A legitimate child can use his mother’s surname… but what would be his middle name?

By Atty. Eduardo T. Reyes III

 

In a landmark decision which was handed down by the Philippine Supreme Court on 11 November 2020 but was uploaded on the SC website only on 22 February 2021, it granted the petition of ANACLETO BALLAHO ALANIS III to change the following entries in his certificate of live birth, as follows:

1)That his first name be changed from “ANACLETO” to “ABDULWAHID”;

2) That he will drop the surname of his father “ALANIS” and instead use his mother’s surname which is “BALLAHO”; and,

3) That he will also necessarily ditch the suffix “III” from his name

As may be gathered from the allegations in his petition, ANACLETO III was born during the subsistence of a valid marriage between his parents; but for some reason, they had factually separated and he and his siblings were “single-handedly” raised by their mother. With their father being an absentee in their lives, ANACLETO carried his mother’s surname “BALLAHO” in his school records particularly in articles he had written for his school paper.

Later, instead of the mundane practice of asking two (2) disinterested persons to execute an affidavit attesting to the fact that his real surname is ALANIS, in order that his school records will conform to his officially registered name in his birth certificate, he did the exact opposite: he petitioned the court to change the entries in his birth certificate to synchronize with his school records.

The petition was denied by the trial court by citing Article 364 of the Civil Code which mandates that legitimate children shall “primarily” use their father’s surname. But on appeal, the SC rebuked the trial court by ruling, thus:

“This Court fails to see how the change of name would create more confusion. Whether people inquire deeper into petitioner’s parentage or paternity because of a name is inconsequential here, and seems to be more a matter of intrigue and gossip than an issue for courts to consider.

Regardless of which name petitioner uses, his father’s identity still appears in his birth certificate, where it will always be written, and which can be referred to in cases where paternity is relevant.

Aside from being unduly restrictive and highly speculative, the trial court’s reasoning is also contrary to the spirit and mandate of the Convention, the Constitution, and Republic Act No. 7192, which all require that the State take the appropriate measures to ensure the fundamental equality of women and men before the law.

Patriarchy becomes encoded in our culture when it is normalized. The more it pervades our culture, the more its chances to infect this and future generations.

 

The trial court’s reasoning further encoded patriarchy into our system. If a surname is significant for identifying a person’s ancestry, interpreting the laws to mean that a marital child’s surname must identify only the paternal line renders the mother and her family invisible. This, in turn, entrenches the patriarchy and with it, antiquated gender roles: the father, as dominant,

in public; and the mother, as a supporter, in private.” (Anacleto Ballaho Alanis III v. Court of Appeals et al., G.R. No. 216425. November 11, 2020).

                This recent ruling of the SC is a paradigm shift of sorts because it veers away from the former practice of making it mandatory for a legitimate child to use the surname of his/ her father. The decision is also iconoclastic in the sense that it had affirmed the right of a legitimate child to change his/her first name which was presumably assigned by his/ her parents upon birth.

Given this doctrinally-recognized right of a legitimate child to drop his/ her father’s surname and carry instead his/her mother’s surname, what then should be the middle name of the child?

In an earlier decision of the SC, it had dealt with the significance of a person’s name, thus:  “A name is said to have the following characteristics: (1) It is absolute, intended to protect the individual from being confused with others. (2) It is obligatory in certain respects, for nobody can be without a name. (3) It is fixed, unchangeable, or immutable, at least at the start, and may be changed only for good cause and by judicial proceedings. (4) It is outside the commerce of man, and, therefore, inalienable and intransmissible by act inter vivos or mortis causa. (5) It is imprescriptible. xxx This citation does not make any reference to middle names, but this does not mean that middle names have no practical or legal significance. Middle names serve to identify the maternal lineage or filiation of a person as well as further distinguish him from others who may have the same given name and surname as he has.” (In Re: Petition for Change of Name and/ or correction of Entry in the Civil Registry of Julian Lin Carulasan Wang, G.R. No. 159966. March 30, 2005).

While in another case which was decided only a day after, the SC ruled that an adopted child may carry the surname of his/ her biological mother as the purpose of a middle name is to provide a trace of maternal lineage. (IN THE MATTER OF THE ADOPTION OF STEPHANIE NATHY ASTORGA GARCIA, G.R. No. 148311. March 31, 2005).

Reading all of these cases together, the reasonable conclusion is that once the child decides to change his/ her name by dropping the father’s surname to be replaced by the mother’s, the child will necessarily also carry the mother’s middle name as well.

This means that on the child’s certificate of live birth, what will be reflected after his/ her first name, as the child’s middle name, will be the maiden middle name of the mother; while as to the family name of the child, it shall also be the maiden surname of the mother.

It goes without saying that the father’s first name and/ or surname will no longer be part of the child’s name. Instead, the paternal lineage could only be traced by examining the child’s birth certificate because “Regardless of which name petitioner uses, his father’s identity still appears in his birth certificate, where it will always be written, and which can be referred to in cases where paternity is relevant.” (Anacleto Ballaho Alanis III v. Court of Appeals et al., G.R. No. 216425. November 11, 2020).

(The author is the senior partner of ET Reyes III & Associates- a law firm based in Iloilo City. He is a litigation attorney, a law professor and a law book author. His website is etriiilaw.com).