Can a Mrs Dawnay who lives in Devon be chief of clan Macsporran?

There is unlikely to be an emergency Cabinet meeting about that question any time soon, but it is worrying Scottish clan chiefs, who fear clan chiefships could become separated from hereditary titles (and ancient clan lands and property) if women are allowed to inherit titles on the same basis as men under new equality legislation.

Sir Malcolm MacGregor of MacGregor, convener of the Standing Council Of Scottish Chiefs, predicts a "massive jolt" to the clans system.

He warns that the new Equality (Titles) Bill, which allows for the equal succession of female heirs, will increase the risk that hereditary titles, and also castles and lands, become separated from the clan chiefships traditionally associated with them.

It is arguable whether being clan chief is a hereditary title or not, but many chieftains are also peers or baronets. Sir Malcolm asks what would happen if the eldest daughter of a clan chieftain - Macsporran, say, married a man called Dawnay, moved to Devon, and was unwilling to keep the name Macsporran? She would inherit her father's title, but could she really call herself clan chief when she did not have the right name?

If she retained the name and became chief of the Clan Macsporran, her husband might be unwilling to allow their eldest child to take the name Macsporran, which would again put the clan chiefship in doubt. Meanwhile, the ancient Macsporran castle back in Scotland would no longer be home to the clan chieftain. All in all, this increased risk of separation between chiefship and title is not in the interests of the clan system, according to Sir Malcolm.

The new law is about serving the interests of gender equality, however, and it certainly achieves that. The passing of titles only through the male line is a remarkable anachronism and its reform is long overdue. Of course, some would argue the existence of hereditary titles and peerages that are regulated by the state is in itself an anachronism, but the Equality (Titles) Bill is still progressive within its scope. Women ought to have an equal right with men to inherit titles.

The suggestion females should continue only to inherit where there is no male heir, is discriminatory. As for requiring in law that any heir to a title adopts the surname linked to it, this could force people to take names they did not want, including, presumably, individuals outside Scotland who had nothing to do with the Scottish clan system. Ultimately, it will be up to chieftains themselves to manage this situation through encouragement rather than legal coercion.

Traditional social rules about women adopting their husbands' surnames are loosening, in any case. Increasing numbers of couples double-barrel their names and it is not unheard of for men to take their wives' surnames. Many women would no doubt see the sense in retaining the clan name if they became chief, but the risk that they might not is insufficient reason to sidestep equality legislation.

While the clan chiefs' concerns are understandable, the interests of equality must come first.