Genealogy Chat

Hi dont know if Im putting this on the right board, but I dont understand this birth cert that arrived this morning.

It says 1949 birth of Mary Ann in westminster, parents CATHERINE ROSE otherwise lenihan, formerly horgan

and father JOHN ROSE

The child was given the name lenihan, yet the parents were married, and if horgan was her maiden name, then lenihan must be her previously married name. yet shes remarried and states Rose is the father, so why is the child called lenihan.

I really dont understand, please can anyone help, there is no marriage in this country for a horgan and a lenihan unless they married elsewhere.
THANKS CONFUSED AND DESPERATE .. LATEST UPDATE

Birth found 1951 wandsworth area of a ROBERT P ROSE
mmn Horgan, this time he doesnt have two surnames, so I think his parents were married, yet still cant find a marriage of a JOHN ROSE TO A CATHERINE LENIHAN, lenihan being her prev married name and horgan being her maiden name please help

AH Thanks for that, initially before this arrived I looked for a horgan/lenihan marriage, Ive never looked for a lenihan/rose marriage.

so maybe they werent married, and maybe the mother catherine just used his surname

thanks

It is possible that she was still married to her former husband, although living with another.

Where have you looked for the marriage? Free BMD only goes up to about 1930, with a few later exceptions, so you would have to trawl through the indexes quarter by quarter to find anything.

Hi some patient kind person trawled through it for me, and couldnt find it, also we do believe there is a connection to cork for lenihan and horgan.

but didnt know this rose situation till an hour ago

thanks for answering

I cant see a lenihan rose marriage, if anyone else can, can they let me know. thankyou

With names like those, I'ld be tempted to look in Eire. Go to
http://www.familysearch.org/eng/default.asp
and select "Record Search - Record Search pilot" then click on Europe, then Ireland civil regos (BMDs).

thanks for that do you mean for the lenihan horgan marriage

or the rose lenihan marriage

maybe I could check for both there.

thanks for answering

Hi Ive tried that site, not sure how to use it but it doesnt seem to come up with either marriage.

a kind person has found me four possible births for a catherine horgan but we have no way of knowing which one as we have no year of birth, area or fathers name.

the only way out is to find one of these marriages, but I think maybe she never married John Rose

Hi Ive updated this thread from the top, I know I shouldnt delete it or start a new one.

initially we thought these two people werent married as the birth of the daughter was under both surnames, but now another birth has turned up and its registered under one surname, so I think the parents did marry.

can anyone else back this up and find the marriage, the child is Robert p Rose born 1951 Wandsworth, London mmn horgan, but the prev married name is lenihan

thanks

So far the only time I have seen 'otherwise' used is on my great grandmothers death cert, as she used her second 'husbands' surname but never married him, so her death cert also states her name as it 'offically' would have been.

My grandmother is registered twice due to this once under her mother married name and again under the fathers name.

thanks but now mary anns brother ( I think that who it is)

Robert P Rose born 1951 is just registered now under mmn hogan and no other surname

so I think the parents married between 1949 and 1951, I have tried ancestry myself with very little success, can anyone else see a marriage for catherine lenihan and John Rose

thankyou

Hi

I searched between 1949 and 1953 - no marriage for John Rose and Catherine Lenihan/Horgan. They may have married elsewhere....

OR, done what a lot of others have done! This one I know for a fact as it relates to a member of my own family.....and is in the late 1960's.

Alice Brown marrys Joe Blogs - divorces him and lives with new partner. Adopts his surname as her own (nothing illegal in that), therefore when registering the children, her name is now *Smith*, partners name is Smith - ergo children are registered as Smith with mmn Brown.

And if I didn't know the above for a fact - I could spend the rest of my days searching for a non existant marriage! ;-))

Mary

thanks Mary, disappointing, it was to be the only way to get the right years of birth for them both.

so many john rose's