This chapter examines the historical and jurisprudential development of the principle of moral and legal equality between parents within the family, using the rules on the attribution of children’s surnames as a key lens through which to observe the tension between family unity and personal identity. After reconstructing the patriarchal foundations of the Italian legal system—from marital authorization to the customary rule of automatic transmission of the father’s surname—the analysis traces the gradual dismantling of this framework in light of constitutional and conventional principles, with particular attention to the interplay between national courts and the European Court of Human Rights. The turning point is identified in Constitutional Court judgment no. 131 of 2022, which declared the paternal automatism unconstitutional and replaced it with the general rule that children bear the surnames of both parents. The chapter critically highlights the unresolved issues left open by this decision, especially concerning the order of surnames and their intergenerational transmission, showing how the removal of a discriminatory rule has not been accompanied by the formulation of clear substantive criteria. The contribution argues that, in the absence of legislative intervention, these gaps risk undermining legal certainty and coherence, and concludes by stressing the need for a comprehensive regulatory solution capable of balancing parental equality, the child’s interest, and the constitutional value of family unity.
Il contributo analizza l’evoluzione storica e giurisprudenziale del principio di eguaglianza morale e giuridica dei genitori nella famiglia, assumendo la disciplina del cognome dei figli come osservatorio privilegiato delle tensioni tra unità familiare e identità personale. Dopo aver ricostruito le radici patriarcali dell’ordinamento ottocentesco e novecentesco – dall’autorizzazione maritale alla regola consuetudinaria dell’attribuzione automatica del cognome paterno – il lavoro esamina il progressivo processo di erosione di tale assetto alla luce dei principi costituzionali e convenzionali, con particolare attenzione al ruolo della giurisprudenza nazionale ed europea. Il punto di svolta è individuato nella sentenza n. 131 del 2022 della Corte costituzionale, che ha dichiarato l’illegittimità dell’automatismo paterno, affermando la regola dell’attribuzione dei cognomi di entrambi i genitori. L’analisi mette tuttavia in evidenza le criticità ancora aperte, in particolare in relazione all’ordine dei cognomi e alla loro trasmissione intergenerazionale, sottolineando come la rimozione di una regola discriminatoria non sia stata accompagnata dall’elaborazione di criteri sostanziali idonei a garantire certezza, non discriminazione e coerenza sistemica. Il saggio conclude evidenziando la necessità di un intervento normativo capace di bilanciare in modo più compiuto l’eguaglianza dei genitori, l’interesse del figlio e il valore costituzionale dell’unità familiare.
L'eguaglianza morale giuridica dei genitori e il cognome dei figli tra unità familiare e identità personale
Francesco Ricci
2025-01-01
Abstract
This chapter examines the historical and jurisprudential development of the principle of moral and legal equality between parents within the family, using the rules on the attribution of children’s surnames as a key lens through which to observe the tension between family unity and personal identity. After reconstructing the patriarchal foundations of the Italian legal system—from marital authorization to the customary rule of automatic transmission of the father’s surname—the analysis traces the gradual dismantling of this framework in light of constitutional and conventional principles, with particular attention to the interplay between national courts and the European Court of Human Rights. The turning point is identified in Constitutional Court judgment no. 131 of 2022, which declared the paternal automatism unconstitutional and replaced it with the general rule that children bear the surnames of both parents. The chapter critically highlights the unresolved issues left open by this decision, especially concerning the order of surnames and their intergenerational transmission, showing how the removal of a discriminatory rule has not been accompanied by the formulation of clear substantive criteria. The contribution argues that, in the absence of legislative intervention, these gaps risk undermining legal certainty and coherence, and concludes by stressing the need for a comprehensive regulatory solution capable of balancing parental equality, the child’s interest, and the constitutional value of family unity.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
