|
Hi Potplant
My great grandmother had a child before she married with the man she went on to marry. On their son's birth cert he is registered as being their son as if they were married. However, many months later there was a statutory declaration to remove the father's name from the birth cert - because they weren't actually married at the time and because the father wasn't present at the birth registration. It seems silly as the poor little baby only lived for 6 weeks and I dont see the point of them having to correct the birth certificate for a baby that didn't survive, but I suppose they were encouraged to.
I think it may well be that she made up a father - putting her own father's details - perhaps because she was scared and unsure what to do. Back in those days you didn't always have a wedding ring to prove you were married so you could say anything. But perhaps someone locally cottoned on and squealed on her to the authorities and she had to make a declaration to remove the false information.
x
|
|
Thanks for all your replies.
Kate - yes, inventing a father is a possibility. I knew my great gran (she lived until 97) and whilst I never thought of her as timid, she may have been very different back then when she was 19 and possibly a single mother.
Liz - the profession of the man on the birth cert and also her father is a cotton weaver. In the area where they were from, almost everyone worked in a mill so there's nothing odd there. Of course, because the name and occupation are so common, I cannot be 100% sure that the 'father' on the birth cert doesn't exist independently of her own father (if that makes sense?!).
Sister B - re the names. Under the mother's section it says ".... Bentley, formerly Bentley". The additional notes ask for "formerly Bentley" to be omitted, which would make her unmarried I guess. I don't know whether the original was a mistake on the registrar's or my great gran's part, or of course, even a fib by my great gran.
It is frustrating, especially as I am so nosy! I had a chuckle with my mum about it yesterday though - my grandma was very religious so it's really quite ironic if she was illegitimate! ;)
My grandma was born in 1912 so the 1911 census won't show her when that comes online, although it will show if my great gran was still single and living at home. I can't wait to see 1921 because it may show if there was a 'dad' around for my gran. It's a long wait to see that online - is it possible to see it at any of the records offices?
Many thanks for all your help.
cheers.
|
|
Hi, I'm a bit unsure of the names here.
When you say the certificate alteration 'omits' the 'formerly' before her maiden name, do you mean that she gave a 'married' name? And do you mean that was the same as her maiden name?
But just to clarify birth certificates: the registrar doesn't check any information given so theoretically you can say what you like!
If she'd said she was married, all she'd have to do is give a name and occupation for her 'husband' and that would be recorded as fact.
On the other hand, if she'd said she was UNmarried, she should only have been able to give the father's name if he was present when she registered the birth. Sometimes registrars were a bit lax on that rule but that''s what should happen. It's a rule meant to safeguard innocent men from being, unbeknownst to them, recorded as fathering a child when they hadn't! They actually have to be there to sign the book.
But I think your first supposition is quite likely, that she misunderstood the identity of 'father' and perhaps gave her own. Maybe 3 months later it came to the notice of an older family member (the unknown woman) and she pointed out the mistake and marched her down to the register office to change it.
She could also have been too ashamed to give correct details, as Kate says. lllegitimacy was an enormous stigma, both for mother and child, in those days.
So frustrating not to know for sure though isn't it? That's family history for you! oads of frustration with the occasional blinding light of truth at last!
Best of luck,
CC
|
|
I am in a similar situation.A birth certificate of a relative who was adopted shows the father as having the same name as her father and brother. Like you, her maiden name is the same as her supposed married name which I find highly suspect.The surname is quite unusual.
I have no proof, but I think she made it all up. The address supplied does not exsist, there is no trace of a marriage either.
Have you checked the address? Also does the father's profession match up to people in your family?
One thing I'm a bit unsure about is how easy it was to lie. Wouldn't the registrar become suspicious if a maiden name was the same as a married name? Can a mother put any father's name on a birth certificate?
Any way, hope some of this helps you.
|
|
Just wondering if she invented a father for her child - I'm guessing the registrar would not have asked for proof of a marriage of the parents - and, because she couldn't think of another name, used her own father's name?
Either that or, as you say, she misunderstood the registrar's question and because she was unmarried - when asked for the father's details - she thought the registrar knew she was unmarried and assumed he wanted her father's details. It could all depend on the way the registrar phrased it - I am guessing he would ask the relevent questions to fill in the boxes on the certificate.
Also, if she was a really timid person or a young girl, perhaps thinking the registrar would disapprove if she said she was unmarried, she invented a father for the baby to save face - maybe she thought the registrar would take the moral high ground and refuse to register an illegitimate baby?
|
|
Hello all
I've only recently started my tree but I've come up against a puzzle with my maternal grandmother's birth certificate.
I noticed that my great grandmother had the same maiden name as her husband - I thought it coincidence as it's not an unusual name in the area. When I found the 1901 census details for her, I then noticed that her father had the same name and occupation as her 'husband' so I thought I'd check further. I went back to the birth cert and noticed that there are some notes on the right to "omit" the father and his occupation and also to omit the "formerly" before her name (ie her maiden name). This is dated 3 months after the birth and is done "on production of a statutory declaration" from my great grandmother and another woman who I don't know. The records office have told me that they don't keep old copies of the statutory declaration so I am unable to find out the reasons for it.
My mum told me that my grandma used mention her 'dad', and yet the birth cert has him omitted. My mum never met him - we were under the impression that he died fairly young. I haven't managed to find a marriage cert for my great grandmother either, so our presumption that she was married is also possibly wrong,
I'm guessing perhaps one of the following:
1. The father of her baby is not around/she is single, and when my great grandmother registered the birth perhaps she thought she had to give HER father's details because she was unmarried.
2. The father does exist as originally named but he has objected to being on the birth certificate and is consequently removed. (However, this option has the 'coincidental' names and occupations).
3. The unpleasant option: my great grandmother's father is the father of her child. He is entered on to birth certificate for whatever reason, but perhaps they later got it removed because of it's illegality?
I think 1 is the most likely but I'd welcome your comments on the likelihood of any of them, and perhaps other reasons for this correction. If there's no father I'm guessing I've hit a wall with that trail?
I'm also puzzled as to who my grandma's 'dad' was as there was certainly someone assuming this role at some point in her youth - whether that was her real father, her grandfather or some other man, I'm not sure!
Thanks in advance for any help.
Cheers
|
