must be exactly the same, including the middle name.
  3. The father must still be living.

'II' is used whenever any close relative, including for example a grandfather or a great-uncle, shares the same name as the child."

Of course, there are also many who argue whether people move up the ladder as family members die i.e. Junior becomes Senior when the father dies, and III becomes Junior. Some, such as Miss Manners, say that yes, everyone does move up a notch [Martin, Judith. Miss Manners’ Guide to Excruciatingly Correct Behavior. Warner Books (1982)] , while others insist that your formal name, including the suffix, does not change. But that's a discussion for another day...

Do you have a comment or preference on the subject? Click on "comments" below and tell us what you think!

June 19, 2006 at 5:57 pm
(1) Scott Salberg says:

See here:


As to “moving up” — I would suggest against this. I have a friend who carries the suffix “IV” (4th). This is what appears on his legal documents, etc. His father was “III” and now deceased, and the two previous are also deceased, so my friend, if he were to “move up”, would be the 1st. That wouldn’t seem quite right, would it? There are some with the suffix of Jr. who don’t wish to be known as that any longer, and that is a matter of personal choice — if they don’t care for the system, they likely didn’t name a child after themselves. (You might take a cue from monarchs who take a suffix if they use the same name as a previous monarch.)

June 19, 2006 at 5:59 pm
(2) Scott Salberg says:

The link to Wikipedia above: you need to copy and paste into browser — the URL includes that whole line, including the parentheses around the word (name).

June 19, 2006 at 11:27 pm
(3) Homer A. says:

If everone moves up like that,then how
does their past records change?
Do we have to get the names on the
headstones changed for past generations
Personally I dont think past Aunts,Uncles,Cousins,Grandparents &

June 20, 2006 at 10:22 am
(4) Raymond T. Wing says:

It is my understanding that in modern times, the Suffix “Sr.” “Jr.” “II” “III” etc. are part of a person’s legal name. As such, the name cannot legally be changed without (I believe) a court order. This process likely varies, depending on what state (or country) you live in.

June 20, 2006 at 7:44 pm
(5) Joanna Wallbillich says:

Genealogy speaking … it would be quite confusing if one were to “move up.” I have five Charles in one of my branches — I have them figured because I gave them Sr., Jr., III, IV, and V. I’ve seen many mistakes by other genealogists, sometimes the III is listed as Sr., other times the V is listed as Jr. My vote would be to keep the original name.

June 21, 2006 at 8:06 am
(6) phil w says:

I think using the name would be a fine way to honor the ancestor,but the fact that there are others in the line who could also use this name,would make it improper to use the ” II “.

January 18, 2008 at 12:23 pm
(7) Damien says:

Does any one know what a “Jr. II” is? How can one be a junior and the second at the same time? I saw this today on the Red Cross website, when registering they ask for a suffix and they have “jr II” listed as an option. What the hell is it?

August 20, 2008 at 12:24 pm
(8) Karen M says:

I dunno. Sometimes you just have to let it roll off the tongue and see which sounds best. I mean, “Bubba II” just doesn’t sound right!

August 27, 2008 at 11:50 pm
(9) Jim McNamara says:

“Jr.” has often been used in 18th & 19th centuries to distinguish two unrelated people living in the same locale so they would not be mixed up by the people and authorities.

October 31, 2008 at 8:28 pm
(10) Linda Heilman says:

I know a friend, a FEMALE, who was named Jr. Was this just a fluke or is that allowed? It does make sense if you think of it, exact same names, same household.
Any thoughts?

December 28, 2008 at 12:16 am
(11) MIke says:

DAMIEN I think JR II is used in this fashion. I’m Mike my son would be Mike JR his son would be Mike JR II. I believe because he’s the second person to be called JR. Some would say he’s the III. I could strongly argue it this way. You see I’m The original Mike and my Son is the original Mike JR his son will be the second one to be called Mike Jr… I think…lol

January 5, 2009 at 5:54 pm
(12) Angie Copeland says:

In working for a 30′s-40′s format radio station in Florida, I came across lots of published articles about the greats from that era. Both Frank and Nancy Sinatra were discussed from time to time, along with their children, who were listed as Frank Jr., Nancy Jr. and Tina.

January 19, 2009 at 5:36 pm
(13) Tom says:

Well, I am a “Jr.” and I’ve studied these suffixes many times. The answers I find are never consistent.

However, I’ve never, before today, found a single reference to a person changing his suffix, or “moving up” as you call it. This “moving up”, as posted here, is entirely incorrect.

April 13, 2009 at 5:18 am
(14) Bill says:

In reply to Raymond, it does not take a court order to add a suffix on the end of it. When my son was born I became a Sr. I changed all my legal documents (license, SS card, etc) without the need of a court order. Anyone who does this better change all documents and credit cards or there could be issues. I ran into a problem when I delayed changing my SS card and the DMV had a fit.

April 14, 2009 at 8:57 pm
(15) Howard From Bahamas says:

Jr. is when a son shares One of his father’s name. eg Howard William Forbes (Father) – Howard Benjamen Forbes Jr. (son).
ii is when the son shares all of his father’s name eg Howard William Forbes (Father) – Howard William Forbes ii. (son). The third Happens Only if the ii (second) gives His son the exact name and the iii would be the ii’s son with the exact name and so on. ANY other persons want to give their son the exact name as their grand or uncle or whoever is just another Howard (in this case)

July 15, 2009 at 4:59 pm
(16) Don U says:

Is there a stipulation that the title Jr. has to correspond with the first born son. Any sons born after that and possess the father’s name would be called II or III?

August 14, 2009 at 10:57 pm
(17) Howard From Bahamas says: says:

you are right about one thing DON U The parents can name any son JR. or ii as they wish, not necessarily the first born.

December 14, 2009 at 10:30 pm
(18) VPR says:

I agree the Jr. suffix is when the father and son share a name, e.g., first and last but not middle, while II is when the “Jr.” son has a son with the EXACT same name. That’s how we did it anyway.

January 6, 2010 at 4:46 am
(19) Casey Jones Jr says:

Ok so what i have seen here could confuse a rocket scientist. This is how it works. My father is Casey Jones when i was born I was named Casey Jones Jr and my father became a senior. My son is Casey Jones III and his son will be Casey Jones IV and so on and so forth. The II comes into play when the child is named exactly after a relative such as a Grandfather. If I named my son after my Grandfather my sons name would be Paul Jones II and as for the moving up stuff. Before today I had never heard of it. And yes the names do have to be the same in order to use Jr and be correct. But then again I guess if someone just wanted to write Jr on the birth certificate what would stop them Ive seen weirder things happen. In any case going down the line the first middle and last names should be EXACTLY the same….

January 12, 2010 at 3:23 pm
(20) Connie says:

A bit “off subject” – just pity those of us who are researching the last name of “Junior”!

February 3, 2010 at 10:37 am
(21) Dean Jr says:

My father and I share the exact same name and always have. I was named as a “Jr.” and have never been referred to as “II.” In my case, couldn’t I use these two terms interchangeably?

May 4, 2010 at 6:57 pm
(22) Howard From Bahamas says:

Dean-In my view you are Dean II. No they are not interchangeable

July 18, 2010 at 11:38 am
(23) Sharon says:

It’s silly to think that a generational suffix is set in stone and does not change. Nobody has “Sr.” or “I” on their birth certificate.

September 22, 2010 at 12:18 pm
(24) Barbara says:

I appreciate this discussion as I named my son a II because he was named after his grandfather not his father. My son and his grandfather are David Orville whereas his father is David Arthur. Many people (including teachers) argue with my 8 year old that he should be a junior. I was glad to see that I was naming him the right way!

October 17, 2010 at 4:47 pm
(25) Stephanie says:

The idea of “moving up” is probably the silliest thing I’ve ever heard…

October 17, 2010 at 5:15 pm
(26) Stephanie says:

AND, it just occurred to me if there was “moving up” there would never have been all those kings in Europe with names like Henry VIII or Louis XIV… no moving up… totally ridiculous.

December 17, 2010 at 11:02 am
(27) Renee says:

In the case if Barbara naming her son after his grandfather, making him a II because their names exactly match, he could also be a junior because he shares a first and last but not middle name with his father. However, one could also say that he could be a Jr II if his father, who shares a first and last name with his father, calls himself Jr and his son would be the second Jr, i.e. Jr II.

February 1, 2011 at 10:20 pm
(28) Howard From Bahamas says:

WOW! this can go on 4ever

April 14, 2011 at 9:07 pm
(29) Stephen II says:

My dad it the first and I am the second. On my legal documents it is the second and you do not have to me a junior if your parents do not wish. It is their choice!!

July 23, 2011 at 12:51 pm
(30) John Cook says:

One of my 4th great grandfathers was a James Williams. He could not write his name, as is clear from his Revolutionary pension papers. He is, however, often, even after death, in those papers referred to as ” James Williams 2nd “. Do you think that his father was also named James Williams, or, as the above article suggests, could it have been an uncle or grandfather?

August 1, 2011 at 4:28 pm
(31) Terry Griffin says:

John Cook…to my interpretation of everything I have read–not only here but elsewhere–it’s more likely that James Williams II was named after someone up the family tree who was OTHER than his own father. (Although I HAVE read that Jr. and II can be interchangeable, it makes more sense to me that they wouldn’t be…at least not formally.)

August 19, 2011 at 11:01 am
(32) Lee says:

Herein lies the confusion most people experience: When a man names his son with his exact name, he is known as “Jr.” e.g. John William Henry names his son John William Henry. If then John William Henry, the son, names his son
John William Henry, then he will be known as “III” so on and so forth. The LEGAL name is exactly the same, that is why when Great-Grandfather dies, everyone moves up. So in society, when introducing oneself or addressing mail, the II/III/IV was used to distinguish one from another, because they were all living. Rarely was there anyone more than a IV because of lifespan (Regal/Monarch naming notwithstanding)
It has been commonplace in the US to place the suffix on the birth certificate, therefore creating a LEGAL name with the suffix, and that is why no one “moves up”.
Use of II is reserved for an honorific naming of a child after someone other the father, usually Grandfather or Uncle; aforementioned rules of LEGAL name applying.

June 1, 2012 at 6:02 pm
(33) Nantucket says:

Howard from the Bahamas is wrong. This subject can be researched at the library (reference desk librarians can be a tremendous help). They have the official rules for naming a son after a father or loved one. I incorrectly named my son the II, when he was actually a Jr. and was called out on it by a very astute acquaintance. Everything had to be changed; birth certificate, baptismal certificate, SS card, etc. There is proper etiquette associated with naming a son and it is important to get it right. It’s wrong to do whatever you want, despite what has been mentioned here. This is one area that must remain consistent to avoid embarrassment to the child as he becomes an adult.

June 13, 2012 at 5:02 pm
(34) Howard from Bahamas says:

To You Nantucket, I concede

June 18, 2012 at 12:18 am
(35) Senior says:

In Reply to Sharon.

(23) Sharon says:

It’s silly to think that a generational suffix is set in stone and does not change. Nobody has “Sr.” or “I” on their birth certificate.


What ever gave you the idea that the suffix is not on the birth certificate? My son is a JR and IT IS ON HIS BIRTH CERTIFICATE.So at least in Contra Costa County, California they DO put the suffix on the birth certificate. There is a spot on the birth certificate application where you specify a suffix. This means it is set in stone, as is part of his LEGAL NAME. JR is also on his social security card!

June 29, 2012 at 10:20 am
(36) Adria says:

So, what do you do when naming a son after his deceased father??? My husband died suddenly just 15 days afer finding out I was pregnant. I found out that I am having a boy, and would like to name my son after my husband, his father. However, he was a Jr., John Richard. My husband’s father, who is still alive, is John Richard, Sr. So, if I follow the “moving up” etiquette, that would make my son either Jr., thus taking the place of his father, or II, thus not acknowledging he was named after his father. The “moving up” theory just doesn’t sit well with me. It makes it seem like the person who previously held the title did not exist. That was their name and to have someone else take it over takes away their identity. I put Jr. on my husband’s headston, so If I named my son Jr., his name would be on a headstone…YUCK! I was considering using the III in this situation for my son. Does anyone know what the proper etiquette is on this situation?

July 20, 2012 at 12:06 pm
(37) Victor says:

My entire name is exactly the same as my father, so i am a junior. However, my little brother’s entire name is also exactly the same as my father and I. He is also called junior.

We are all alive and well.

I wonder can we both (sons) be called junior or I will be i and my little brother ii?

This has puzzle me for a while now.

October 26, 2012 at 1:25 pm
(38) Daniel says:

Now, do I have to have the same middle name as “the first” to be “the second’? There was another Daniel Chance born in 1808, long gone, and I cant find his middle name. I would definitely like to add “II” to my name, but I’m still not sure if I can. Any help would be appreciated!

March 1, 2013 at 10:55 am
(39) paul says:

Speaking of Jr,. my simple question is what is the proper format putting jr? it is

(Firts Name) Jr. (Middle Name) (Family Name)


(First Name) (Middle Name) (Family Name) Jr.

Kindly answer my question. thanks

April 7, 2013 at 6:15 pm
(40) Sam says:

Would it still be considered “II” if you change from languages? For example Vinchenzo vs Vincent

April 11, 2013 at 2:03 pm
(41) jbf says:

I wish I had never looked this up! Everybody seems to be ignoring one very important thing — with all the legal/security issues in the 21st century, one should follow the LEGAL way of naming successive generations so that 20 years from now the person is not trying to prove who s/he really is.
First person with a name: John Paul Jones — no suffix
Son of John Paul Jones: John Paul Jones, Jr. (John Paul Jones is now John Paul Jones, Sr.)
John Paul Jones, Sr. dies: Son should NOT change to John Paul Jones, Sr. unless he wants to have a heyday with Social Security, Insurance, legal papers, etc.
Son of John Paul Jones, Jr.: John Paul Jones I
Son of John Paul Jones I: John Paul Jones II
IF you start by naming a son for his grandfather/uncle/somebody OTHER than father in the direct line of the family: NO Sr. or Jr. or I: He would be John Paul Jones II. Who cares if there is no “legal” John Paul Jones I??
Other than the legalities, most people don’t introduce somebody as John Paul Jones, Jr./Sr., I, II – but as John Jones.
Unless your checkbook says John Paul Jones, Jr. – why add to the confusion?
For legal purposes one should ALWAYS stick to the LEGAL name. Otherwise, it’s simply called “AKA” – also know as. Unless you use a different version of your legal name WITH INTENT to defraud, etc., it’s common practice. Some people choose to go by their middle name. John Paul Jones could be known to everybody as Paul Jones. BUT, when signing legal papers, John Paul (or P.) Jones would be the proper thing.
Until the mid-19th century is was actually illegal in some countries to use a middle name. So, there are MANY family trees with John Jones in SEVERAL generations in a row.
I’ve just spent the past couple of hours sorting out 4 generations of relatives with the same exact name – first middle last – but the “Sr.” and the “Jr.” are not listed with the suffix.

May 22, 2013 at 1:09 pm
(42) BARBARA J. HUGHEY says:

Thank you for the Sr. , Jr., I, II legalities. This is as I remember the rules. I’m one of those ancestry researchers, and become so confused with what I view as mistakes regarding the Jr., Sr., etc.–I have tried to determine what is correct. Now someone has confirmed what I thought all along! GREAT!

May 31, 2013 at 8:51 am
(43) Jennifer says:

Just to complicate things, I have another question: My son would like to have his birth certificate changed to add a IV to the end of his name. he is named after his Great-grandfather, grandfather and uncle (who does not and never will have children). Since he is in the next generation, but not a direct descendant of his uncle, can he still have it done?

June 11, 2013 at 2:57 am
(44) Katrina says:

Ok, I don’t know if this discussion is still active or if anyone is going to read this but if someone does maybe someone could help me? My husband and I are having a baby soon and we don’t know for sure if it’s a boy or girl yet. So far the doctors think it’s a girl but if it’s a boy my husband and his parents wanted us to name it after him (Pedro Jose Melendez), just like his father Jesus named my husbands older brother Jesus after him as the first born but labeling him Jr. My problem is that I don’t like the Jr. Sr. thing and I wanted to know if we’d be able to name the child Pedro Jose Melendez II instead of Pedro Jose Melendez Jr. My husband had brought it up with his mother and she told us we couldn’t name our child Pedro Jose Melendez II if it was a boy because he’d be a Jr and that if our son named his son after him that it would then progress into the numbers like I,II,III. Also my husband considered naming the child with just one part of his name, either Pedro or Jose, along with the last name but wasn’t sure if Jr would still apply after doing so. I apologize if I’ve made this confusing, I’m not always good at organizing my thoughts.

July 24, 2013 at 6:59 pm
(45) Steven Bingham says:

I can’t believe that I still have a question after reading the many comments here, but here goes: I want to know if it’s ok to tack “Jr.” onto a name in a history I’m writing. This particular ancestor has the exact same names as his father, but I have no indication that he used or wrote his name with a Jr. In other words, he’s not legally a Jr. I just want a way to tell the two men apart in my writing?

August 28, 2013 at 10:41 am
(46) Allen says:

This has been insightful for the sake of “knowledge” historically. But in real application this issue of Jr or II and moving up is a battle between etiquette and possibly legal troubles (if proper changes have not taken place concerning authenticating identity and documents at both the State and Federal level). I have seen people go through a lot of hassle in the justice system because they were/are considered to have an “alias” by adding, dropping, or changing variations to their name. In my opinion, that “hassle” is entirely preventable, in this day and age of identity theft, by consulting the legal eagles and to follow their instructions BEFORE going public with signatures and other documentation that now portrays one as new/different (or updated) from their prior known identity.

August 28, 2013 at 9:12 pm
(47) lmpr8r says:

Name suffixes serve to distinguish family members with the same *exact same* (including middle) name. Furthermore, names with a different spelling (Christopher vs. Kristopher) should not warrant a suffix.
George Foreman named all five of his sons after himself (at least one has the same middle name: Edward) and they are named with the sequential suffixes Jr., III, IV, V, and VI.
Why is there no George II?
I agree with the convention of naming a child as “II” when they are named after family members other than a parent and reserving “Jr.” only for a child named after the parent. Additionally, the child’s middle name must be the same as the parent; otherwise, the middle name/initial can make the distinction.
It gets interesting when a child named with a “II” names their own child after themselves. How would John Q Public II, named after his great uncle John Q Public, suffix his own son’s name? I believe John Q Public, Jr. would be correct, since it would be distinct from both the great-great uncle and his father.
George Edward Foreman III, should he be first of his siblings to name a child with his same names, would use George Edward Foreman VII, sequentially following the youngest uncle’s suffix. Furthermore, he is also naming his son after the uncles, one of whom is already named George Edward Foreman, Jr.
A suffixed name drops the suffix when changing in any way that would make it separate and distinct. This includes hyphenating or adding a second last name to the last name. Legal documentation would follow, as when a woman takes her husband’s last name.
In the coincidence that persons in a small geographic area/workplace share identical names (including middle name and spelling), they may be distinguished by “of <street name/department >”, “the elder/younger”, “the <profession >” and so forth.
The notion of “moving-up” as elders die off undermines the entire purpose.
This is my take on the issue and is not official, only logical.

August 28, 2013 at 9:25 pm
(48) WhatsInAName says:

replying to Allen (46)
I know of a couple who hyphenated their last names when they got married (this is after the year 2000, mind you). They both did this so they would both have the same last names as their (future) children. They got updated SS cards without a single issue, just showed the marriage license. Then, off to the Motor Vehicles to get their licenses updated. The woman behind the counter took care of the wife’s license, then the husband stepped up. The clerk looked at him and with total seriousness said, “You can’t change your last name when you get married. You’re a man!”
Can you believe it?
The reason this relates is because the husband had a suffix to his name before they were married and he dropped it when he changed his name, since it was no longer identical to his dad’s.

September 18, 2013 at 3:08 am
(49) wildtank says:

What about people who go by Jr. and actually are not… for example Hank Williams Jr. His father’s given name was Hiram King Williams and his given name is Randell Hank Williams. and to boot his son’s name is Shelton Hank Williams (aka Hank Williams III)… What is the protocol there because my best friend’s brother is named after their father only with reversed First and middle names (Timothy Michael and Michael Timothy) yet he isn’t a Jr…

October 14, 2013 at 11:59 am
(50) senatorbob says:

@wildtank – I would suppose that in the Hank Williams situation the father and son used the same “stage names” so HW, Jr added the “Jr” to distinguish himself from the father. Whether either, or both, legally changed their names I do not know.
This whole thing about name suffixes changing as one of the holders dies – this was probably a lot easier in the “old” days but nowadays it would take a court order (a legal name change) to do so. My husband was named after his grandfather – but with a middle name, his grandfather had no middle name (had the names been exact my husband would have been “ii” our son “iii”) so my husband had no suffix, until our first son was born. My husband became a “Sr” which was added to his driver’s licence, ss #, passport and everything (but his birth certificate) since then. He did NOT HAVE to change anything to include “Sr” – that is always an option. BUT our son is a “Jr” – that is on his birth certificate, ss#, all ID, all legal documents, etc. So, at the time of my husband’s death, it would take a LEGAL name change for my son to DROP or CHANGE the suffix. If our son names his son after his father/himself that child would be “iii”. IF that’s the way my son decided to do it, following the standard application – there is no LAW saying how it must be done.

November 7, 2013 at 6:09 pm
(51) David Todd says:

Supposing a grandfather and a grandson have exactly the same name, but the grandfather’s son (father of his grandson) has a completely different fist and second, but not last, name?

December 4, 2013 at 9:36 am
(52) Angela b says:

My husbands father was a Sr. And my husband is a Jr , but I guess my husband has a brother also named Jr too but were not 100% sure if he was the 3rd or not. We are having a baby anyte and wanted to carry on the name of my husband. What would that be then the 3rd or 4th?

January 9, 2014 at 11:35 pm
(53) Sherry K says:

My friend just gave birth to a still born child, a little boy. They had really pondered and gave a lot of thought to the baby boy’s name for several months before the stillborn birth occurred. They had been referring to the baby as James for several months. The mother’s maiden name is Clarkston and her married name is Chandler…therefore the baby’s name was and is James Clarkston Chandler…a very pretty and distinguished and very planned name. She says the baby cannot be named anything else, but feels badly that the precious name won’t be heard by many…after time passes. I suggested that if they have another son, they name him James Clarkston Chandler, II in honor and memory of their stillborn son. Would this be proper? I think it would be.

January 12, 2014 at 9:27 pm
(54) Nicole S says:

I am so glad I have found this page…My niece had a baby and named him after the dad but has called him the 2nd…It TOTALLY drives me batty every time I see her post something about it…When I post about him I always use the II instead of the 2nd thinking maybe she’ll get the hint. I surely hope they didn’t put the 2nd on his birth cert and instead used the II. And that’s my story…..:)

February 6, 2014 at 2:33 am
(55) Luis S says:

I have a question. My dad and I are both mexican (he was born in Mexico but I was born in the USA). When he got his Permanent Resident card his full last name was registered as his paternal and maternal last names (the spanish custom). When I was born, I was given my dad’s first and middle name but only the first last name (paternal) and given the JR. Is this how it’s supposed to be or should I also have the EXACT last name which is the paternal and maternal last names of my father in order to be considered a JR.?
I know that in order to be a JR the name has to be exactly the same.. if not , there is really no reason why to differentiate me from my dad since our last names are clearly not the same. Please help!

February 27, 2014 at 9:20 am
(56) Ric says:

Ok this is how it works. Just pay attention. This is a example name. Im David Don Leer Sr. My son is David don leer jr. If my son names his son after himself and wants people to know that its after him he will be called David Don Leer III. If he wants people to know that he was named after me the Sr he will be David Don Leer II even tho we all have the exact same name. Its not how the name is its about who you are named after. You can start after the II and go to the III or you can go jr III. So it could be SR JR III IV etc. or SR JR II III IV etc. . If it don’t make since to you do what ever you want it your sons name.

February 27, 2014 at 9:25 am
(57) Ric says:

Sherry K. That would be exactly how it works. And that is so bad of that happening. May God be with them.

Leave a Comment

Line and paragraph breaks are automatic. Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title="">, <b>, <i>, <strike>

©2014 About.com. All rights reserved.