Days Of Our Lives' Peter Reckell Explains Daughter Loden's Name

08/09/2008 at 01:00 PM ET

Peter_reckellSoap star Peter Reckell and his wife Kelly Moneymaker weren’t sure what to call their 9-month-old daughter until her name, Loden Sloan, appeared to Kelly in a dream. When the singer awoke, "she looked up Loden, which is a shade of green, and Sloan is Celtic for warrior," Peter say. "It made perfect sense as were both passionate environmentalists." Their earth-focused outlook is also one reason that Peter and Kelly will not be having any more biological children, citing a concern for population control. Peter explains, "We should be discussing that topic." However, that doesn’t mean that they won’t add to their family by another way.

We might adopt down the road. My wife is adopted.

Peter, 53, and Kelly, 38, were married on April 18, 1998.

Source: TV Guide Canada; Photo by Juan Rico/Fame Pictures.

FILED UNDER: News , Parenting

Share this story:

Your reaction:

Add A Comment reserves the right to remove comments at their discretion.

Showing 42 comments

jasmine on

Whoa…that is really cool how the name was dreamt and actually ended up having a significant meaning. Awesome.

Stéph on

Wow, I wonder what it’s like to dream about you’re baby’s name. I might feel like the baby is trying to make you know what it wants it’s name to be.

Personnaly I think the name Loden sounds more masculine than feminine, but that’s their chose. I love the meaning of it, though.

Is Kelly’s real last name Moneymaker? If so, it would have been a shame if she wasn’t rich.

I also think that adoption is really great and I would also like to adopt children, because there are so many children that do not have parents and so many adults who want to be parents, but can’t and even if they can, people should adopt to help with the earth population control. It’s nice to see celebrities talking about it and doing it. I think it makes more people do it.

ekaterina on

i like that story!
interesting i have yet to hear many people cite population control for not having kids… gues the jolie pitts have a differing view on that! lol

Diane on

I’m sorry, but I don’t agree with their views on over population. They are making children sound like they are burden to the world, instead of a gift. Adopting is fine. But I think they’re thinking is wrong.

Stef on

Give me a break. Population control.

Emily on

Is her last name really Moneymaker???

Ash on

I kinda named my son this way. I had been thinking SO hard about names and trying to pick out something perfect but nothing seemed to ‘fit’ for one reason or another.

One day I just woke up and had the perfect name for him ‘implanted’ in my mind… I dunno where it came from but it was just what I had been looking for and when he was born, was the only name that felt right. You hear of this kinda thing a lot… like how Angelina and Brad recently said Vivienne “named herself”.

LisaS1968 on

Moneymaker is a fairly common Native American last name…

Lisa on

Wow…she looks a lot different than she used to…perhaps that picture was taken when she was heavily pregnant?

Christina on

To each their own. Alexandra Paul also cited population control as the reason she and her husband were not going to bear biological children.

That’s a lovely story about their baby’s name!

Erica on

Okay, without reading this story the first thing I thought was “Loden Sloan, jeez what a horrible girl’s name.” After reading it I’ve done a 180–I would love to have my future child’s name come to me like that and for it to have such a relevant meaning within the context of my life.

h I think the Jolie-Pitts are a different story ekaterina. After all half of their kids were already born by the time Angelina and Brad adopted them. Plus I 100% buy that they didn’t use IVF or any other fertility treatment to conceive the twins, only because Angelina’s mom died of ovarian cancer and I don’t think she would take the risk of taking anything to throw her only reproductive system off.

Sorry, back on topic: I agree with the Reckells about population control. Perhaps it doesn’t directly affect those in developed countries, but even here in the U.S. I feel like we are truly on the cusp of an energy crisis. Until our government takes more initiative addressing our reliance on oil, it only makes sense to be more mindful of the # of children you have–the more people a family has to feed=greater amounts of energy needed to keep up the food supply. With the cost of oil going up so steadily I think many are already feeling the hit of bigger grocery bills. I truly hope we don’t get to the point where we literally have to make the choice not to have as many kids as we like, but I don’t see the median deviating from 2.3-2.5 anytime soon.

M on

i agree, stef.

plus too many countries that implement it as a rule actually end up with the opposite problem and have to take steps to correct it. or it is forced upon people in the cruelest of ways, i.e. in china for instance.

MB on

According to, her birth name is Kelly Susan Moneymaker, Emily.

I love the meaning behind Loden’s name. What a cool story!

sigh on

That’s an awesome story about their daughter’s name! Very very cool.

It’s also nice to hear celebrities cite population control in talking about their family planning. I wish more people took that into account. Kudos to them. 🙂

Cait on

Before you just dismiss their concern of population control, you might want to do some research. Just saying.

Jaclyn on

I love naming stories like this.

Good for them deciding what’s right for there family, although I will say that larger families (4+ kids) statistically are more environmentally conscious than smaller families – although sometimes just out of financial necessity.

I’d love a larger family, population control is not a concern in Canada, and we are environmentally conscious, but that’s my choice – to each his/her own.

poppy on

Over population is a huge issue, actually. Every year the population grows exponentially, because the average person gives birth to more than 2 kids. That means they are more than replacing themselves, then those kids each give birth to more than 2 kids. There are only so many resources and space on this planet. It doesn’t feel that way here in the USA, but check out any developing country.

So kudos to them! I plan to adopt if I want more than 2 kids.

Doreen on

God told us to muliply and fill the earth! Just saying. 🙂

Renee on

I think it’s an interesting and beautiful name. I can’t say I agree with all of the comments about population control. I feel like it’s no one’s business how many kids people have or that they have the right to say how many kids people should have. I feel that it’s a personal matter that should be respected.

Lulu on

If they were really worried about population control they shouldn’t have had any children like many are doing in Europe now. In 30 to 50 years, that continent will be completely different because of the choice of individuals not to breed and to allow the Muslims to do it for them.

As for energy worries, we have plenty of resourses, they just aren’t utilized or utilized well. Most famines don’t happen because of a lack of food but because of bad government. Fewer people won’t make bad governments better.

Don’t worry though. I’ve already had enough kids to make up for the one they aren’t having. The Jolie-Pitts are doing their part too, along with the Duggers, Annette Benning and so forth.

I’m not going to comment on the kid’s name because I think it’s mean when everyone attacks a person’s choice of names for their kids. Their political vices are fair game though.

SeanJay on

Why should people take it into account? If you want to have more than 1 child & can take care of them that is your business.

You need to focus on the people who have a bunch of kids with no money & pawn them off on others to care for or drain their government’s funds in order to care for them.

Whatever Peter & his wife do kid wise I hope they don’t wait another 10 years to add to their family.

Stef on

Cait–I believe saying “I will deprive any future children of mine the chance at life because I want to make this political statement” annoys me to no end. There are many many more ways that a person can slow down or reverse environmental or population issues without resorting to such ridiculous statements. Check out the statistic that says how many people can live and thrive on the amount of land the Earth has–Along the lines of if everyone who has lived in the past six thousand years stood shoulder to shoulder, they could all fit on the Isle of Man. The real issue has to do with waste and poor management of resources. Perhaps they would consider moving into an efficiency apartment and giving up a giant Hollywood mansion. Not likely.

Annika on

Beautiful story about the little girl’s name. =o)

Population control… I realize that the world population is growing (too) rapidly considering all the available ressources. However that does not apply to every part of the world and that has to be taken into account too. I`m living in Canada but I am from Europe (Germany) and there the problem has been for a few years now that not enough babies are being born but the percentage of retired people is getting bigger. That might cause serious problems in the future. I`m not sure how the situation is here in North America.
But ‘population control’ can not be generalized IMO.

sabrinasmom on

Kelly used to be a member of the 80s group expose.

bren on

Erica I agree with it too. I think population control is something people should at least consider when having a child. Sure we shouldn’t say ok only one child because any more and the world is going to go down the drain but definitely think about what kind of effect each person has on the world can help people. Maybe if we think ok there are alot of people on this planet and a certain amount aren’t educated or wealthy enough to use birth control or whatever. Maybe we can all say ok I want to have however many kids with that amount of kids I am going to make sure they are careful about the resources they use. I think its important to always be concerned about the enviroment because your children are the ones who are going to be here after we are gone. I am not sure if I am making much sense but I do understand what they are saying. I personally would love to have my own and adopt but I can’t say I am only going to have one. I just think its good to put it out there as another way to help the enviroment and the economic state of the country as well. Not writing this to start a big deal but I think its an interesting thought.

shidney on

I also agree that ‘population control’ isn’t an outlandish or ridiculous notion. It’s realistic and responsible to consider the toll humans place on the earth by our fairly long existence on the planet. I appreciate that this family has a realistic attitude, at least.

FC on

For some reason, I don’t even remember reading their daughter’s name. Maybe I’m losing my mind. But Loden’s name is pretty.

Cait on

Stef – all I said was is that before you dismiss their reasoning, do some research. I never said whether I agreed with them or not. I never said that I was making a political statement. Next time, read what’s written on the page before making comments. That’s what I did. Especially since I didn’t make my comment at any one specific person.

Renee on

I think some of the people talking about population control forget that not every country is having this issue. Also, they seem to think that none of us know about the issues of population control. It sounds like they need to do more research before jumping on people for wanting more than one child. Also, in the U.S. we would have the population issues that some countries like Germany and other European countries have if it wasn’t for immigration. I have done my research before anyone criticize me for saying that

carie on

Lulu….I’m not even going to get into how offensive I found your entire statement about breeding and Muslims was.

Anyway, I absolute support the idea of population control. And even if other people don’t that’s fine, but it’s ok for people to feel opposite than you.

sheba on

Population control is what is important to them and a topic they wish to discuss. They have not told anyone else what to do with their bodies or their future babies. People are ridiculously offended. And how are they denying life to their future kids? Have they killed a fetus recently? Are they suppose to reproduce a baby every 9 months just because they can like the Duggers? Just plain bizarre some thinking. They have decided not to have any more biological children and have given their reason. How is different from someone saying they don’t want any children just cause they are having too much fun being childless. Or, I only want 1 child because I can only love 1 child? Both of which I have heard celebrities say. Kelly and Peter seem quite content with their choices. And I really like the name Loden.

If you don’t agree the Earth’s population needs controlling, then pop out a kid a year until you hit menapause. Kelly and Peter don’t have a lock on your uterus.

Stéph on

I think what they actually wanted to say is that there are so many children in needs of parents that they would prefer saving one of them instead of just adding one to the world.

umma on

lulu—you wrote: “In 30 to 50 years, that continent will be completely different because of the choice of individuals not to breed and to allow the Muslims to do it for them.”

uh…huh? unless i misunderstand, your comment seems rather offensive to muslims (people like me).

Lucy on

“In 30 to 50 years, that continent will be completely different because of the choice of individuals not to breed and to allow the Muslims to do it for them.”

Oh. My. God.

I seriously worry for the future of this planet, and it’s not because of the Muslims.

Cora on

“I will deprive any future children of mine the chance at life because I want to make this political statement”

This struck me as a fairly bizarre statement. Do you really think the millions of gametes (eggs and sperm) in any given person have a right to form life? If one, then all? A woman loses one every month – should she mourn for that potential child? How do you distinguish between them? Deciding not to bear one or two children, from the billions of potential children you could have, doesn’t seem like depriving anyone in particular of their rights. To me, life is not a “right” as far as conception is concerned, it’s a miracle, whenever you consider how many odds are stacked against it in the first place. Just my opinion, of course.

As to the population control issue, to me it seems like a fairly responsible stance to take, just because our planet is already massively overpopulated and its resources can’t sustain our current way of life. Fewer people will mean better quality of life for the children who are born. Of course in an ideal world, every couple would have 2.0 children to replace themselves so that the population would remain stable over time, but with the birth rate much higher than that in just about all countries, the world’s population is increasing exponentially and it can’t just continue forever; there has to be a tipping point. For now, the people who choose to have no children just balance out the people who have many.

Having said all that, everything in the above is hypothetical and of course I fully support the notion of individual choice… no I’m not suggesting that there should be an enforced limit on how many children someone can have! 🙂 If someone wants to have 19 children then more power to them. I’m just explaining why I think that Peter Reckell’s decision to take population control into account shouldn’t be ridiculed, and may in fact be a positive thing.

Lauren on

Lulu, it’s funny to me that you wont comment on a baby’s name because it’s mean to “attack a personal choice” but you say that Europeans are “allowing…Muslims to do(breeding) for them.” That’s dancing on the line of xenophobia, basically insinuating that there wont be any European people (ie, Caucasian)left if Muslims do all the “breeding” for them. Whoa. First, who cares if that even turns out to be true? Is Europe destined to only have white people, and the Middle East only people of the Muslim faith? I don’t get it. Second, people of the Muslim faith don’t have disproportionately larger number of children in relationship to other populations, such as devout Catholics in, say, South America. It’s a complicated issue what with religious considerations and the like, but I’m just really put off by that comment you made – it struck me as a little ignorant.

Regardless, anyone who reads a little about exponential population growth know it’s a serious issue. The planet cannot support endless number of humans – we consume to many resources! However, that’s not to say government should dictate reproductive choices. I just think we all should take a more holistic view of the issue. For instance, just because there isn’t a problem in Canada doesn’t mean the fact that there are huge and growing populations in India and China doesn’t affect Canada as well. It’s like saying, well we don’t have polution in Fiji so who cares about smog in LA? It’s one earth, and everything affects everyone else.

mommyof4 on

Sorry but I stongly disagree with the idea that people should adopt instead of having biological children beacuse of population control. Why should the people having the children that are available for adoption be aloud to have children they can’t take care of while people that can take care of their own biological children are looked down on for having too many children and adding to overpopulation. It makes no sense to say that i shouldn’t have as many bilogical children as i want and can care for just because so many other people have their children in an orphanage.

trl on

I have seen alot of enviromnetalists take the stance on not having children of their own. They truley believe thats their way of helping save the earth then hats off to them.

I like this childs name!

mp on

What I find offensive about Peter’s remarks is his stridency — “We know better than everyone else.” I don’t care if he and his wife have another baby or not, but the pop control issue, WHILE VALID, comes off as celeb preaching, and that never comes off well.

As for the Muslim issue, I think many people find it frightening that Muslims are emigrating to Western countries but refusing to embrace their values. A valid point, IMO. Westerners who work or emigrate to Muslim countries are required to obey their rules and mores.

Sarah on

Wait, are discussions about religion even allowed here? I am shocked that Lulu’s incorrect/offensive/inflammatory comment about Muslims in the Western world were allowed to be posted. What does that even have to do with this topic? Neither Peter nor his wife mentioned their religion or anyone else’s.

As for the real topic, i think Peter raises a valid point. He wasn’t pushing his beliefs on anyone else (and since he has a bio baby, i’m sure he’s not totally opposed to it). He simply said that we should be talking about population control, which we should. And if he and his wife want to adopt, then i think that’s a wonderful choice.

terri on

I agree, Sheba.

Kelli on

He has every right to voice his opinion on population control, if you are offended by that, which you shouldn’t be, that is definitely a personal problem.

I can’t even fathom the rudeness of the Muslim comments. By making comments like that, you are just screaming to the world how absolutely ignorant you are. How embarrassing it was to read those comments.