I'm very sorry to hear what happened to you. I don't know personally of anything quite that bad but it is certainly true that the majority of my friends have had custody issues after divorce, the man has certainly come off worse re access to the children (no mater what the 'moral' rights and wrongs of the split - ie adultery or similar with very limited contact whilst still paying high child support. It is still unfairly weighted to the mother and sadly, a few of my male friends have ended up pretty much giving up and accepting the scraps they are offered due to the pain and trauma involved - noth emotional and financial and also the worry it is doing the children more harm than goos.

Yes she would, she just has to go to court and prove that Michael can't be bothered with Scarlett and that changing the name to Butcher is in the interest of the child. And as Michael is only interested in Scarlett because he can get to Janine and her money it won't be that hard to do with the Lawyers she can afford.

It really does depend on whether he actually signed anything giving up parental responsibility when he 'gave up' going for sole custody and allowed Janine to have her full time at the house. If he did sign something, then he'd have a hard time stopping her changing her name - especially if the divorce is going through and Janine makes a case for her child having the same name as her rather than her 'absentee' father. Pat had both David and Simon's names changed to Wicks after her divorce from Pete Beale. I also had several school friends who had their names changed from their biological father's to their mothers second husbands to keep family 'unity' for those sharing a house.

The law changed in 2003 even unmarried fathers who are named on the birth certificate automatically have parental responsibility. As Janine an Michael were married she wouldn't be able to officially change Scarlett's surname without his permission.
Anyone can be known by a different surname but Janine seemed to have legally changed her surname which can't happen without the father's consent.
I have a residency order for my daughter but her name couldn't be changed without her father's permission until she reached 16.

In soapland maybe but not in real life.

Because in most cases the mother is the primary care giver. In this situation the baby would have formed an attachment with Michael, in addition to that Janine displayed signs of being an unfit mother by running away. Her getting custody is unrealistic.

Had a quick look at the deedpoll website, and she probaly could if she had sole custody and he had no contact/didn't contribute.

Speaking of Janine and Michael, are they still married or is she set to become a widow for the third time?

Actually that explains alot, thanks.