To Re-register DS Birth certificate

[Kira893]

Hi MN

When I was pregnant, me and father had just really met and he wasn’t around to support me. When baby was born, he started to step up. He came with me to the registry office and begged me to give baby his last name as everyone does that in his family married or not. There was an argument and the registry office lady advised me to keep him off the birth certificate and give baby my name until he can prove himself, then I can change it at anytime .

He asked me if he proves himself, would I consider changing it and I agreed. So for the last 3 years he’s been great with DD. Can’t fault him. DD turning very soon, He’s now brought it up again and wants his name on the birth certificate and DD to have last name. I think I’m ok with it but I feel a bit silly calling up the nursery etc asking them to change her name. Would they think it odd? I don’t really care much for my last name, I’ve no contact with any of my dad’s side of my family. I don’t really think last names matter much.

Would anyone else change it?

Given the OP's latest update, it looks like she's going to ignore 99% of the posts on this thread and change the surname anyway. Solely because it's because it's what the father (who she's not even in a relationship with) wants.

Some women are their own worst enemies

I have pretty strong feelings about this, as we've been through similar. In my case though, my DS was born before the PR law changed in Dec 2003 (thank fuck...)

His Dad took it to court a couple of times, attempted name change and to request PR. Thankfully the court saw right through him and knew he didn't want PR for the right reasons - he wanted control and was furious he didn't have it. The name change was for "he belongs to me" reasons too. He was and still is a knob.

Name wasn't changed, and to keep the peace I ensured I informed him of everything (that I would have done anyway), not that he was really interested. He didn't attend parents eves/sports days/ hosp apps. The whole thing was a possessive thing, and trying to get one over me.

Personally I think it's brilliant that the registrar suggested to leave him off, she probably was picking up on the tension.

I'm not sure i believe this as it would have been extremely unprofessional of the registrar - a birth certificate is a legal document!

By 'stepping up' he is doing it for himself, not you. Why would you make your life more complicated by adding father to the BC now, so he has more parental rights and can control your life in the future? As for changing DC's surname- why would you think that he has more rights to give his surname to your DC, than you? With different surnames, you will have to show birth certificate every time you cross a border, for example. Don't complicate your life unnecessary.

A registrar faced with arguing, unmarried parents would default to the mother's surname, I suspect. On the basis that if they can't agree in public, what pressure is being applied in private?

You can't re-register unless after a marriage, only to the father's name and only for a short period - I know this because I wanted to change my son's surname to my surname, and the registry office flat out said it wasn't possible, and they'd only change to the father's name under the above circumstances as a courtesy (no courtesy for women of course)

You CAN reregister and add the father if he wasn't originally on the birth certificate. And there's no time limit on that. And you DO NOT have to get married to do that. There are forms for declaration of parentage. And a new name can be entered at that point. It's different to wanting to only change a name.

OP, the issue of him then obtaining equal rights and responsibilities is one to seriously consider. You don't know what's ahead of you and do you really want him to be able to essentially control your actions by refusing, for example, to allow you to move to a new town by withholding permission for you to take your child ?? I know a young woman in just that situation at the moment... chance of a great move for her and her son but the sons father (never married but on the BC) took her to court to stop the move. He barely sees the boy but spite and control are his driving force, and of course he has equal rights!!! Think long and hard !!!

Yes I did. Still think it's a valid point.

So I’ve said it makes me feel uncomfortable to completely change the surname. He’s asked if I could compromise to a double barrelled name. I don’t mind this too much as my name is still there I suppose ?! I really don’t know what to do !

It's not your name to change, it's your daughters and she can do it at 16 if she wishes.

No way. Keep your name same as kid. Easier when travelling. Plus who knows what the future holds. Do nothing.

I had two children before I got married. Dad was on birth certificate and they had his last name (we couldn’t double barrel as our last names sounded ridiculous together and I was confident he’d be in their lives and eventually we’d get married).

After we got married, we re-registered them and could have changed their names completely as you have the opportunity to (we didn’t change anything as they had my husband’s last name already) and then they were both issued brand new birth certificates that basically void their old ones and the new ones have my married name on.

So if he wants to change your daughter’s last name on her birth certificate then that’s the way to do it!

Lots of people don’t bother to re-register after marriage, but we did as we went on to have two more kids. I wanted them all on equal footing as we still have some very archaic laws and I didn’t want any problems with inheritance etc down the line.

Traditionally, the babies of unmarried mothers always cared their mothers’ surnames. No wedding ring, no surname.

After your update with the idea of giving your child the double barrelled surname, I still stand by my first response OP, if he wants his child to bear his name, then he should marry you, or change his name to match that of his child. He showed his true colours during the time you were pregnant, and while he may be behaving himself now, it doesn't change how he treated you in the early days. Therefore, what makes you think that he wouldn't stop you moving away if that's what you wanted? It might just take a disagreement about something to do with your child, and once he has PR, then he has control over you, and your child, where you live, where you travel, etc. Stick with your original decision OP, why should a man hold all the cards, when you were the one who carried the child alone and without his support?

The name is a red herring. The parental rights and responsibilities are the important bit. Are you sure that he or his family aren’t pushing this as a way to get him named as the father on the birth certificate? If so, why are they pushing for it? I would ask him whether he would be ok with having his name on the birth certificate as the father but let the child keep your surname. If he says yes I would immediately be suspicious. Either way go see a solicitor or citizen’s advice asap. You need to know exactly which of your parental rights you are signing away. And to be clear - currently you have exclusive parental rights, so you are talking about handing him power and leverage over your and your child’s life. Think very carefully before you do this.

Make sure you frame any alternative suggestion, like having him on the birth cert as father without changing the name, as an ‘if’ question, not an offer. But find out what rights you are giving up before you do anything. With the right information I suspect the decision will make itself, this is how such things usually turn out. At the moment you don’t really know the full consequences. When you do then you can make an informed decision. If you have a good friend or older relative who can support you and help you to get the information you need pls consult them asap.

You can't change your child's name on the birth certificate, it's too late for that. You can add her Dad to the birth certificate, but please be aware, by doing so, he will automatically have parental responsibility. The only way to change her surname is by Deedpol and probably via a solicitor, as she is under 18. I don't think anyone can advise on if you should or not, that's really your choice.

You can change the child’s surname but only in specific circumstances eg if you marry the child’s father (I had my eldest daughter re-registered for that reason), if a child is adopted they can be re-registered or in this case it would be to add the child’s natural father to the birth certificate, in which case the question of parental rights is more important than the surname, as you say. Technically it’s not changing the original birth cert, it’s a re-registration which legally supersedes the previous certificate. But as I said there are limited circumstances under which the change is allowed, most of them to do with paternity. If a woman divorces she can’t change her children’s surname to her maiden name, for example. The whole thing is a typical example of patriarchy. So she cannot change the surname without giving the father parental rights and responsibilities, which I strongly suspect is the real reason the father and his family are pushing for it. It should be noted that the Dad’s parents are not legally the child’s grandparents unless he is on the birth certificate, so they also have skin in the game. OP said his brother insisted on the same thing even though he’s not married to the mother of his child. But like many distance Dads they are probably much keener to press their rights rather than their responsibilities. The whole thing screams red flag to me.

Just sulk even more than he did and tell him all the time about how you grew up in a society where women mattered just as much as men and so it's important to you and your family that the baby has your name.

Every time he brings this up, say that as nauseam until you "win".