Family Court authorises application from a 15-year-old looked after girl to change her name despite objection from the local authority and her mother
This judgment concerns a 15-year-old looked after girl, referred to by the family court as BC*, and her application to the family court to change her name to JKL*. BC’s application was opposed by the local authority and by her family. Despite this, the family court authorised BC to change her name based on evidence that it was in her best interests and giving considerable weight to her wishes.
*All initials, both those referring to the girl’s current and new name, have been anonymised within the judgment.
Background
BC was removed from her family home in 2021 following disclosure of sexual abuse by her father (which was confirmed during subsequent public law family proceedings). BC went to live in foster care and was made the subject of a care order in June 2022. She has been living with her current foster carers for over two and a half years where she is happy and settled. BC has no contact with her father, who is awaiting a criminal trial, and she sees her mother during supervised time together once every half term and remotely on a weekly basis. BC has three brothers, two of them adults and, despite limited contact presently, she wishes to be included in family gatherings in the future.
In late September 2023, BC applied to the family court for an order permitting her to change her first and last name. The names chosen by BC do not relate to any existing family names and she told the court the initials JKL are significant to her in her recovery from the trauma she’s experienced.
BC was deemed competent to instruct a solicitor and she made a detailed statement explaining her reasons (see below). She has consistently expressed her wish to change her full name since 2021.
BC’s wishes and feelings about the application before the court
In her statement to the family court, BC said:
[…] I settled on the name [JKL] in November 2021. I expressed at the time to the professionals who were working with me, a desire to change my name. The advice I was given was to wait until I became settled in foster care and the care proceedings had concluded. I accepted that the abuse I suffered has had a significant impact on me emotionally. I also accepted the view of professionals at the time such as my social worker who said that it wouldn't have been right to change my name. However, I have stuck to this name for over three years, and I believe it to be part of me. It is now part of my identity and a part of who I am. My desire to change my name arose from being hurt by the people I trusted most. I really don't want to be associated with or have my identity linked to my father, who betrayed me in such a cruel way.
[…]
I was disappointed that I had to bring this application to Court as it couldn't be agreed by my family and professionals. I wrote an entire double page, to the social worker as to why I feel my name should be changed and how I would feel if my name is not changed. I'm happy for her to show this to the Court. I am disappointed that even after the abuse I have suffered, people cannot understand why I ask that my name is changed. I am particularly upset about the view taken by [the local authority]. They applied to Court for a care order so they could keep me safe and make decisions in my welfare. I feel on this issue they have let me down and do not have my best interests at heart.
The people who I care about most, in and out of school, already know and for the most part call me J. I have thought about what would happen if I change my name when people that don't already know find out, yes they will be curious but they will just have to accept it. They are only people that don't know me, and they are temporary in my life. All my friends and the trusted adults in my life already know the things that have happened to me. It's only students that aren’t my friends that don't really know at my school. I only have one year left in school after this in any event and if they asked why I changed my name then I will tell them.
J is part of my identity, and if you ask me, it is already my name. My name should not be something that a bunch of people, who barely know me have decided, it should be something I've decided. The legal age for someone not in foster care to change their name is 16. I turn 16 this year. I am not too young to decide this. I have decided this, and I have been dead set on this since I was 13. If I had any doubt that my name shouldn't be J and should be B, then I would have already felt it. I also know that I can change my name back. If the Court doesn't grant permission to me, then I will change my name when I am 18 anyway. I feel it is better for my name to be changed now, so that when I move onto college and university my name is legally formalised and the people I encounter in my life going forward will only know me as that. It will be a fresh start for me.
I considered that my name is an anchor that weighs me down and ties me to the man that made me hit rock bottom and not want to live anymore. I can't even imagine a future of not being called J, because for me the name BC, has me connected by one of the most important ways to a man that I've come to fear so much. This name is making me be associated to a man I am scared of. I’m mature enough to make this decision. You can see this through my school work and home life. I understand the consequences of changing my name, I know it will change my identity. The reality is that my identity changed when my father decided to abuse me.
A name change will make me feel like I am free of my father. I can finally say that I'm not his daughter and that I don't belong to him in any way. I have already waited three years and waiting two more years will just be unbearable. I am disappointed that so many people don't understand the importance and significance of the reasons why I am changing my name. You can't even comprehend what it's like being owned by the man that you fear the most. If I can’t change my name the impact on my mental health will be significant.
I accept and understand that my family are unlikely to ever accept my name change. I know that my mum and brothers will not call me J. I'm willing to accept that. I'm just asking people to empathise with me for what it's like being called by the name that I have such negative connotations with. I have done my best to move on in life and my name is holding me back.
BC’s wish to change her name was supported by the deputy safeguarding lead at her school who expressed their confidence in BC’s capacity to make this decision and confirmed that the school would support her throughout the process. They also confirmed that BC’s wish to change her name has been unwavering since she first arrived at the school and that BC’s close friends have been using her chosen name for several months.
BC’s wish was also supported by her guardian during earlier care proceedings.
BC’s foster carers, whom she’s lived with since 2021, shared with her social worker that a lot of thought had gone into the name change and it was their view that changing her name would improve her emotional wellbeing.
The opposing view of the responsible local authority and BC’s family
BC’s application was opposed by her mother and the local authority (her ‘corporate parent’).
BC’s mother expressed a wish for BC to adopt her surname, which was against BC’s wishes, and opposed BC’s application to change her name to JKL saying that BC’s entire family, including her brothers, were against it.
The local authority submitted that BC’s application should be refused because it would not be in her best interests and would jeopardise her relationship with her family, arguing that a change of name should only be permitted if the court concluded that the current name would be likely to cause BC significant harm.
Furthermore, the local authority submitted that BC was “hesitant, indecisive, and reluctant to use her preferred names” in that she advised the deputy safeguarding lead at her school that she wished to wait for the court’s decision before using her preferred name at school and refused to speak to the social worker after being informed of the local authority’s opposition to her application to the family court. The fact that BC was only using her preferred name with trusted friends and teachers was, according to the local authority, proof that she was unsure about this decision. The local authority also submitted that BC was not emotionally mature enough, that there were concerns about BC “overstating the effects on her of having her [current] name” and that a name change would draw too much attention to BC at a very vulnerable time, including by inviting difficult questions from her peers. Finally, the local authority expressed a concern that the proximity of the hearing concerning her name to her father’s criminal trial would have “an adverse impact on relations with her family”.
The legal framework
Children Act 1989 - Effect of care order
Section 33(7) Children Act 1989 states:
(7) While a care order is in force with respect to a child, no person may—
(a) cause the child to be known by a new surname; or
(b) remove him from the United Kingdom,
without either the written consent of every person who has parental responsibility for the child or the leave of the court.
[There are equivalent provisions in place with respect to children who are the subject of a special guardianship order (section 14C(3) Children Act 1989) or a child arrangements order (specifically one indicating with whom and when the child is to live) (section 13(1) Children Act 1989)].
While a care order is in force, the local authority designated by the order acquires parental responsibility for the child (section 33(3) Children Act 1989).
Changing a name by deed poll
A child’s name may be changed by an enrolled or unenrolled deed poll. Children aged 16 and 17 can change their own name by making their own unenrolled deed poll without the consent of any person with parental responsibility or the leave of the court, meaning 16- and 17-year-olds are presumed to have capacity to decide to change their names (but note that exceptions apply, e.g. where a care order is in place; see box above).
Human rights
Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) guarantees the right to respect for private and family life, home and correspondence. The European Court of Human Rights has established through its case law that issues concerning an individual’s first name and surname fall under the right to private life.
Section 6 Human Rights Act 1998 requires UK public authorities, which includes local authorities and those acting on their behalf, to act compatibly with ECHR rights.
Relevant case law
Analysing existing case law, the family court identified the following principles as applicable to an application by a competent child in care to change their forename and/or surname:
i) The court’s paramount consideration is the child’s best interests.
ii) In assessing best interests, the wishes, feelings, needs and objectives of an applicant who is competent to make a decision about changing their name(s) should be given careful consideration.
iii) The motives and objectives of any family member who objects to the application will require careful scrutiny.
iv) Advice from a guardian will be valuable to the court.
v) The principles to be applied to a change of name are the same regardless of whether the change is to a forename or surname ...
vi) Regard should be had to the fact that at 18 the child will be free to change their name(s) without hindrance and that at 16 a child who is not in care or subject to a child arrangements order or special guardianship order is free to change their name by deed poll without the consent of any person with parental responsibility.
vii) The views of others and proposed carers are relevant only as they may affect the conduct of those persons and therefore indirectly affect the welfare of the child.
viii) The name(s) chosen by the child’s parent(s) may link them to particular religious or cultural backgrounds which are of significance to the child’s identity.
ix) The article 8 [ECHR] rights of both the child and their parents/family members are engaged. However, the balance of those rights should be considered in the context that a 16 year-old who is not subject to relevant Children Act orders is free to change their name(s) by unenrolled deed poll without the knowledge or consent of their parents or other family members.
The views of any local authority who has parental responsibility for the child must also be taken into account.
To learn more about relevant domestic case law, see in particular:
- C, Re (Change of Forename: Child in Care) [2023] EWHC 2813 (Fam) (09 November 2023) in which the court stated that when determining whether or not a change of name should take place, the court must, first and foremost, have regard to the welfare of the child and that each individual decision is highly fact-specific.
- C (Children) [2016] EWCA Civ 374 (14 April 2016) in which the court stated, e.g. that "…forename is now every bit as important to that child, and his or her identity, as is his or her surname”.
- Re S (Change of Surname) [1998] EWCA Civ 1950 which included the finding that “… In determining an application by a Gillick competent child in the care of a local authority, the welfare principle must of course be paramount. However, in addition, the judge should give very careful consideration to the wishes, feelings, needs and objectives of the applicant”.
You can also find a comprehensive analysis in paragraphs 21-36 of this judgment].
The family court’s analysis and conclusion
Acknowledging the seriousness of a change of a person’s name, the family court confirmed that an application by a ‘Gillick competent’ child would not be sufficient for the court to automatically authorise the requested change – the benefits and harm to the child connected to both granting and refusing such an application would have to be considered in each case, as would the views of those with parental responsibility, together with the child’s human rights under article 8 ECHR.
The family court rejected the local authority’s submission that a change of name may only be permitted if the continued use of the current name would be likely to cause the child significant harm.
Addressing the motivations behind BC’s wish to change her name the family court stated:
“BC has a good reason to want to change her names. She wants to dissociate herself from her father […] The evidence suggests that she has made very good progress since being in foster care and starting a new school but she continues to be emotionally and psychologically very vulnerable. I accept that she has not been through a formal therapeutic process to explore her motivations for changing her name, but she has articulated her motivations very clearly to the court and they are understandable. BC’s statement is powerful. It shows the depth of her wish to change her names. It shows that she has thought through the implications of the decision. It shows the serious emotional and psychological impact that a refusal of leave would be liable to have on her”. (Paragraphs 48-49; emphasis added)
Moving on to consideration of BC’s family’s views, the family court confirmed that even if BC’s father were engaged in the proceedings, the court would be “unlikely to give his views much weight in the circumstances”. The court noted that there was little evidence to demonstrate that BC’s motivations for changing her name were understood by her mother and her brothers, and noted the findings of the family court during care proceedings that BC’s mother failed to prioritise her welfare during and after the time BC was sexually abused by her father (including by allowing him to return to the family home after BC disclosed sexual abuse, withdrawing consent for BC to have a forensic intimate examination and asking BC not to give evidence against her father during the criminal proceedings).
The family court reminded all parties that while the views of the parents and the wider family are important, they are “not determinative” and constitute only one of many factors which must be considered in the court’s decision-making.
Acknowledging the importance of the views of the local authority, which has parental responsibility for BC, the family court concluded:
“…I do not find the local authority’s grounds of opposition to be substantial. I cannot see any evidence to justify the … concern that permitting BC to change her names will set back the ongoing re-building of family relationships […]. Relationships within the family might well come under considerable strain. In my judgement … the change of name will not be a significant contributor to any strain on relationships … The father’s conduct, the verdict, and the sentence will be much more significant”. (Paragraph 55; emphasis added)
“Likewise, I am not persuaded that the other concerns raised by the local authority have the weight it is submitted they should be given. The school will support BC as she changes her names … The foster carers, in whose care BC has thrived, will also provide her with support through the process […]”. (Paragraph 57; emphasis added)
“To be clear, BC does not seek to change her name to avoid other people recognising a connection between her and her father. The changes would be for her own psychological and emotional benefit. When her name is used it is a constant reminder of her trauma. Her name is part of her identity and affects her self-perception. She wants to extinguish the association of her name with her abuser to help her develop a more positive experience of being herself. BC has been steadfast in her wish to change her name to JKL for over two and a half years. This is not an application made on a whim. In my judgment it is likely that BC will maintain the same wish until she is 18, when she will be free to change her name without anybody’s consent or the leave of the court. BC suggests in her statement that it would be better for her to have established her name change now, before she goes further in her education, and well before she goes to university (which is the academic progress she is on course to achieve). I agree with her.” (Paragraphs 58-59; emphasis added)
“The Local Authority suggests that BC could simply try out her new names without making a formal change […] In any event, BC seeks to change her name in an official manner, to make a formal break with her current names and I recognise that wish … She wants a formal court order permitting her to change her names in order to reflect the seriousness and significance of the change.” (Paragraph 60; emphasis added)
Confirming that from the making of the order BC may be known by her chosen name, JKL, the family court concluded:
“A change of forename and/or surname for a child is a serious decision whatever the age of the child. The court’s paramount consideration is the best interests of the child. The views of others, in particular of those with parental responsibility, are to be taken into account. The family’s views are relevant insofar as they may affect their conduct and attitude and therefore affect the welfare of the child. The views of the local authority, having parental responsibility in respect of a child in care, are of importance. The court must take into account the child’s competence to make the decision, their age and maturity, the steadfastness of their wish to change their names, and the reasons behind the wish to make the changes. The court should consider the choice of name(s) – are they frivolous or would they be liable to be detrimental to the welfare of the child because of their nature or associations? The court should have close regard to the impact on the child of allowing them to change their name(s) as well as the impact of refusing them leave to do so. In the case of an older child, the court can have regard to the fact that a 16 or 17 year old not in care …, could change their name without consent or leave, as could any 18-year-old. Having regard to the legal framework and all the evidence and circumstances in this case, I have little hesitation in allowing the application and in giving leave to BC to change her forename and surname so that she shall be known as JKL. I suggest that if she wishes to do so, once she is 16 years old, she should be assisted to change her name by unenrolled deed poll. My order gives her leave to do so. I give considerable weight to the settled wishes of a mature, competent 15 year old who has good reason to wish to change both her forename and surname, who has chosen sensible new names that are not frivolous or provocative or liable to be detrimental to her welfare in any way. I am content that she has thought through the decision and is aware of the significance of the changes proposed. I am confident that she will be well supported at school and in her foster placement in the change process, that she will enjoy psychological and emotional benefit from the changes, and that she would be liable to suffer psychological and emotional harm were her application to be refused. The local authority might consider funding further therapy to support her though the process of the name changes (and the pending trial of her father). I do not believe that her family relationships will be harmed by the proposed name changes. In my judgement it is clearly in BC’s best interests to allow this application”.
You can read the full judgment here: BC, Re (Child in Care: Change of Forename and Surname) [2024] EWHC 1639 (Fam) (26 June 2024)
