Determining when a change of name is in the “best interest of the child”

 

This guest post is from Taylor Wise, Regent Family Law student: 

 

          There are many situations in which a parent my desire to change the last name of their child, particularly, in cases of divorce where one parent changes their last name following the divorce. Issues begin to arise when the name change is contested by one of the child’s parents. The District of Columbia has considered this issue both in Nellis v. Pressman and Melbourne v. Taylor.

 

In the District of Columbia, the primary consideration for the court is whether the name change is in the “best interest of the child.” Nellis v. Pressman, 282 A.2d 539, 543 (D.C. 1971). Factors to be considered in determining the best interest of the child include but are not limited to: how long and how widely the child has been known by her current name, the extent to which the child's name has become embedded in the child's own mind and identity, and the view of the child (depending on the age and maturity of the child). Melbourne v. Taylor, 147 A.3d 1151, 1158 (D.C. 2016).

 

In Nellis, the mother remarried after her divorce from the biological father of her two children of whom she had custody. Mrs. Nellis enrolled the children in school under her new surname, Nellis, after her son expressed discomfort because his name was different from the Nellis family. 282 A.2d at 539. In Melbourne, the mother and father had joint custody over the child with Ms. Melbourne having primary physical custody. 147 A.3d at 1153. Ms. Melbourne wished to change her daughter’s name due to having difficulties establishing that she is her daughter’s mother. One such example involved Ms. Melbourne being prevented from leaving with her daughter after taking her to temporary childcare for the day because the childcare worker incorrectly entered her last name after assuming it matched that of the daughter. Id.

 

          In both Nellis and Melbourne, the fathers made the argument that a change in the child’s last name would weaken the bond with them and negatively impact their relationship. However, the court in Melbourne expressly rejected that idea finding that there were more compelling factors in ensuring a parental relationship with the child, such as his continuing presence in her life through visits and other communications that express his interest and affection, as well as compliance with child support obligations. Id. at 1156. Additionally, the court noted that such an assumption was based on gender stereotypes, not grounded on the best interest of the child. Id.

 

          Courts will always look to what is in the best interests of the child in any decision regarding children.  Family restoration means much more than a change of name.