Court rules 5-year-old girl must keep surname of dad who r@ped her mother

A UK High Court judge has decided that a five-year-old girl must continue using the surname of her father, even though he r@ped her mother.  Mr Justice Peel upheld the earlier ruling on appeal, explaining that the fathers surname is considered an important element of the childs personal identity and family background. This ruling stands despite the father having carried out multiple acts of domestic v!olence against the mother, including r@pe and threats. The girl, known in the case as D, has not had contact with him since December 2021. The mothers barrister, Charlotte Proudman, told The Times that the judgment shows a r@pists rights are more important than the victims, expressing frustration at the outcome. The family courts initial fact-finding hearing concluded that the father committed four extremely serious incidents of s3xual abuse against the mother between 2015 and 2017. These included forcing int3rcourse when she had made it clear she wanted to wait until marriage, continuing despite her crying in pain, saying no, and asking him to stop. The court also accepted evidence that he was verbally abusive and threatening as their relationship collapsed. In one frightening confrontation in September 2021, he warned the mother that if he became overwhelmed with anger, he might pick up the knife, kill your parents first in their sleep and then k!ll you and [D]. She later told the court that he soon erupted again, swearing at her and leaving both her and the child terrified. Despite these findings, family recorder Judge Laura Moy ruled in March that altering Ds surname would create an unnecessary break in her connection to her father. She said that the name forms part of the childs sense of identity and links her to her paternal family. This position was maintained even though Judge Moy noted the father refused to acknowledge the courts findings, dismissing them as mere allegations of s3xual harassment, and repeatedly using the phrase marital r@pe, despite being warned to stop. The mother appealed Judge Moys ruling, arguing that the judge had not properly considered the emotional harm of forcing her daughter to carry the surname of a man who r@ped her. However, during the appeal hearing, Justice Peel said the earlier judge clearly understood the extent of the abuse and the mothers trauma before reaching her conclusion. The appeal court found no realistic chance of overturning the decision and declined to interfere. Justice Peel did, however, reverse Judge Moys refusal to extend a non-mol3station order. He pointed to the fathers alleged breach of the injunction, which is now the subject of a criminal trial, as well as an active police investigation into past r@pes. The protection order will now remain in place until 2027. The father was also instructed to pay 5,000 toward the mothers legal costs, which total 13,000. Speaking to Metro, Dr Proudman said the case adds to the growing evidence that the family court system continues to work in ways that disadvantage victims of domestic abuse and expose children to further risk. She said the ruling shows that family courts remain out of step with modern understanding of trauma and abuse. Requiring a child to keep the surname of a man who r@ped her mother, she argued, ignores the serious psychological and emotional consequences for both the mother and the child. She described the states insistence on enforcing the surname as arguably abusive, adding that most people would be shocked by the decision, yet such outcomes still happen routinely behind closed family-court doors.The post Court rules 5-year-old girl must keep surname of dad who r@ped her mother appeared first on Linda Ikeji Blog.