Advice on Child Surname Change

jigglypuffstuff

Hi guys quick question,

A friend has a child with her ex partner. He has beaten her on several occasions and in the last instance with the child in her arms, pays no maintenance for the child and drinks/takes drugs regularly. Following this she got a barring order until the child turns 6. She will apply for renewals on that one until 12 and again at 18 provided shes still in the country. She now wishes to change the name of the child to her own although i cant see the father agreeing to it as he is a control freak

Im currently finishing a degree in Early years Studies with a view to a masters in developmental psychology and I have a great grasp on social policy especially regarding children. So its almost a given at this stage that he will not be able to see that child until the childs 18th birthday

In the meantime she wishes to change the surname of the child to her own. What process does she need to go through? Surely given the circumstances she wouldnt need consent?

All advice welcome

Tom Young

Advice is not allowed here. See charter. Sorry OP.

Cavehill Red

Squabbling parents who split up often end up arguing over relative irrelevances like a child's name. Fundamentally, it's the sort of thing that matters little to a child and much more to the adults.
Of much more concern in this post is the idea that someone would seek to bar a man access to his child for their entire childhood. That has the potential of doing immense damage to the child, their development and their sense of self-identity and heritage. Everyone has an innate human right to know who they are and where they come from.
The 'friend' of the OP would need to speak to a solicitor if they are intent on focusing on something as unimportant as the child's surname. However, I would suggest it might be preferable to explore how the child can safely and securely forge a meaningful relationship with their father, perhaps with the involvement of the authorities if that is deemed necessary.

jigglypuffstuff

Tom Young wrote: »

Advice is not allowed here. See charter. Sorry OP.

Thats understandable. I most likely did not choose my words correctly.

What i should have asked was if what was suggested is possible? Is it possible to change the surname in certain circumstances?

To clear up any misconceptions, I dont actually want advice on the subject

jigglypuffstuff

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Squabbling parents who split up often end up arguing over relative irrelevances like a child's name. Fundamentally, it's the sort of thing that matters little to a child and much more to the adults.
Of much more concern in this post is the idea that someone would seek to bar a man access to his child for their entire childhood. That has the potential of doing immense damage to the child, their development and their sense of self-identity and heritage. Everyone has an innate human right to know who they are and where they come from.
The 'friend' of the OP would need to speak to a solicitor if they are intent on focusing on something as unimportant as the child's surname. However, I would suggest it might be preferable to explore how the child can safely and securely forge a meaningful relationship with their father, perhaps with the involvement of the authorities if that is deemed necessary.

I'm quite aware of whats been happening, and as already suggested by her solicitor she will have no problem prohibiting the father making any contact with the child for the duration of his childhood given the circumstances. Im not getting into specifics but the nature of the assaults were quite serious and there were many not just one. in one instance the mother was pushed over with her son in her arms who was injured and then had to witness his mother being choked.

The damage that witnessing such events can have on a childs development far outweigh the ones of not seeing him whatsover..especially given the child has positive male role models too look too in the mothers boyfriend, mothers brother etc. Such events lead to insecure attachments in children which are a matter for serious concern

Efforts have been made, but as stated the man is incapable and has already been barred for 5 years. The man still insists in contacting and threatning the mother. So i think that you are unaware of the situation. But thank you for you input

Cavehill Red

You will appreciate I have no interest in discussing the details of a case which could be entirely hypothetical and which you have a monopoly on how it may be presented in this forum.
My points all stand, and stand in relation to any instance where someone would seek to eradicate all contact between a child and one or other parent for the entire duration of their childhood.
It's wrong and should be avoided for the development of the child. Even visiting a parent in prison is deemed generally beneficial to a child's sense of self and development, which is why I suggested that a refocusing of efforts on what actually matters to the child would be useful here.

Cody Pomeray

pone2012 wrote: »

What i should have asked was if what was suggested is possible? Is it possible to change the surname in certain circumstances?

Yes it is possible. A great deal turns on whether the father is married to the mother, or whether the father is a legal guardian. If the answer to both of these questions is 'No', then a name change could hypothetically be effected with minimal difficulty.

However, even where a father has no custody but is a legal guardian, here is where you run into difficulty.

All is not lost, however, a child's name can simply be changed through the lived reality of simply using another name over time, e.g. the name by which the child is registered on the school roll and by which he or she is known to teachers and contemporaries.

jigglypuffstuff

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

Yes it is possible. A great deal turns on whether the father is married to the mother, or whether the father is a legal guardian. If the answer to both of these questions is 'No', then a name change could hypothetically be effected with minimal difficulty.

However, even where a father has no custody but is a legal guardian, here is where you run into difficulty.

All is not lost, however, a child's name can simply be changed through the lived reality of simply using another name over time, e.g. the name by which the child is registered on the school roll and by which he or she is known to teachers and contemporaries.

Thanks for your reply, They were never married and I am unsure of his status...I know he is not allowed to come near her or the child for the next 5 years. What you suggested seems plausible.

Cavehill Red wrote: »

You will appreciate I have no interest in discussing the details of a case which could be entirely hypothetical and which you have a monopoly on how it may be presented in this forum.
My points all stand, and stand in relation to any instance where someone would seek to eradicate all contact between a child and one or other parent for the entire duration of their childhood.
It's wrong and should be avoided for the development of the child. Even visiting a parent in prison is deemed generally beneficial to a child's sense of self and development, which is why I suggested that a refocusing of efforts on what actually matters to the child would be useful here.

Perhaps you are missing the point here?? He's already injured the child and mother on several occasions. To leave a child in the attendance of such an individual will do far worse things for them than not seeing the father, especially given the fact that the child won't ever get the chance to know him. He's already been ordered to stay away from the child..and since hes lost his job due to use of drugs and driving licence due to drink driving and driving under the influence

To suggest leaving a child in the care and presence of a person capable of such things...i'd question your logic on that one...every child has the right to safety...

with regard to visiting in prison...yes perhaps...but thats not accounting for what the father did...would you suggest if the father beat the child as an infant ( less than 12 months) that he should be given access?? if so you should rethink that in my opinion.

username123

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

All is not lost, however, a child's name can simply be changed through the lived reality of simply using another name over time, e.g. the name by which the child is registered on the school roll and by which he or she is known to teachers and contemporaries.

^^This.

Simply start using the relevant name for the child in school, with the GP, any clubs, sports etc...

A name change can be done by common usage in this country.
From Citizens Info:

The surname of a child can be changed in the Register of Births but only in certain circumstances. However, the surname of a child can also be changed by deed poll or common usage. Children aged between 14 and 17 years can execute the Deed Poll themselves but need the consent of both parents. Where a child is under the age of 14 years, one of the child's parents must execute the Deed Poll with the consent of the other parent.

Pro Hoc Vice

pone2012 wrote: »

Thanks for your reply, They were never married and I am unsure of his status...I know he is not allowed to come near her or the child for the next 5 years. What you suggested seems plausible.



Perhaps you are missing the point here?? He's already injured the child and mother on several occasions. To leave a child in the attendance of such an individual will do far worse things for them than not seeing the father, especially given the fact that the child won't ever get the chance to know him. He's already been ordered to stay away from the child..and since hes lost his job due to use of drugs and driving licence due to drink driving and driving under the influence

To suggest leaving a child in the care and presence of a person capable of such things...i'd question your logic on that one...every child has the right to safety...

with regard to visiting in prison...yes perhaps...but thats not accounting for what the father did...would you suggest if the father beat the child as an infant ( less than 12 months) that he should be given access?? if so you should rethink that in my opinion.

In such cases the court may and has been know to allow supervised visits. I assume your friend has a solicitor as she has got baring orders. The solicitor can advice on how to change name.

Cavehill Red

pone2012 wrote: »

Perhaps you are missing the point here?

No, but I suspect you are. Your account of the past interaction between this child and its parents is, perhaps of necessity, highly skewed and hence I wouldn't trust it without hearing from the other party. So I have said I have no interest in discussing something that may be hypothetical, and the perameters of which you can move at will.
My point is nice and simple and unrelated to any individual circumstances. A child has a human right, enshrined in the UN charter, to know their own heritage, identity and background. A meaningful relationship with both parents is the best way of achieving that.
It really doesn't matter what a child's surname is. That's the sort of petty nonsense that only matters to vindictive bitter ex-partners. My child uses their mother's surname yet lives with me. I couldn't give a crap whether they used it, mine, a double-barrel name or called themselves Marilyn Manson. It's not important.
I'm suggesting to you that a refocusing of efforts on the needs of the child ought to be paramount. This can be achieved by jettisoning irrelevant point-scoring issues like surnames, and looking to see how the child's need for a meaningful relationship with its heritage can be developed.
It may be possible to do so with the intervention of the authorities, or of extended family. It may be difficult to achieve and take time to do so. But it is infinitely preferable to seeking to prevent a child from knowing their parent for their entire childhood.
Any account given to them as to why will inevitably (and rightly) be questioned as they reach adulthood, and there is a genuine possibility of a backlash against the parent who prevented access, especially if the other parent does not live up to their advertised demon dad status. It wouldn't be the first time.

jigglypuffstuff

username123 wrote: »

^^This.

Simply start using the relevant name for the child in school, with the GP, any clubs, sports etc...

A name change can be done by common usage in this country.
From Citizens Info:

And when applying for passports etc? Does the common usage hold true to documents like that?

infosys wrote: »

In such cases the court may and has been know to allow supervised visits. I assume your friend has a solicitor as she has got baring orders. The solicitor can advice on how to change name.

Yes she has a 5 year barring order, and the solicitor is almost certain given the fathers reputation that making an application for a new one once this one is expired will be a very quick process and will go in her favour.

Cavehill Red wrote: »

No, but I suspect you are. Your account of the past interaction between this child and its parents is, perhaps of necessity, highly skewed and hence I wouldn't trust it without hearing from the other party. So I have said I have no interest in discussing something that may be hypothetical, and the perameters of which you can move at will.
My point is nice and simple and unrelated to any individual circumstances. A child has a human right, enshrined in the UN charter, to know their own heritage, identity and background. A meaningful relationship with both parents is the best way of achieving that.
It really doesn't matter what a child's surname is. That's the sort of petty nonsense that only matters to vindictive bitter ex-partners. My child uses their mother's surname yet lives with me. I couldn't give a crap whether they used it, mine, a double-barrel name or called themselves Marilyn Manson. It's not important.
I'm suggesting to you that a refocusing of efforts on the needs of the child ought to be paramount. This can be achieved by jettisoning irrelevant point-scoring issues like surnames, and looking to see how the child's need for a meaningful relationship with its heritage can be developed.
It may be possible to do so with the intervention of the authorities, or of extended family. It may be difficult to achieve and take time to do so. But it is infinitely preferable to seeking to prevent a child from knowing their parent for their entire childhood.
Any account given to them as to why will inevitably (and rightly) be questioned as they reach adulthood, and there is a genuine possibility of a backlash against the parent who prevented access, especially if the other parent does not live up to their advertised demon dad status. It wouldn't be the first time.

With all do respect my account of this goes on the bruises on the child and mother, the decisions of the court, and the police report. and actually friends of the father who just happen to be honest, ive never even met the man nor will I. As a person who studies early years I would agree with your logic, but in this case i disagree as the level of violence the child and mother are exposed too is far to great. Hence the reason the solicitor states the following barring orders will be easily approved.

Pro Hoc Vice

Well said Cavehill Red.

Cavehill Red

A physical risk to a person is best dealt with via the criminal courts, not the family law system.
I'm genuinely not going to engage with discussing individual circumstances which could be largely or entirely misrepresented, if not by you then to you.
What I've said applies to all children, no exceptions.

jigglypuffstuff

Cavehill Red wrote: »

A physical risk to a person is best dealt with via the criminal courts, not the family law system.
I'm genuinely not going to engage with discussing individual circumstances which could be largely or entirely misrepresented, if not by you then to you.
What I've said applies to all children, no exceptions.

To be fair we shouldnt have engaged in this conversation to begin with, as i didnt ask for an opinion on the situation. However lets not continue it as it will go in circles

Zonn

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

Yes it is possible. A great deal turns on whether the father is married to the mother, or whether the father is a legal guardian. If the answer to both of these questions is 'No', then a name change could hypothetically be effected with minimal difficulty.

However, even where a father has no custody but is a legal guardian, here is where you run into difficulty.

All is not lost, however, a child's name can simply be changed through the lived reality of simply using another name over time, e.g. the name by which the child is registered on the school roll and by which he or she is known to teachers and contemporaries.

Please explain further. Is that deemed an official name change and would the child need a new birth certificate without the father's details on it? Does that automatically mean the father will be barred from seeing the child in a case where he is not violent.