Valid reasons to stopping a child surname change

[Febee23]

my 5 month old daughter’s father is fighting to have her name double-barrelled in court.
Valid reasons to stopping this change

I'm not sure there are any, honestly. If it's going through the courts, the judge will decide. The default is about what is best for the child - is it best for a child to know her father, be aware of her full identity, etc. And on paper the answer is yes.

What are the reasons you don't want this? That might be a good place to start.

I'd he abusive or neglectful? Is he a part of her life and care?

It’s for the person seeking the change to justify why change is necessary and desirable.

Yuck, how petty of your ex (I’m assuming) to create litigation over something like this. It’s totall unnecessary and clearly about control.

It has nothing to do with it being in her best interests, best for a child to know her father, be aware of her full identity. Children in this country don’t take both parents surnames automatically.

It’s just a convention to name after the father so the whole family has the same surname, which makes sense in a family that is still living together as a unit.

If she is living with you then it makes more sense for her to have your surname for her to identify with the parent who cares for her most. Also it will make it way for you wen dealing with all administrative things e.g. schooling, healthcare, travel.

My daughter has my ex’s name and it’s really impractical for her to have his name not mine when I’m the one who deals with all the practical stuff for her and she lives at the same address as me.

I’m remarried and I have taken my husband’s name so we will all (with the exception of my DD) have the same family name. It’s a shame that my DD is going to have a different surname from her siblings. I have a different surname to my half-siblings and I hated it growing up because it really separates the family unit.

I’m sure you don’t want to change your surname to that of your ex so it’s right that your daughter should keep yours.

It’s on him to explain why such a change is necessary at all when they child has already had her name for months.

You could argue that had you taken your ex’s name and your daughter too then you would have been willing to keep his surname as your surname so that everyone could have the same name. But that’s not the case so he should just be a grown up and deal with it.

To be honest I think he’ll lose (I’m not a lawyer though). What arguments has he put forward for changing her name at this stage?

As a compromise ( if you wish to compromise....) can you have his surname as an extra middle name- they hardly ever get used.
I kept my name when I married but my children took my surname as a middle name, not a double barrelled surname.

What are your reasons for not wanting it? In most places you can register her with her actual name then have her known as just your surname if it’s a real issue .

My advice is to focus less on getting it stopped. Let him double barrel it. BUT don't let him put a hyphen between the names. Then you can legally just use one of the surnames.

The point here is that the child already has a surname on her birth certificate. If it’s changed now she will always need her birth certificate and proof of the name change every time she does any administrative formalities.

This doesn’t seem to be a case of the OP not wanting her husband to give their child his surname, but a case where the OP doesn’t want her EX to change the surname her child now already has. It’s unreasonable to expect the OP to change her name to her EXs name.

Children don’t usually get their mother’s surname (and no-one is crying about a loss of identity) so why is it necessary for the child’s name to be changed just to appease the father in this case when the family is no longer together as a unit?

IME the other way round mother’s don't tend to get to change their dc names I don’t see why in this case the ex would win.

The case for keeping the status quo, it’s what she’s known by and will cause a lot of disruption to her everyday life having to change everything. Is ex paying for the admin fees to change passport and alert notify everywhere of the change should it go thro?

Are you main carer? You’ll have to forever take proof she’s your dc if you travel with her and even then be prepared for border security to ask ‘who is this lady’, my friends ds memorably responded ‘oh this is Ms X’! When he'd ever only called my friend ‘mum’ previously.

If you’re the main carer your dd will want to have your surname, mine kept wanting to change theirs and still hate that they don’t have the same surname as me.

Why is it suddenly terrible for your dc to have your surname when presumably previously your ex was happy to have your dd named as she is?

As it’s her name now she can decide to change it to whatever she wants when older.

Not sure if this is a legal argument but: It's the 21st century, children are no longer their father's property.

If you have more children they will share a name with her.

All the things said above about dealing with paperwork etc.

What are your reasons for wanting to prevent it?

I don't see the problem with effectively adding an extra name - your name will still be there so the arguments of how she should have yours as primary career are somewhat invalid.

If he was, say, abusive, that would be different.

I'd be interested to know the result of the court case. I think a father has more chance of gaining a double barreled surname in this case than a mother...

I'm wondering if precedent could be used? Does anyone with something better than a 20 year old Law A Level know? Could you look up cases at that court or with that judge and see their judgments for similar cases?

From Google;

'The doctrine of precedent dictates that a court must follow decisions of previous decisions of the same or higher court in cases that are similar in relation to the facts and the legal issues.'

'The Importance of Precedent. In a common law system, judges are obliged to make their rulings as consistent as reasonably possible with previous judicial decisions on the same subject. ... Each case decided by a common law court becomes a precedent, or guideline, for subsequent decisions involving similar disputes.'

Are you being represented by a solicitor? If so, ask them. If it's relevant I'm sure they'll already have looked into it. These days, I'm sure this is not an uncommon subject for family court. Instinctively, I'd look up the judgments in cases where women wanted to get a child's name double barreled against the father's wishes. (Plus also men if you have time,but you're looking for judgments that would go in your favour.)

A good reason for not agreeing is confusion and wanting continuity of what has already been registered. Children a not possessions and in court people treat them as if they are. The original naming decision should be allowed to continue as this is what your child is known as by the NHS, birth certificate, government for benefits and anyone else who needed to know. Leaving well alone is a good argument!

Hi, what was the outcome of this? My friend is currently going through the same thing in court.

Hey, I’m going through this now. I’d be curious to know too. Rachie, what was the outcome for your friend?