Welcome to another week.
The Home Office is advising families travelling with differing surnames to bring birth or adoption certificates to the airport, to prove the identities of children within family units.
Officers at the airport are to step up interrogations in a bid to tackle child trafficking and exploitation.
The request was not well received by parents, and some member of the public on Twitter, who felt the new policy was draconian and heavy handed.
A tweet posted on 1st August, highlighting the change has received over 500 comments, most of which appear to be deeply critical of the move.
Replying to the Home Office on Twitter, Welsh MP Hywel Williams said:
“Wholly unacceptable. Having different surnames is not some bureaucratic problem. My wife is Davies- she’s not an add-on to me. My children are Hywel – a pattern becoming more common in Wales as we shed practices enforced on our culture during industrialization.”
Academic researcher Dr Johnna Montgomerie observed the effect this would have on married women who chose to forego taking their husband’s names:
“Just to clarify women who chose not to take their husband’s surname or have children with a partner they are not married to will be subject to increased border measures. This is what freedom looks like under a #Tory government? Straight out of #Gilead”
Tweeter Nicky Marsh pointed out the impact this would have on men, as well:
“Absolutely, this is terrifying. And this extends to men, too, and might even be more problematic for them: my children have my surname rather than their father’s and although we are married this is an issue for him.”
Another tweeter pointed out an issue in relation to carrying several important documents around:
“This is a great way to lose important documents while travelling. Brilliant advice from the same department who will probably try to deport people later on when they have lost, say, a marriage certificate abroad after following this advice.”
Our question this week then, is just this: do you agree with the new policy?
Researching Reform 
The “Nanny State” and Under a Tory government too.How can such measures stop child traffiking when the biggest offender of all in that sphere is the UK government as represented by UK Social Services in collaboration with the UK family courts
LikeLike
Reblogged this on World4Justice : NOW! Lobby Forum..
LikeLike
Reblogged this on | truthaholics and commented:
“Ian Josephs said:
The “Nanny State” and Under a Tory government too. How can such measures stop child trafficking when the biggest offender of all in that sphere is the UK government as represented by UK Social Services in collaboration with the UK family courts?”
LikeLike
One more reason to stay at home and avoid the endless queues. It’s the price we’re going to have to pay for mass mobility.
LikeLike