Changing a childs name -Help needed.

RadoJo

Ok, TRIPLICATE posting - honestly folks, I was trying tohelp, but I didn't really think you all needed to read my post 3 times! Computer gremlins ahoy once more!

pipkin71

black-saturn wrote:

I changed both my daughters surnames to mine when I split with their dad and didn't need any permission at all from him.

Yes, that is the case, as my friend has just had her child's surname changed to the mother's, and she didn't need the father's permission.

gron1979

Just on the same note, my fiance's children have always had their mothers surname, as they were going to change the names when they got married, this never happened. Where does he stand now, as she is getting married next year, would she be able to change their surnames to the new husband without consent from biological dad??? (he has parental responsibility) thanks

thesaint

There are a lot of different stories going on here.

The law is quite clear on this subject. Just because some people on their own, and sometimes with their solicitor's help change their children's names without consent does not make it right. If the ignorant parent finds out that it can be reversed, it will cause a problem to those involved.

Best to do it properly the first time.

thesaint

gron1979 wrote:

Just on the same note, my fiance's children have always had their mothers surname, as they were going to change the names when they got married, this never happened. Where does he stand now, as she is getting married next year, would she be able to change their surnames to the new husband without consent from biological dad??? (he has parental responsibility) thanks

Your fiance should be consulted. His ex can change the names without his consent. The authorities do not make the necessary checks.
If this was to happen, your ex can get them changed back relatively easy.

samcat_2

Voyager2002 wrote:

Anyway, that is very different from the case under discussion.

At least one post has been deleted, putting my original comment a little out of context. I remember one post with the phrase 'it's so cruel' which has gone from the thread.

At the time of my original post it was absolutely relevant due to one element of this thread by Stepmother WAGs condemning mothers, when they didn't have any background information,(''angry that she has done this', 'so cruel', 'so horrid', 'oh I sympathise' etc etc.. ).

I can sympathise with both sides but I had to respond to the WAGs comments. I just hope, for their sakes, that they don't find themselves facing the same difficult decision as a mother one day.

vix2000

could someone tell me why, in the 21st century, it is the males god given right to give the child his surname, when, in 99.9% of cases it is the mother who is left looking after the child, no matter whos fault the break up is. I totally agree with samcat in regard to posts 14 and 15. What actually is the problem with a child having its mothers surname?

thesaint

vix2000 wrote:

could someone tell me why, in the 21st century, it is the males god given right to give the child his surname, when, in 99.9% of cases it is the mother who is left looking after the child, no matter whos fault the break up is. I totally agree with samcat in regard to posts 14 and 15. What actually is the problem with a child having its mothers surname?

It is not the males god-given right. No one is suggesting this(I think) usually the parents decide within the 6 week time frame what their child's surname will be. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the child having the mothers surname. I chose to 'double barrel' my child's surname even though his mother said he could have just mine if I wanted.

What I find unfair is that the female often changes the agreed name without any consultation.

The mothers often have the child because in the 21st century solicitors, judges, CAFCASS officers, the general public on a whole want it that way.

vix2000

I agree that might be the position in a minority of cases, but in my experience it is usually assumed that the mother will keep the children.

As samcat has previously said, if the father has no intention of paying child support or seeing the child on a regular basis, then why should the father care?

Luckily all my children are grown up now, but my middle daughter was caused much upset by a father who didn't give a damn about her refusing to allow her to use my maiden name. As we were married when she was born she had to wait until she was old enough to change it legally herself, which she did as soon as.

She was lucky in that a lovely school head allowed her to use her chosen name though high school without her fathers written permission, which was the education authorities rule.

I know that he only objected because he saw it as some sort of macho thing and 'proof of ownership'.

I would also like to add that many women aren't aware theres a choice in the matter as this custom has gone on 'forever' so just think its the done thing. Obviously just after their child is born they aren't, quite rightly, looking cynically at their future and any possible problems caused by relationship breakdown.

I would also like to throw in the possibility of it being the childs right, if old enough, to choose which name they want. My eldest chose to keep her fathers name and that was fine by me.

thesaint

Maybe it is in a minority of cases, but i've found it to be the norm.
If 100 separated parents went to court and they were equal in every respect, would residency be awarded to women and men 50/50?
While men are not equal in this respect, there will always be an easy out for those type of men who wish to dodge their responsibilities.

I agree that if a parent is not interested in maintaning or keeping in contact with a child they forefit the right to consultation, but the law already allows for this regarding name change.

Whilst I understand what your daughter's school did for her, if they didn't ask the father his side of things, they shouldn't have done it.
I believe that you did it for the right reasons, but what about the parent who does it with bad intention?

In most cases I have heard on here for changing a child's name it has been because the child has been made to feel bad by others about their surname, or one of the parents don't like the connection. I wouldn't change my child's surname on this basis.


Lastly, I don't agree with lowering the age because there is too much room for manipulation of a child. I read on here the other week of a mother who was claiming their daughter had made the decision to change their name at age 2/3!

Thanks for replying in such a nice manner, it is nice when people can disagree but be civil.:A