Short answer. A married woman is not required to change her surname. Article 370 of the Civil Code gives her three options: keep her maiden name and add her husband's surname, use her maiden first name with her husband's surname, or use her husband's full name prefixed with "Mrs." The key word is may — it is a choice, not a duty.
What the law says
A married woman may use: (1) Her maiden first name and surname and add her husband's surname, or (2) Her maiden first name and her husband's surname or (3) Her husband's full name, but prefixing a word indicating that she is his wife, such as "Mrs."
Civil Code, Article 370 — How a Wife May Style Herself. Read the full provision →
The law gives options, not a mandate
Article 370 of the Civil Code is permissive, not mandatory. A married woman may use any of the three name styles the article lists — she is not compelled to use any of them. This means that marriage alone does not strip a woman of her maiden name or force her to adopt her husband's surname. She retains full legal capacity to continue using her pre-marriage name on documents, contracts, and official registrations. The question of what name to use after marriage is a personal choice under Philippine law, not a legal obligation.
The three choices Article 370 provides
For a woman who does choose to reflect her marriage in the name she uses, Article 370 permits three specific forms. First: she may keep both her maiden first name and her maiden surname, and simply add her husband's surname alongside — resulting in a compound surname. Second: she may use her maiden first name combined with her husband's surname alone, dropping her maiden surname. Third: she may style herself by her husband's full name (both his given name and his surname), but must prefix a word such as "Mrs." to indicate that she is his wife, not the person herself.
Keeping the maiden name: the unchanged option
Nothing in Article 370 — or in any other provision cited in the brief — requires a married woman to change the name on existing documents. A passport, a professional license, or a bank account opened in a maiden name does not become legally incorrect simply because the holder has married. Government agencies and private institutions sometimes ask for updated records as a matter of administrative practice, but that is not the same as a legal requirement to change the name. A woman who wishes to continue using her maiden name in all respects is legally entitled to do so.
Practical consequences of the choice
Whether a married woman changes her name or not, her civil status as a married person is established by the marriage certificate, not by the name she uses. A woman who keeps her maiden name throughout her marriage does not affect the validity of the marriage or any rights and obligations arising from it. Conversely, a woman who takes her husband's surname does not lose rights associated with her maiden identity. The name and the legal status are separate: one is a matter of personal choice, the other is determined by the marriage itself and the law that governs it.
Cases citing this provision
These Supreme Court decisions cite the provision above. We list them so you can read them yourself; the summaries of what each decided are not ours to give.
- Ma. Virginia V. Remo vs. The Honorable Secretary of Foreign Affairs, G.R. No. 169202, March 5, 2010 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Ma. Amelita C. Villarosa vs. The House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal and Ricardo V. Quintos, G.R. No. 143351, September 14, 2000 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Richelle Busque Ordoña vs. The Local Civil Registrar of Pasig City and Allan D, G.R. No. 215370, November 9, 2021 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Victorino Salcedo II vs. COMELEC & Ermelita Cacao Salcedo, G.R. No. 135886, August 16, 1999 — read the decision on LawPhil →