To think there is no excuse for mothers names not being on marriage certificates when fathers names are requested?

[nameequality]

How did we get to 2014 and still on marriage certificates in England & Wales the names & occupations of the father of the bride and groom are requested and expected but the name and occupation of the mother of the bride and groom are not allowed to be recorded.

Shocking shocking sexism that has persisted for years.

Civil servants are citing cost as a reason.

The public sector Equality Duty came into force across Great Britain on 5 April 2011. It means that public bodies have to consider all individuals when carrying out their day-to-day work – in shaping policy, in delivering services and in relation to their own employees.
It also requires that public bodies:
have due regard to the need to eliminate discrimination and
advance equality of opportunity.

In fact according to my FOI request a different electronic system is used for civil partnerships.

If this was used then the only costs would be printing new marriage certificate stock.

Nearly 25,000 people have signed a campaign calling for this to change.

AIBU?

It could be changed but it would not affect certificates of marriages already celebrated. So it would not be fully effective for decades.

I was shocked that it was the case when I got married 18 years ago! Unbelievable that it persists. How much can changing a document cost? Surely they don't print thousands of them years in advance. I shall sign the petition.

It is ridiculous. If they want to save time and money why record parents names are all?

It is very odd. The mothers' details are on Scottish marriage certificates but I'm not sure how long that has been the case. I don't know how the costs of the IT changes were handled here.

I think they have been on Scottish certificates for decades!

they asked my father's occupation... he'd been dead for a decade so I failed to see any reason for it

ebwy The rules which lay down what information is required (in England and Wales) were first laid down in 1836 and the world has changed a bit since then; which is no reason not to update them.

That law did not apply to Scotland where the law is probably more recent.

In the list of things that irritate me because they're sexist this is perhaps bottom.

Given marriage statistics indicate marriage is on the decline it will become even less relevant.

Why does it need parents' jobs on at all?

I always wish we'd had our mums as our witnesses, at least they would have been in it somehow.

Both parents are on civil partnership certs

Odd that the marriage ones didn't change accordingly when civil partnerships came in

I wrote to my MP about this when I got married 8 years ago. This is patriarchal crap and lets face it in some cases pointless as you only have your mothers' word on who your father actually is.

Write to your MP, it's the only way this will get changed.

It'll be more complicated than just printing different forms though. I imagine that there is a high level governmental procedure to go through to change a long established legal form.

We had both our mums as witnesses so they do appear on the marriage certificate.

Mother's name has been on Scottish certificates since civil registration began their in 1855, and before that mother's name was often mentioned in the parish registers.

Women's identities have always been considered important in Scotland

Coming to England & Wales records after using Scottish ones is like arriving in a land of illiterate barbarians.

Princess I would need to look at the Marriage Act 1949 but I think it would have to be changed. Pity it wasn't done in the Civil Partnership Act or indeed the Same-Sex Marriage Act; it could have been.

It could be changed but it would not affect certificates of marriages already celebrated. So it would not be fully effective for decades.

Thank you for that scorching eclaircissement, Andrew.

Your point is?

Jeepers, I'm so annoyed at rubbish records it's destroyed my spelling.

began their there in 1855

Why do either of the parents need to be on there at all?? Don't we exist officially enough as individuals these days that we don't need identifying by through the names and occupations of our fathers/mothers?

Well the Queen's just managed to abandon Salic Law for not just the UK but the entire Commonwealth.

I think we could manage to add mother's name to marriage certificates if we really wanted to.

PartialFancy Changing the male-preference (not Salic) law on succession to the throne required Parliamentary time - and I think this would too. And it does not have the same zing to it as the succession did.

Incidentally the change to the law on succession is not yet in force. Anybody know which Commonwealth country is holding the show up?

If it took any more parliamentary time than the 2 seconds it would take to physically read out the amendment (tacked onto some other bill as misc business often is), I would want to know why.

Archaic.

I wonder what happens if you leave it blank? Plenty of people must have to. Could you cross it out and write on 'mother' instead of father?

At least there is no actual power involved - a father cannot stop his dd marrying, for example.

However, amongst the other disgracefully sexist affronts to a modern constitution we endure is the fact that the succession of titles in the aristocracy has not changed from 'male only'-which matters because the vast majority of hereditary peerages in the House of Lords are not available to women. Added to the male-only seats given to Bishops.

Agreed *PartialFancy". The Law Reform (Miscelleneous Provisions) Bill comes to mind - there's always some damned thing of the sort on the Parliamentary stocks.