Can You Feel the Excitement? Kamala Is Back and in the Lead!
The AI Race Needs a Little More ‘I’ in It
Dana Bash Recalibrates Both Sides of ICE Protest, and Sen. Cruz Is Guilty...
A Republican Who Wants to Raise Taxes
Welcome to the Old World Order
The Midterms: It's Not About 'Affordability' -- It's About Trump Hatred
Trump’s First Year Delivered the Most Meaningful Education Reforms in Decades
Pro-Abortion James Talarico's Factless Campaign for the Senate
How America First Policies Can Lead to Even More Growth in 2026
If You Own It, You Should Be Able to Fix It
Minnesota Malfeasance Is a Preview of Biden-Era Fraud and Waste
Why Children Under 13 Should Be Banned From Social Media
A Refreshing Year for LGBT Conservatives
Jury Convicts Alleged Minneapolis Gang Member in Fatal Gas Station Attack
Former TD Bank Worker Helped Launder $26 Million Through Shell Accounts, Prosecutors Say
Tipsheet

What's Wrong With UK Courts? Judge Rules Young Girl Must Keep Abusive Father's Surname.

AP Photo/Tim Ireland, File

The U.K. has a very disturbing trend of minimizing the sexual assaults, rapes, and abuse of women and girls in the country, especially if the perpetrators are from a minority or migrant class. It seems the powers that be across the pond find the "crime" of being racist (or perceived as racist) is a more serious offense than actual crimes.

Advertisement

Now the High Court has ruled that a domestic abuser and rapist can force his daughter to keep his surname.

Here's more:

The child, known as D, has not seen her father since December 2021 but must continue carrying his surname despite his history of domestic abuse against her mother.

The mother appealed the previous decision, arguing that forcing the child to bear the name was re-traumatising and contrary to the youngster’s best interests.

Representing the mother, barrister Charlotte Proudman said: “It just shows that a rapist’s rights are more important than [the] victim’s.”

In 2023 the family court found four “very serious” incidents of sexual abuse against the mother between 2015 and 2017.

In his ruling, the judge, Mr. Justice Peel, found that removing the surname would remove a "key part of the child's identity and heritage."

According to The Sun, the man also threatened to kill D and her mother, and the court was told he said, "There is no guarantee that if I come back here that I will not get so stressed out that I decide to pick up the knife, kill your parents first in their sleep and then kill you and [D]."

Advertisement

The girl has not seen her father since she was about one year old. It's unlikely she has any memory of him, let alone ties to her "identity and heritage."

Would anyone be surprised by this? No.

It's cold comfort to know the U.K. judiciary is just as crazy as ours.

Barrister Proudman further blasted the court, "This is abusive, state-sanctioned harm. You are forcing a child to bear or to continue to retain the father’s surname, the man who raped her mother. That is abuse facilitated by the court. In what world would a child want to have the name of a man who raped and abused the mother? How is that upholding important identity and links? It’s really harmful. It just shows that a rapist’s rights are more important than [the] victim and a child’s right to freedom."

Editor’s Note: Do you enjoy Townhall’s conservative reporting that takes on the radical left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth.

Join Townhall VIP and use the promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your VIP membership!

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement