Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To not want to re-register DC

98 replies

Liskee · 09/01/2018 12:51

DH and I got married a year after DS2 was born. On both DC birth certificates are DHs name, and my maiden name. I changed my name when we got married (my choice, very happy to do so, this thread is NOT ABOUT name changing).

MIL is now suggesting though that we re-register DC births so that BCs show my married name. I dont think it's necessary to do so. DC were conceived and born to two loving parents in a relationship who have since married. We're not embarrassed by our non-married state when we had the DC and we're delighted they were both able to be at our wedding. However MIl is saying that if I'm happy to have all of us with same name now, then it should be on BCs too.

AIBU? (I know I'm not - just want to know other peoples experiences/thoughts really).

OP posts:
petbear · 09/01/2018 13:54

I'm not gonna lie, I would change it, yes.....

Sorry if that's not what you want to hear @liskee

What a PITA to have to make sure you always carry letters and 'proof' with you, to prove your children are yours. Confused

Why not just do it? It won't take long. Personally, I would do it (if I had had my kids before getting married.)

JapaneseBirdPainting · 09/01/2018 13:55

I kept my passport and drivers licence in my maiden name (due to a can't be arsed sort of attitude) and so my DCs have both a different name to me. I often take them abroad on my own, and always carry a letter from DH saying they can travel, and my marriage certificate to prove I have connection to their surname and I have never been asked for it, not even once. But, it may be that they both look exactly like me, little clones.

tiggytape · 09/01/2018 13:58

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

JapaneseBirdPainting · 09/01/2018 13:58

(Plus to be fair, the older one is largely non-verbal and clearly has SN and the younger one looks quite young for his age).

It IS a pain to take the docs with me everywhere- but no more of a pain than taking any of the documents- passports, boarding passes, Doctor letters regarding epi pens and insulin for the hand luggage etc. It's just another thing that has to be taken so I just do it.

privatewedding · 09/01/2018 13:59

When we married we were told that legally we had to register our kids births. I had never done it but this post prompted me to ring and ask why. Our local registry office are adamant that it is illegal not to reregister births after marriage even if we both had same surname before marriage. They are unable to explain why and just say it is the law and refer me to the government website which confirms what they are saying.

Viviennemary · 09/01/2018 14:04

I think you should in order to tie up loose ends. But it's not up to your MIL to dictate what you do as it's your choice. I'd rather my birth certificate showed my parents as married.

farangatang · 09/01/2018 14:05

If it's technically the law to re-register, and could prevent potential issues over your will, it's a bit negligent NOT to bother.
Having seen BOTH my parents and also my husband's mum go through absolutely hideous very difficult sibling relationships when it came time to their parents' wills (and court cases contesting the will, which you wouldn't think were possible, but not only were and are possible, but ended up finding in favour of those who really you wouldn't think had any claim at all!) , I'd do everything possible to try and make ALL my children's 'rights' as equal as possible.

DonutCone · 09/01/2018 14:05

Why in this day and age are we still validating the concept of legitimate, and illegitimate?

I've always thought it is a way to remove the 'shame' or having a child out of wedlock. By re registering you are saying that there must be something to be ashamed of. You weren't married. The birth certificate shows that. Why would anyone feel the need to get a new BC to make it look different?!

prh47bridge · 09/01/2018 14:09

Just to repeat the correct legal position since people continue to post incorrect advice...

You are required by law to re-register the birth. The penalty for not doing so is a £2 fine.

Failure to re-register will not cause any issues over the will or anything else. Your child is now automatically legitimate because you have married. Even if your child was still illegitimate it would not cause any issues with your will or anything else. Apart from inheriting peerages, illegitimate children have the same rights as legitimate children.

user1495451339 · 09/01/2018 14:12

Would never even thought of this! Sounds a bit old fashioned. Surely it is just the status at the time of birth or you could change it again in the case of divorce or re marriage!

Dagnabit · 09/01/2018 14:12

The birth certificates show the dc surname as that of their father with OP down as her now maiden name. So they do all have the same surname now so why would that reflect when travelling? Presumably all their passports show their surnames as the same - unless, like me, you travel under your maiden name until your passport needs renewing? And that has nothing to do with birth certificates.

LuchiMangsho · 09/01/2018 14:12

As I said above being asked to show documents at immigration has NOTHING to do with surnames. In fact last summer DH and I were travelling with DS1 (pregnant with DS2) and on our return from a weekend in Berlin. We were asked, ‘and how is this child related to you?’ Eih? How do you think? You have all three of our passports with you! But I then did notice that the British passport for minors does not have the names of parents on it whereas our previous citizenship was of a country which did. Anyway, it’s not pages of proof or whatever. And actually both parents travelling alone should have it.

prh47bridge · 09/01/2018 14:12

Why would anyone feel the need to get a new BC to make it look different

Because the law says you must. Legitimacy Act 1976 S9 specifically requires the birth to be re-registered within 3 months of the parents marrying. Failure to re-register is a criminal offence. The penalty is paltry (£2 fine), it is widely ignored and never enforced. But it is the law.

prh47bridge · 09/01/2018 14:14

Surely it is just the status at the time of birth or you could change it again in the case of divorce or re marriage

Divorce and remarriage are irrelevant. You cannot re-register the birth following either of those events. You are, however, legally required to re-register the birth if the parents were not married at the time of birth and subsequently marry.

MrsU88 · 09/01/2018 14:16

what has it got to do with mil what you do with your children?

for what its worth my dc birth certificates have my maiden name on as we werent married, and it has never occurred to us to have it changed. surely its just an extra faff and will probably cost.

NeedsAsockamnesty · 09/01/2018 14:16

Well my nieces and nephew were abducted abroad by their father. Parents were married. I think any parent travelling alone with children should have to prove the other parent agrees otherwise children are at risk, married or not, same name or not

They are meant to, the problem is it’s rarely actually checked

Allthewaves · 09/01/2018 14:19

Complete waste of time and effort

grannytomine · 09/01/2018 14:21

I have never been asked for it, not even once. But, it may be that they both look exactly like me, little clones. But them looking like you doesn't mean you aren't abducting them, taking them to another country and denying their father access to them.

For my family it meant little girls disappearing to a country where FGM was a risk, where they would be denied education and marriages arranged for them. The fact that they resembled their father didn't make any difference to the risks. Twenty bloody years went by before we saw them again.

genever · 09/01/2018 14:22

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Battleax · 09/01/2018 14:23

It is optional. In the sense that you can easily chose not to and nothing happens as a result.

grannytomine · 09/01/2018 14:24

They are meant to, the problem is it’s rarely actually checked It is a disgrace and I am always shocked when people on here object to these perfectly reasonable measures to safeguard children and I have had people telling me that no one has a right to stop them travelling with their own children. If only the knew what the pain is like when a seemingly loving parents does this.

I will stop posting now as it distresses me.

Original poster
Liskee · 09/01/2018 14:28

Thanks All.

My passport and driving licence are now in my married name, so no issues about travelling with them. It's also highly unlikely that there'll be any more babies Wink

I don't remember the registrar recommending we re-register the DC at our wedding. Although truthfully she may well have done!

MIL is opinionated, but a good sort really and we couldn't be without her help Smile

However, I am a total goody two shoes, so if it's the actual law I think I'll probably end up doing it! The local government website says 'may' wish to re-register which made me think it's optional - I'll call our local office as a pp did and seek their advice. Many thanks for replying.

OP posts:
BrokenHollandaise · 09/01/2018 14:29

I think it's just a thing in England and Wales? Never heard of anything like that in Scotland

IsaSchmisa · 09/01/2018 14:29

I probably would just because any kind of conviction, even if the fine was only a penalty of £2, would fuck me over work wise. Although the odds of you ever getting convicted would be minimal, I don't know of any recent cases where it's happened.

Xmaspuddingdisaster · 09/01/2018 14:36

Broken, I do not think it is an obligation in Scotland, their website talks about if you wish to apply etc, nothing sounds compulsory. A more sensible approach!

Swipe left for the next trending thread