Judgment of the Amsterdam Court on May 26, 2021

The petitioner experiences severe disruption in his daily life due to his first name. The reason for this is that it is a namesake of his grandfather, who had abused the petitioner in the past. As a result, he did not have a normal childhood, and the scars of the abuse are still visible today, as the petitioner has had to undergo therapy for many years to come to terms with the abuse.

In his everyday life, the petitioner is strongly impeded by the name to the extent that he can experience panic reactions. For example, he is unable to visit his birthplace. He has been forced to sever all contacts with family, friends, and acquaintances because he found these relationships too burdensome. On a professional level, the petitioner is also (indirectly) hindered by the name because, for instance, in the recent past, he quickly categorized his working relationship with his colleagues as a perpetrator-victim relationship. The name triggers a reaction in the petitioner, whether consciously or not.

The petitioner wishes to break free from his past and make a fresh start. He believes that a request for a name change, in the sense that the namesake of his grandfather is removed, will make a positive contribution to his mental recovery.

Considering the petitioner’s explanation, the court rules that there is a sufficiently significant reason. The request for a name change is granted.