Reframing the Dual-Surname Debate: Misunderstandings Accentuate Perception Gap

In an opinion poll conducted in April this year by national broadcaster NHK , 62% of respondents said they favored allowing married couples to keep separate surnames, while only 27% were opposed. But public opinion on the issue is divided along generational lines. Among respondents 60 and younger, more than 70% supported providing the option of retaining different names. Among those 70 and up, the results were 48% in favor and 40% opposed. Multiple surveys have revealed a similar gap in attitudes.

A generational shift in values reflecting the diversification of family structures is doubtless one factor behind the disparity, as is the proliferation of two-earner households as more women opt to remain in the labor force even after marriage and childbirth. But the perception gap has been exacerbated by misconceptions regarding the issue and its impact. In the following, I address these misunderstandings and attempt to clarify the fundamental problem and its ramifications.

Background

In recent years, the diversification of lifestyles and family structures has attracted the media spotlight, and the rise of de facto or common-law marriage is often presented as an example of this diversity. In much of the world, common-law marriage is closely associated with the rejection of legal marriage as an institution. In Japan, however, this connection is more tenuous. While a certain percentage of common-law couples have chosen this path as superior in principle to conventional marriage, the majority would prefer to be wed legally if only they could keep both of their surnames in the process. This situation is unique to Japan, as it is the only country in the world where couples who wish to marry are still legally required to adopt the surname of one partner or the other.

The law is the consequence of Japan’s long-standing koseki (family registry) system. Under this system, every Japanese citizen must be a member of a registered household, and all members of the household must, in principle, share the same surname. For a marriage to be legal, one of the spouses must be entered in the other’s koseki. Although the Civil Code allows married couples to adopt either the husband’s or wife’s name, in practice, 95% of married couples follow tradition and embrace the husband’s surname.

The issue of surname choice has attracted a good deal of attention and debate in recent years, but I am not at all convinced that the majority of Japanese fully understand the issue and its implications. Moreover, I believe that such misunderstandings have contributed to the perception gap between the older and younger generations. In the following, I draw on the results of my own survey of common-law couples to clarify what the surname issue is and is not about, highlighting points that have too often been neglected in previous discussions.

The Right to Choose

I believe that one basic factor exacerbating disagreement over this issue is the use of the phrase fūfu bessei, or “separate names for husband and wife,” to sum up the position of those advocating reform. The truth is that very few of the common-law partners I interviewed saw themselves as advocates of a dual-surname system. They simply wanted to have the option of marrying legally without changing their own legal surname.

To be sure, a growing number of women wish to keep their surnames after marriage for various reasons, including personal and professional identity and domestic circumstances. But the issue is not whether maintaining separate surnames is better, or more equitable, or more in keeping with the dignity of the individual. It is quite simply whether the law should grant both partners the option of retaining their legal surnames when they get married.

Since the 1990s, it has become increasingly common for major Japanese companies to permit married women in their employ to use their maiden names in the workplace. Conservative opponents of legal reform are often heard to argue that there is no need to change the law, since women are permitted to substitute their maiden names in practice. (It is a curious position, inasmuch women had to fight the conservative establishment tooth and nail to win even this meager concession.) In 2021, the Supreme Court cited widespread acceptance of the use of maiden names in the workplace in rejecting a constitutional challenge to the current law.

But the fact is that only about half of all Japanese companies permit married women to go by their maiden names. And even at those companies, one’s married (legal) name must generally be used in certain situations and documents. Studies confirm that major complications, obstacles, and difficulties face Japanese women choosing to use their maiden name in the workplace.

Not Just About Working Women

On the other side of the question, there is a strong tendency to adduce terms like “women’s social advancement” when making the argument for surname choice or the use of maiden names in the workplace.

Certainly the increase in two-income households has focused attention on the problems women encounter when forced to change their surnames mid-career. But I would be cautious about criticizing the current system solely from this narrow perspective. Working women are not the only ones negatively affected by the current law.

Full-time homemakers and women working part-time jobs accounted for a substantial portion of the common-law wives I interviewed. Generally speaking, their resistance to changing their surnames had little or nothing to do with career building. Moreover, many were dismayed by the tendency among reform advocates to focus solely on the needs of working women.

A person’s name is a highly personal, individual matter. The problems surrounding Japan’s laws governing marriage and surnames are not limited to women in the labor force and should not be framed in that manner.

Privacy and Child Welfare

Another reason for generational divisions is the misguided tendency to view the issue as a simple choice between two options. In fact, there is much more to it than that.

As noted above, in 95% of cases it is the woman who changes her surname. In doing so, she is telling the world that she has married, whether she wishes to disclose that information or not. By the same token, when a woman divorces and reverts to her original name, she is publicly announcing the fact of her divorce, even though the fault may lie with her ex-husband. Despite all we hear about the need to respect individual privacy, Japanese women—unlike men—are routinely forced to disclose personal information in this manner.

In addition, the requirement that everyone in a household adopt the same legal name imposes hardships on the children of divorced couples, more than 80% of whom end up living with their mother. When the mother reverts to her maiden name, her children are obliged to change their surname as well—and then change it again if their mother legally remarries.

One reason people frequently give for opposing separate surnames for husband and wife is that it is hard on the children when not all family members go by the same surname. But this is already the situation for children of common-law partners and international couples. (Under Japan’s koseki system, foreign and-Japanese partners keep their respective surnames when they marry, and children take the name of the Japanese parent.) These children are apt to face prejudice and confusion under today’s rigid one-surname-per-family system. Allowing greater freedom of choice in the matter of surnames would contribute greatly to their welfare, as well as that of the children of divorced parents. But this point is routinely ignored.

Reframing the Issue

As we have seen, how one frames the issue can have a major impact on the debate over Japan’s laws requiring both spouses to adopt the same surname. The question, as I see it, should not be “Should we allow spouses to have separate surnames?” but “Is it right to force couples to take the same surname?”

Since any decision on the issue of surname choice will have the greatest impact on young people looking ahead to marriage, it is vital that the legislative process give adequate weight to their views on the subject.

At the same time, we must keep in mind that young people and common-law couples are not the only segments of the population negatively affected by the current system. Opting for common-law marriage instead of legal matrimony is a difficult decision, and only a small portion of women are willing to go that route in order to retain their legal surnames. The statistics on common-law marriage tell us nothing about all the women who reluctantly change their names because that is their only option if they wish to be legally married.

To bridge the generational divide on this issue it is necessary to foster greater social awareness of the numerous problems the current system poses and the wide range of people affected by them. We need to heed the diverse voices of those on whom the system imposes disadvantages and hardships and consider how expanding the options can benefit society as a whole.

(Originally published in Japanese. Banner photo: A group of plaintiffs suing to overturn Japan’s laws requiring married couples to adopt a single surname pose outside of the Tokyo District Court, March 8, 2024. © Kyōdō.)