Father's name still the only source of identity

I recently read an article in a newspaper which highlighted the difference in the legal gender equality in India. A 19-year old girl was denied a passport because she refused to write her biological father's name on the application form. The man had not communicated with his daughter since the day she was born and the girl thought it justified to leave his name out. Even though her mother raised her and the girl still lives with her, the courts said she can be granted a passport only if she lists her foster father as her father and fills in the application form accordingly.

This case emphasizes the still prevalent “patriarchal society” norms in India. Nirja Gopal, professor of women studies at Delhi University, says this case is hardly surprising. She says the importance of the father's name is well-established. "It is a form of identification. How else do you know one Sunita Kumari from another? But that's certainly not a justification for making father's name mandatory for an identity document; why not the mother's name?"

Student Rajiv Chowdhury was raised by a single mother and insists that "it makes no sense to put in my father's name and have the family as the only identifier even when he is practically absent from my life for all purposes".

Unfortunately, the story doesn’t end with just the father’s name being mandatory on a passport application. You need it for practically everything, including applying for a PAN card (to pay one's tax), a mutual fund, a bank account or even admission to professional bodies such as the Indian Institute of Chartered accountants or the Indian Actuaries Institute. This underlines the reluctance of our society to recognize the pivotal role a women plays in her child’s life. It is the woman who gives birth to her child. How and why should she be totally shadowed by the male in being accepted as the legal guardian of her son or daughter? What if you don’t want to put in your father’s name as your identity? Should you be denied all official documents? Shouldn’t the mother’s name be enough to support her child’s legal formalities?

In 1999, the Supreme Court ruled that a mother can act as natural guardian of a minor child even if its father were alive. This incredible judgment was handed down in response to writer Geeta Hariharan's plea for justice because the Reserve Bank of India had refused to accept her signature on an application to open relief bonds for her minor son. Though such laws exist, our society is still ignorant of their subsistence. Women are still living in oblivion with men enjoying all the power in providing any form of identity for their child.

Though mother’s role is rendered invisible in a child’s life, there is still some hope left. With more and more awareness being generated, changes are being incorporated in many systems to strengthen a women’s role in her child’s life. The Central Board of Secondary Education made it optional for students to use father or mother's name to identify themselves; many banks forms seek to ascertain only the mother's name and many school and college application forms are willing to accept either parent's name.

The process may be slow but I think we are on the right path of granting more recognition to a women. I just hope it doesn’t take too long for girls and boys like Rajiv to be able to exercise their right to access any kind of official document with just their mother’s name on it as their guardian. If a woman can be given recognition in other fields of activities, she should definitely be given equal, if not more, legal rights in her child’s life.