Court: Dads have right to name kids too

Canadian Press, by SUE BAILEY, June 6, 2003,

OTTAWA (CP) - Mothers shouldn't have sole power to name a child when they arbitrarily refuse to acknowledge the father, Canada's highest court says.

The Supreme Court of Canada ruled 9-0 Friday to strike down British Columbia's Vital Statistics Act because it violates guaranteed equality rights. Under the act, mothers who "unacknowledge" the father can register and name their children without the dad's input.

That's unconstitutional, the high court said. But it suspended the effect of its ruling for 12 months, allowing the province time to change its law.

At the heart of the case is an unmarried B.C. father's fight to have his triplet sons bear his last name.

While it's a victory for men, the judgment won't immediately help Darrell Trociuk.

It orders the B.C. legislature - and, in effect, others with similar laws - to draft rules that better reflect the interests of both mothers and fathers. But it stops short of granting Trociuk the outcome he most wanted: to give his seven-year-old sons at least a hyphenated last name.

He'll have to wait to see if B.C. drafts a new law that will retroactively give him his wish.

The self-employed landscaper was in a two-year relationship with Reni Ernst that ended in 1995. There has never been a paternity dispute, and Trociuk has paid support and sought access to his children.

But when Ernst filled out a vital statistics registration form, she declared Trociuk "unacknowledged" - a category often used when women become pregnant from rape or incest. That allowed her to give the children her surname.

When both parents register but can't agree on a name, children receive hyphenated surnames.

Ernst has said she chose not to acknowledge Trociuk because he initially insisted the children take his name only.

Once officially unacknowledged, Trociuk had no legal say in the matter, and no recourse to appeal.

Fathers such as Trociuk "should not be compared or confused with fathers who are justifiably excluded," wrote Justice Marie Deschamps for the unanimous court.

"Among those included in the latter category are rapists and perpetrators of incest."

They can also be mistaken for dads with no interest in raising their kids, she said.

"Such confusion is disrespectful to fathers who want to participate in their children's lives through the inclusion of their particulars."

The judgment is expected to have far-reaching impact in provinces where such laws are similar, including Ontario, Saskatchewan and Prince Edward Island.

Only about five per cent of fathers fall into the "unacknowledged" category in British Columbia.

Friday's ruling overturns a B.C. Court of Appeal decision that had upheld the Vital Statistics Act.

The Ontario Court of Appeal also ruled last June that a mother can acknowledge a father for custody or child support reasons but does not have to acknowledge him on a birth registry for naming purposes.

It said the province's Vital Statistics Act, which is worded similarly to that in B.C., provides mothers with the "ultimate ability" to name their children.