Six couples file suit seeking separate surnames

A local law requires a car owner to possess a parking spot within a certain distance from their residence. A friend had one near her parents' house but not near her paramours - she'd have had to secure one there at great trouble and expense if they married and she changed her address, so they simply did not marry. Over a parking space.

Backers of the current laws say having a single family name is important to promote family ties and that efforts to change the rules are an attack on traditional values.

Why not have a referendum on it? Or some kind of poll (conducted by an impartial "panel of experts" of course)?

Good for them. An arcane system that should be scrapped.

Simple... Just marry a foreigner and you will not have to change your name. Mrs. "Kipling" is not a Kipling.

I wonder why they allow that exception ???

Simple... Just marry a foreigner and you will not have to change your name. Mrs. "Kipling" is not a Kipling.

I wonder why they allow that exception ???

Exactly. And you know the reasons.

Exactly. And you know the reasons.

I can't quite put my finger on it.... Maybe they didn't like something? But what?

Japanese politician opinion that having different surnames after marriage could increase crime, strange?

Check it by yourself.

https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20200317/p2a/00m/0fp/019000c

.

For Japanese conservatives, their argument having different surname can weakening family ties, that's really strange argument. They think that family ties can be ruined just over just a name not attitude or behavior of family member.

https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/Inside-Japanese-politics/Debate-over-surnames-hinders-reform-agenda-of-Japanese-PM

One of the plaintiffs, a 50-year-old who declined to be named

lol

The jokes just write themselves!

Why not have a referendum on it? Or some kind of poll (conducted by an impartial "panel of experts" of course)?

-5( +5 / -10 )

Some people don't like the democratic will of the people? Are they the same as those who believe two names would undermine tradition and destroy the family? It would be quite fitting that traditionalists don't trust the people's will, I suppose.

Seems to me one long article wholly in favor of separate family names with this little trite throw in at the very end;

Backers of the current laws say having a single family name is important to promote family ties and that efforts to change the rules are an attack on traditional values.

The institution of marriage and family ties are NOT arcane ideas. Any culture that respects them are immediately more successful.

Only six? Let me know when it becomes 60,000. I will take a nap now.

The institution of marriage and family ties are NOT arcane ideas. Any culture that respects them are immediately more successful.

That may well be so, ted, but the question is whether having the same family name for a married couple is essential to that, and then, if there is no basis to it, why traditionalists should get to impose their ideas on others AND on what grounds they get to do that.

A local law requires a car owner to possess a parking spot within a certain distance from their residence.

Wow, they are lucky! In many municipalities it is a requirement to have it within the property or connected directly to the building.

A friend had one near her parents' house but not near her paramours - she'd have had to secure one there at great trouble and expense if they married and she changed her address, so they simply did not marry.

Sounds to me like there is more to it! lol!

Owning a car here is a privilege not a right!

This is one law that makes absolutely zero sense to me, because any Japanese married to a foreigner, is not required to take their spouses name, and have the option to keep their own. Hence they have two different surnames.

As with gay marriage, this is a complete free hit for politicians. A policy you can enact with zero funding that makes you appear kind and caring, instead of tight-fisted, corrupt, full of yourself and everything else people think, not without justification, about politicians.

With the current corruption case surrounding the LDP, it would actually be good timing for them to bring in separate surnames as a distraction to their own misdemeanours. Maybe its not a thing in the city, but in inaka, there are couples, usually an eldest son with an eldest daughter, who cannot marry because neither set of parents will allow a name change.

Lord (bwahaha) David Cameron stands as one of the worst prime ministers in UK history, but he at least gets to say "I brought in gay marriage". This is frequently cited as his "legacy".

The issue is with the Japanese family register system, known as Koseki. As per this system, only one Koseki can be created per family. If two individuals in a family have different surnames, it would necessitate the creation of two Kosekis. That is not allowed. When a non-Japanese individual marries a Japanese citizen, they are not added to the Koseki and can choose to retain their original surname.

When a non-Japanese individual marries a Japanese citizen, they are not added to the Koseki and can choose to retain their original surname.

Which is very much xenophobic, as if we were not citizens here. Only Japanese are allowed to create a Koseki.

The institution of marriage and family ties are NOT arcane ideas. Any culture that respects them are immediately more successful.

That may well be so, ted, but the question is whether having the same family name for a married couple is essential to that, and then

As I have pointed out, having the same family name is essential. It is an agreement between man and wife that they are in it for the long haul, and not as some sort of shallow business arrangement.

why traditionalists should get to impose their ideas on others AND on what grounds they get to do that.

I suppose because many more Japanese support the law than oppose it.

I don't care either way. If Japan chooses to do it that way, fine. BUT... as others have pointed out, the rule is not applied if a Japanese national marries a foreigner. They should clarify what they mean by that decision.

Protestant...

If they allow separate surnames, mark my words - the entirety of Japanese society will simply and utterly collapse. Never mind the decades of economic stagnation and the umpteen other crises that plague this island backwater… catching up to the rest of the world in areas of social reform will be the end… the absolute end. Shudders!

It all makes sense now. The moral and economic decline in the West is all down to married couples having different names. Thankfully Japan has saved itself from this.

koiwaicoffee

When a non-Japanese individual marries a Japanese citizen, they are not added to the Koseki and can choose to retain their original surname.

> Which is very much xenophobic, as if we were not citizens here. Only Japanese are allowed to create a Koseki.

You can become a Japanese citizen and then form a new Koseki. We are not citizens.

The suit seeks "confirmation of illegality of the government's failure to amend the law"

Ok

As I have pointed out, having the same family name is essential. It is an agreement between man and wife that they are in it for the long haul, and not as some sort of shallow business arrangement.

Is that all, though? Is sharing family name some kind of indication of their love for each other? Can't you love without sharing the same name?

I suppose because many more Japanese support the law than oppose it.

Well, that is what we don't really know.

As I have pointed out, having the same family name is essential. It is an agreement between man and wife that they are in it for the long haul, and not as some sort of shallow business arrangement.

How ridiculous. My wife took my name, but I know plenty of couples where the wife didn't, and there is no less love in their marriages as a result of that.

 As per this system, only one Koseki can be created per family. 

Before you comment, you really should check how things work. You are dead wrong.

For reasons I will not go into detail about, my daughter, who is under my wife's tohon, had to remove herself from the tohon, and create her own, when she got married to a foreign man.

Right there, there are technically two tohon's in the "family", but the Japanese see it as a separate one, her "own".

Similarly Japanese have the highest adoption rate in the world, but not of children, of mostly men, being "adopted" into a new family upon marriage, to keep this fallacy alive. Taking the "name" of the wife, so the lineage continues. Not necessary if two surnames are allowed,

These adopted people are "removed" from one tohon, and placed on another, yet their names do not disappear on the original, they still stay there for eternity. Two tohon's!

Yubaru

 As per this system, only one Koseki can be created per family. 

> Before you comment, you really should check how things work. You are dead wrong.

> For reasons I will not go into detail about, my daughter, who is under my wife's tohon, had to remove herself from the tohon, and create her own, when she got married to a foreign man.

New Family new Koseki. She was able to decide to keep her given name or use the name of her husband

Right there, there are technically two tohon's in the "family", but the Japanese see it as a separate one, her "own".

Similarly Japanese have the highest adoption rate in the world, but not of children, of mostly men, being "adopted" into a new family upon marriage, to keep this fallacy alive. Taking the "name" of the wife, so the lineage continues. Not necessary if two surnames are allowed,

I know about this situation.

These adopted people are "removed" from one tohon, and placed on another, yet their names do not disappear on the original, they still stay there for eternity. Two tohon's!

But there is only one legal Kosaki. There aren't two.

ted williamsMar. 9 04:02 pm JST

The institution of marriage and family ties are NOT arcane ideas. Any culture that respects them are immediately more successful.

Well, family ties are never going to be outdated, but the idea of marriage is outdated - you don't need to be married to be a family, and marriage doesn't keep families from breaking up.

Divorces happen regardless of marriage, and people stay together for years and have children and even grandchildren without being married.

So really, what exactly is the point of marriage, when it doesn't stop people from separating, it doesn't stop families from fracturing or falling apart, and it doesn't make relationships more stable?

Marriage should be a choice a couple make for themselves as a personal and private ceremony to celebrate, instead of it being foisted on them by the government making these rules and regulations that make your life harder if you don't marry. The government should not be involved in personal relationships or get a say about who gets to inherit, who can visit you in the hospital, or who you live with for tax purposes, or anything else.

We are well past the stage in history where marriage is necessary. Young people are rejecting marriage more and more. It's the oldies who are hanging onto it, just like they hang onto everything else - they need to let go and let change happen.

Why are we trying to stop people from doing what they feel is right for them, just because we have our own ideas of what was right for us?

As I have pointed out, having the same family name is essential. It is an agreement between man and wife that they are in it for the long haul, and not as some sort of shallow business arrangement.

I'd like you to say this to the face of a couple who have been together for 20 years (or more) without being married. I can introduce you to some. They'll straighten out this archaic notion of yours that their relationship isn't based on love.

You can become a Japanese citizen and then form a new Koseki. We are not citizens.

Yes we are. We live and work here, create families, ties, and pay all of the taxes. We are pretty much members of the community, only that we are not officially recognized because we are foreigners.

koiwaicoffee

You can become a Japanese citizen and then form a new Koseki. We are not citizens.

> Yes we are. We live and work here, create families, ties, and pay all of the taxes. We are pretty much members of the community, only that we are not officially recognized because we are foreigners.

Foreigners are not citizens, like in many other countries such as the US. However, it is possible to become a citizen with some effort.

New Family new Koseki. She was able to decide to keep her given name or use the name of her husband

Wrong, her husband can not create a tohon, as he is not Japanese. Even if she took his name, she would have have her name changed on the original tohon, then "removed", but not erased.

Why not have a referendum on it?

Why should we have a referendum on something that should automatically be a personal choice?

But there is only one legal Kosaki. There aren't two.

There is no such thing as a "kosaki" You are a stickler for accuracy!

There are in fact two, both are legal, but only one is used for the individual in question.

Yes we are. We live and work here, create families, ties, and pay all of the taxes. We are pretty much members of the community, only that we are not officially recognized because we are foreigners.

I have lived / worked / paid tax / owned properties & companies in the USA, Japan and Europe. I have never been a citizen in any of those countries.

There are in fact two, both are legal, but only one is used for the individual in question.

There are three Kosekis.

Koseki Tohron. Record of all the family.

Koseki Shoton. One family member.

Joseki Tohron. Records births, deaths, marriages, and divorces of people who were removed from the Koseki Tohon due to the marriage, divorce, and death.

When a Japanese marries a new koseki is made and that is the one used for legal matters. Japanese women and men can decide which surname they want to use.

If a Japanese woman marries a non-Japanese they can retain their given name or use the name of their new partner.

My Japanese spouse kept her given name for many years but then applied to the family courts and changed to my own.

Married couples should be able to choose to use their given name, their spouse's name, or a combination of both. Applied equally to men and women.

As I have pointed out, having the same family name is essential. It is an agreement between man and wife that they are in it for the long haul, and not as some sort of shallow business arrangement.

The existence of millions of families world-wide that do not share a name, and yet are very healthy families, proves the above quote to be based purely in ideology, in ignorance of the reality of the situation.

Koseki Tohron. Record of all the family.

Koseki Shoton. One family member.

Joseki Tohron.

It is called a Koseki Tohon, Koseki Shohon and Joseki Tohon.

There are three Kosekis.

This has absolutely nothing to do with what I was talking to you about the two family registries. This is pure obfuscation and deflection!

There are in fact two, both are legal, but only one is used for the individual in question.

These adopted people are "removed" from one tohon, and placed on another, yet their names do not disappear on the original, they still stay there for eternity. Two tohon's!

But there is only one legal Kosaki. There aren't two.

The original KOSEKI is fully legal, as it is under the family head name, and even though someone is "removed" does not eliminate the legality of the koseki. Their name still exists. It is no longer their koseki, but it is STILL a legal document!

You confuse the differences.

 It is no longer their koseki, but it is STILL a legal document!

The Koseki of the parents may be required if there are problems with inheritance.

Why should we have a referendum on something that should automatically be a personal choice?

True, from the point of view of increasing personal choice. But, I think the majority would vote for this personal choice and then the traditionalists could finally be silenced. Right now they can continue to tout their view as if they are righteous upholders of traditional morality at least the equal of the rest who don't care either way and there seems to be no end to the decades-old logjam.

Japan is the only country requiring married couples to use the same surname.