Change child’s surname

[Marley040783]

Hi all, has anyone ever gone through the courts to change your child’s surname , my application is accepted to take father to court, just wondering what they ask me and do I have to take any evidence etc with me?

If you have a Child Arrangement order you can take them away for up to 28 days without permission.

This only applies to a "lives with" order.

Collaborate in your experience, does it make a difference if the children are older and don't want any association with their father? They have no contact with any of his family, they consider my husband's parents as their grandparents and have nothing but upsetting memories of their father.

It depends what you mean by older. When they’re 18!they can change it for themselves anyway. However a child who is Gillick Competent will be listened to much more than a 5 year old.

I thought they could change it themself from age 16

I didnt know Gillick competence was used other than for medical purposes. That's interesting. It beggars belief that a judge would override the wishes of a mother and both children, and find in favour of a father who has no interest in maintaining a relationship with his children. I know each case is decided individually, but it genuinely worries me that we could spend time, money and energy going to court, only to be told that actually a completely feckless father's rights trump those of the children.

My 4yo ds goes by his "known name" which is my surname. It's not officially his last name but after this first year of school we're slowly receiving less stuff with his legal name on.

Havent been able to apply for court proceedings yet as they cost hundreds of pounds, and exdp left us drowning in debts.

He hasnt seen her in a year now.

Good luck and update us on how you get on!

Gillick (orFraser) competency is, strictly speaking, an assessment of competency to change sent for oneself for medical things.

But it is also widely used more colloquially as shorthand for a mid-teen who has understanding of the issues at hand and can express a clear and cogent preference.

Children's views are taken increasingly into account from secondary school age upwards. Depending on that the issue is, the amount of weight put on those views can vary, but it increases at around 16, and very much so as 18 approaches

only to be told that actually a completely feckless father's rights trump those of the children

From the court's perspective, it is about the right of the child to maintain links with the father. That's where competency comes in. An 8 year old child may want to change their name but they would be considered too young to understand the consequences, so their views would not carry much weight.

My 4yo ds goes by his "known name" which is my surname. It's not officially his last name but after this first year of school we're slowly receiving less stuff with his legal name on

"Known as" names are regularly suggested on here as a way to get around the law. If the school has accepted your son's "known as" name without the father's consent they have gone against official guidance from the government and rulings from the courts. If the father finds out he could take action to make sure your son's legal name is used.

Bit late to the party but I applied for and was granted a change of surname for my dd, with the father's surname as an extra middle name, which was the best outcome I could ever have hoped for. The magistrates actually suggested this, rather than double barrelling which is what I had resigned myself to. Who even uses their middle names on a regular basis anyway?

I was helped by the fact that the father failed to turn up to court for the FDHR and managed to stop proceedings by sending an email saying he was unwell after having told cafcass that he had no intention of coming and no interest in dd, so by the time the next hearing rolled around I think he had given the court a fairly clear picture of what sort of person he is. Didn't turn up to the next hearing and wrote a rambling statement completely (and extremely easy to prove it was utter utter bollocks!) trashing me, mentioned dd right at the end when he actually wrote that I was so untrustworthy, unbalanced and scheming that he couldn't even be sure he was her father... note, he didn't ask for a dna test or anything like that, the magistrates actually struggled to keep a straight face after reading all of it that particular bit.

Anyway, I know how rare it is for surname changes to be granted, so I know how lucky I am, but all sorts of background to my case as well (abuse, coercion, his drug use that I had absolutely no idea about, subsequent arrests for various other criminal activities after I left, him being psychologically assessed and the results showing he has some sort of personality disorder and poses lots of potential risks to dd, blah blah blah. He hasn't seen dd in nearly a year, and basically told cafcass he didn't want to know.

“ If the father finds out he could take action to make sure your son's legal name is used.”

All the less likely for the fact that he hasn’t bothered to see him for a year, of course.

Never late to the party, all comments and people who have experienced this is what I was asking for, for a father who hasn’t bothered for over a year I’m surprised he even took time out of his day to write a letter, the only thing my child’s father writes are threats and blackmail to anyone who stands in his way or tries to go against him! I know there are options of double barrel and deedpole but if I’m going for this then I’m going the whole hog, a name is something a child should be proud to be part off , having the name of someone who has not put anything into helping them become the person they are growing up to be, no time , love, respect, financial stability , all I can do is hope for the best decision on the day.

My solicitor was realistic with me and pointed out how rare it was, so advised me to go for the double barrel if need be, but as I said, it was the magistrates themselves who suggested I keep his surname as another middle name.

Again, as I said, the father basically did a lot of the hard work for me in the utterly bonkers statement he wrote, he did say in it that 'if she was his daughter he wanted her to keep his surname' but with all the evidence I had they saw sense. Perhaps I was just lucky on the day. Even my solicitor was amazed that it was granted, as obviously it is not something the courts decide to do lightly, as pointed out by other (very experienced family solicitors in some cases) pp on this thread.

I do wish you luck though, and as you say, if you don't ask you don't get! I did, and I got it, so it's worth a try, but you will need to have solid evidence as to why it's in your dd's best interests. Again, as pointed out by others, the court aren't interested in what makes your life easier, but are concerned with what's best for the child.

And yes I too was amazed that he wrote the statement, even if it was purely all about how evil and wicked and insane I am must have been to ever give that arse the time of day. Considering the arsehole has done nothing but make my life and dd's hell, I was actually shocked that he didn't kick up too much of a fuss, but again, I guess I was lucky.

@bobbybella
I find the whole changing surname thing rather sad.

If the father allows the surname to be changed, they essentially don’t care about the child and so the child has a father who doesn’t care.

That’s the real loss imo.

Since there is, oh don't get me wrong, I completely agree. Sometimes I feel so so so angry on her behalf that the bastard has essentially rejected her and is probably pretending she doesn't exist. But as I said, i had very good reason to apply for the surname change, and it's better in the long run that she has my surname, and I remember all he did to us, and it makes my life easier on a day to day basis, and means that one day I can tell her the very good reasons for making such a drastic change.

Also, I was applied for and also granted a CAO and PSO, the court ordered indirect contact only (seeing as he was flagged up as a risk to dd any everything) to try and give you a bit of a bigger picture as to my case without going into any more outing detail.

sincethereis I completely understand what you're saying. It's very sad.

My DCs biological father has shown no interest in them for a long time now, around 7 years. And yet he still will not consent to a name change or allowing my husband to have parental responsibility. At least he didn't the last time we managed to contact him, which was over a year ago now. My husband has loved and cared for them as a father for the last 5 years. They use his surname, my married name, in their every day life because they have both chosen to do so. They don't talk about their biological dad, nor do they wish to have any contact or association with him or any members of his family. Denying them the chance to be legally recognised as the name they choose, as a part of this family, is just as sad IMO. Of course they are my husband's children in all the ways that matter. But legal recognition is also important.

My surname is different from my children's surname as I have remarried. I have never ever had a problem travelling outside the EU or indeed within the EU with my children. Dont worry about this, bring their BC if you feel necessary.

Op I'm not a lawyer but my dcs dad was arrested and jailed for being a paedophile.
My lawyer told me unless he consented I couldn't change my dc surname.
Considering I was rejected I can't imagine your reasons will be accepted. Sorry.
Sadly he still has parental responsibility too. Again nothing I can do.

I have never ever had a problem travelling outside the EU or indeed within the EU with my children

Every time taking children abroad without consent from everyone with PR is mentioned people pop up with stories about doing so successfully. Thousands of people break the speed limit every day but that doesn't make it legal. Some people get fined.

Many people take their children out of the country without the necessary permissions every year. However, a few are prevented from boarding and a few are refused entry at their destination. If you want to take your child out of the country legally you need either the consent of everyone with PR or a relevant court order.

Taking a child abroad without permission from everyone with PR is child abduction, and it's just pot luck whether they question you or not. I don't want to be in that position, and I shouldn't have to go to court to get permission from a judge every bloody time I want to take my children on holiday. I want to go once, get their surnames changed and PR removed from their biological father, and given to my husband and be done with it. It's utterly ludicrous that the court system still favours absent fathers so much, even when they have proven themselves to be unworthy.

I'd like to hope that if their bio dad can't be contacted, which currently he can't, then the judge will make the right call and find in our favour. We're supposed to go to mediation before we go to court, but that's impossible if we can't track him down.

You don’t have to go to court every time, you can get an order that covers every time you want to leave the country until the child is 16.

The courts do not favour absent parents.

You do not need to attend mediation - only a MIAM and you attend those alone.

My point is MissMalice if I'm going to court I want to do it once and once only. So why would I not ask for the DCs surnames to be changed, and PR given to my husband and instead just ask for permission to take them on holiday?

My point is MissMalice if I'm going to court I want to do it once and once only. So why would I not ask for the DCs surnames to be changed, and PR given to my husband and instead just ask for permission to take them on holiday?

You can, on a single application, get an order that will allow you to take your child out of the country for up to one month at a time as often as you want. The other two things you want (change of name and PR for your husband) are unlikely.

Myisernameismud this is a fair point... obviously I don't know your back story, but in my case it was deemed unsuitable for mediation, based on the evidence I had of dv, along with a heap of ss evidence about how unstable mental) the father is.

It seems to me in my limited experience that it very much depends on the magistrates/judge on the day. The fdhr in my case, they granted the CAO, but were umming and ahhing about the PSO, and the surname change (said it was not obvious enough on the papers served to him, even though it was clearly stated, and when cafcass spoke to him, he clearly stated he wasn't interested).

The hearing was only stopped when an email came through from his father stating that he was unwell. Which was enough to stop proceedings on that occasion and actually I am glad about that, as then I was able to submit my statement, with all the evidence (all 35 pages of it) which led to everything that I had been asked for being granted. Again, as I said, I was lucky enough that the father is an utter lunatic and basically (and I don't think this was his intention, his intention was always be to try and make me out to be a monster, and that shone through in it that he didn't give a rats arse about his actual child, along with the supporting evidence from ss and the police) he put the final nail in his own coffin.

Actually, I wonder, and seeing as it is sat night, I can't email my solicitor, could anyone actually confirm whether or not he would have received a copy of the court orders that were made in his absence?

Anyhoo, upshot is, we are now protected from him, he can't take her from me or any other third party, I can take her on holiday for up to 28 days without his permission (I should be so bloody lucky!!) and her surname has been changed, to alleviate any negative connotations with his name or his family.... He forced me to give me his in the first place when I wanted to give her mine until we were married (yep, I was actually engaged to that waste of oxygen and we were due to get married the summer after she was born, dodged a great big massive bullet there!) and I could prove that.

Sorry this has turned out rather long. Basically, if you can state a case for whatever it is you want, then as you say, Myusernameismud, nobody wants to go through the stress of the courts in the first place, let alone again if it can be helped.

Again, those saying that court ordered changes of surname aren't granted, just because it will make life easier and less stressful and harmful for the mother and the child, I think my case bucks this trend. That's not meant to undermine anyone and their extensive experience, or give people false hope, but that is very much what happened in my case. I've said it about three or four times now, but it was the magistrates who suggested that by making his surname another middle name, and changing her surname to mine, that should satisfy any need to link to her father. Maybe I was just lucky that the people on the day saw sense. I don't know. But again, my own solicitor was quite surprised that it was granted, perhaps they had access to reports/information from ss that I was not allowed to, because, you know, data protection.

Anyway, that's just my experience.