Short answer. Both parents exercise parental authority jointly over their common children. The Family Code provides that in case of disagreement the father's decision prevails — but only unless there is a judicial order to the contrary, so the tie-breaker is provisional and can be displaced by a court.
What the law says
The father and the mother shall jointly exercise parental authority over the persons of their common children. In case of disagreement, the father's decision shall prevail, unless there is a judicial order to the contrary.
Family Code, Article 211 — Joint Exercise of Parental Authority. Read the full provision →
The rule starts from joint authority
Article 211 of the Family Code opens by putting both parents on the same footing: The father and the mother shall jointly exercise parental authority over the persons of their common children. Joint exercise is the norm, and it is not conditional on the parents living together or on either of them having custody in fact. Decisions about a child's schooling, medical treatment, residence and travel are meant to be made by both. A parent who is out of the household has not thereby lost the authority the article confers.
The tie-breaker, and its important qualifier
The article then supplies a default for deadlock: In case of disagreement, the father's decision shall prevail, unless there is a judicial order to the contrary. The qualifier is doing as much work as the rule. This is a provisional preference that keeps decisions from stalling, not a superior right vested in the father, and it yields the moment a court says otherwise. A parent who considers a decision harmful to the child is not without recourse — the route is to go to court, and the court's order displaces the default.
Separation changes the practical picture
Where parents separate, questions of custody and of who decides are typically settled by the court hearing the case, and the Code contains specific rules favouring the mother for children below seven years of age absent compelling reasons. Article 211 closes by stating the children's side of the relationship: they are to observe respect and reverence towards their parents and to obey them while under parental authority. If you are in a live disagreement with the other parent, the practical question is whether an order already governs the point — because if one does, it, and not the default, controls.
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.
- Jocelyn Pablo-Gualberto vs. Crisanto Rafaelito Gualberto V, G.R. No. 154994, June 28, 2005 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Spouses Magdalino Gabun and Carol Gabun, Nora A. Lopez, and Marcelino Alfonso vs. Winston Clark Stolk Sr, G.R. No. 234660, June 26, 2023 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Renalyn A. Masbate and Spouses Renato Masbate and Marlyn Masbate vs. Ricky Jame Relucio, G.R. No. 235498, July 30, 2018 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Sabrina Artadi Boddagjy vs. Fouzi Ali Bondagjy, et al, G.R. No. 140817, December 7, 2001 — read the decision on LawPhil →
Related provisions
- Family Code, Article 211 — Joint Exercise of Parental Authority
- Family Code, Article 209 — Nature of Parental Authority