A mother in the UK recently spent thousands of pounds to take legal action to have her child’s middle name removed.
Her aversion to the name was because of its association with an infamous public figure. She said the name had negative connotations that could be harmful to the child in the future.
A recent appeal from the child’s father was rejected by Judge Rodgers. The father wanted to keep the name, saying it was an important part of the child’s identity. He assured the judge that he would only use the child's first name and would not refer to the famous name in any form of correspondence.
"At birth, the child was given two forenames by the parents, and registered with both. The child is most commonly known by the first name, but the father uses both and says he favours the middle name,” said Judge Rogers, according to The Telegraph.
"The middle name is a normal well-established name. It is not eccentric or in itself offensive. However, the mother’s case was that, as a result of its association with a notorious public figure, it is infected with bad connotations."
Conservative MP Philip Hollobone was outraged by the decision to grant the mother legal aid. He stated that there are "more deserving cases for taxpayers money to spend on". This was an alleged reference to the parents of tragic Charlie Gard, who were denied financial help by the government.
This ruling also comes after the case of the families of victims of the 1982 IRA Hyde Park bomb. The said families have been refused legal funding to bring a private prosecution against John Downey, who is accused of killing four soldiers and injuring 31 people.
According to the Telegraph, Labour MP Seema Malhotra was reported as saying: “It’s clear it needs overhauling. The heartbreaking case of Charlie Gard highlights why it’s wrong for parents facing this situation to not have access to legal support or for there to be so much uncertainty.”
However, His Honour Judge Rogers said that the continuing existence of the child’s middle name would have a serious negative impact on the child's emotional welfare, and ordered the ruling to have it removed by deed poll.
In the UK, a couple cannot be granted legal funding if they have a yearly gross income of over £31,844.
