Courts rule girl must keep abusive father’s surname

A High Court judge has ruled that a five-year-old girl, known as D, must keep the surname of her father – the man who raped her mother. This ruling is despite years of documented abuse, threats, and a complete lack of contact since 2021. The decision has been described by legal experts and survivors as “state-sanctioned abuse”. 

A ruling that leaves survivors carrying the burden

The child’s mother, who was raped and subjected to serious domestic abuse by D’s father between 2015 and 2017, sought to change her daughter’s surname. For her, the name is a constant reminder of the violence she endured.

But the court ruled that the surname should remain because it forms part of the child’s “identity and paternal heritage”. Regardless of the father’s absence over the last few years and his reported threats to kill the mother, her parents, and D.

One threat recorded in court stated:

“There is no guarantee that… I will not pick up a knife, kill your parents first in their sleep and then kill you and [D].”

Despite the severity of the abuse, both a family court judge and Mr Justice Peel, who oversaw the appeal, concluded that the link to the father should be preserved.

Legal professionals condemn the judgement

Barrister Dr Charlotte Proudman, representing the mother, criticised the ruling, saying:

“It just shows that a rapist’s rights are more important than the victim’s.”

She added that the family courts continue to operate in ways that “systemically disadvantage victims of domestic abuse and place children at risk of further harm.”

The Good Law Project has now taken the case to the European Court of Human Rights, arguing that the decision breaches Article 8: the right to private and family life, and that the UK’s family courts urgently need trauma-informed reform.

For D’s mother, the surname represents ongoing control by a man who inflicted severe harm. As she told the Good Law Project:

“It’s so important for me that this is not overshadowed by that of an abuser and a sick control narrative that courts seem to want to promote.”

The ruling forces both mother and child to carry the name of a perpetrator who continues to deny the abuse and minimise his actions. Insisting in court that the rape amounted merely to “sexual harassment.”

Safeline’s response: the system is retraumatising survivors

Safeline works with thousands of survivors every year who come forward seeking safety, justice, and recovery. We see daily how institutions (criminal and family courts, social care, and safeguarding systems) frequently fail to protect those most at risk.

This ruling is yet another devastating example.

No survivor, and no child, should be legally bound to the name of an abuser.

The court’s job is to protect those harmed rather than preserve the “heritage” of those responsible for that harm. Decisions that ignore trauma, minimise sexual violence, or prioritise the rights of perpetrators compound the abuse survivors have already endured.

Too often, survivors tell us they feel:

• disbelieved

• dismissed

• trapped in systems designed without their safety in mind

• forced to maintain ties with perpetrators through shared names, parental rights, or legal rulings

Safeline believes this is unacceptable. Children’s identities should never be shaped or controlled by the people who harmed their parents. Safeline will continue to fight for change—standing with survivors, advocating for reform, and ensuring that decisions affecting children’s futures are rooted in safety, dignity, and trauma-informed understanding.

Get Help

Stay up to date with Safeline’s work by following us on Social Media:

Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, TikTok and X!