[Solved] Samson, the son of a wealthy family has always claimed that since childhood, he was not a boy. He played with the girls and did not mingle with the boys. After finishing his course at a university in the Philippines, he went to the US to take up his masteral and doctorate degrees. He consulted several doctors of the possibility of sex transmission from that of male to that of a female. The sex transmission was done in Thailand and which was certified as successful by a medical expert in Manila, hence, he claimed to be a woman. He filed a petition for correction of entry of his record of birth from male to female and his name from Samson to Delailah as he was marrying his fiancé. The lower court granted the petition. Is the order of the court correct?

Q.	Samson, the son of a wealthy family has always claimed that since childhood, he was not a boy. He played with the girls and did not mingle with the boys. After finishing his course at a university in the Philippines, he went to the US to take up his masteral and doctorate degrees. He consulted several doctors of the possibility of sex transmission from that of male to that of a female. The sex transmission was done in Thailand and which was certified as successful by a medical expert in Manila, hence, he claimed to be a woman. He filed a petition for correction of entry of his record of birth from male to female and his name from Samson to Delailah as he was marrying his fiancé. The lower court granted the petition. Is the order of the court correct?
A.	The order is correct because it is the right to a person to choose his/her gender.
B.	The order is correct because a person’s status can be changed thru the intervention of medical science due to the advances in science and technology.
C.	The order is correct as there would be no adverse effects, but rather, it would redound to the benefit of Samson.
D.	The order is not correct because it wreaks havoc to the marriage law; create confusion in the civil registry and change of sex is not a ground to change one’s name.
Answer» D. The order is not correct because it wreaks havoc to the marriage law; create confusion in the civil registry and change of sex is not a ground to change one’s name.

2.5k

Do you find this helpful?

View all MCQs in

Philippines Civil Law Society

Discussion

No comments yet

Related MCQs

Jennifer was born an intersex and registered as a female. As she was growing up, there was no development of her female sexual organ and her breast. But there was more development of her male organ, hence, she filed a petition for correction of entries in her record of birth from female to male and to change her name from Jennifer to Johnny. Will the petition prosper?
In 1986, A, a married woman file a petition for adoption of C which was granted. In 2011, A filed a petition to rescind or nullify the decree invoking Article 185 of the Family Code requiring that the husband and wife must jointly adopt and the retroactive provision of the Family Code under Article 256. How do you think the court will decide?
A has been using the name Pedro since birth although his record of birth shows that his name is Juan. He is now 25 years old and about to take the Bar Exams. How can he use the name Juan when he will take the Bar Exams?
A & B lived together as husband and wife without the benefit of marriage. For a few months before his death, A was writing his autobiography and stated that he loved B so much and because of that, they decided to live together as husband and wife, but planned to marry. At the time he was writing his autobiography, B was pregnant and he stated in his autobiography that he was the father of the child inside the womb of B. He died without finishing it and failed to sign the same. Two (2) months thereafter, the child C, was born, hence, B sought to register the child under the name of A but the Local Civil Registrar refused, hence, she filed a suit for mandamus to compel the registrar to register the child under A’s name. She testified as narrated above; D, the father of A testified that during the lifetime of A he lived with B and she was pregnant at that time. E the brother of A likewise testified along the same line. Is the action of B correct?
A, a Russian citizen married B, a Filipina. A divorced B who came back to the Philippines and filed a petition for recognition of the foreign decree of divorce. It was recognized but the RTC of Manila found that A is not capacitated to remarry. Can B get married?
A and B lived together as husband and wife. A brought B to the hospital, and paid for the expenses in the birth of C. When the nurse asked B who was the father of the child, she mentioned the name of A but did not sign the record of birth of C. Can the record of birth be admissible in evidence as proof of filiation?
A & B are married. They have a 10-year old son, C. X & Y, who are childless filed a petition for adoption on June 16, 2010, seeking to adopt C. It was submitted for resolution on December 15, 2010. On December 31, 2010 C was playing with a neighbor D who is likewise a minor, using the airgun of C’s father. He pointed the gun to D, squeezed the trigger and killed D. the petition was granted on January 10, 2011. Who are liable?
A & B are married. They have a 10-year old son, C. X & Y, who are childless filed a petition for adoption on June 16, 2010, seeking to adopt C. It was submitted for resolution on December 15, 2010. On December 31, 2010 C was playing with a neighbor D who is likewise a minor, using the airgun of C’s father. He pointed the gun to D, squeezed the trigger and killed D. The petition was granted on January 10, 2011. Who may be liable?
Magdalene and Shantung Company entered into a contract of agency before the consul general of the Philippines in Singapore. They stipulated that Magdalene shall be the administrator of the real properties of Shantung Company in the said country. By virtue of the said contract, Magdalene sold the 1 hectare land of Shantung Company located in Singapore to Mayhem Real Estate Corporation without any special power of attorney. The said contract of sale was executed before the vice consul of the Philippines in Singapore. Under the laws of Singapore, the sale of a real property by an agent without a special power of attorney is valid. Shantung Company filed a suit for the annulment of the contract of sale on the ground that Magdalene has no authority to sell the property. If you were the judge, which of the following courses of action should you take?
X executed a will instituting his heirs. It was discovered 15 years after his death, hence, the heirs consulted you whether they can still file a petition for its probate, considering that they have already extrajudicially settled his estate. What is your advice?