Genealogy Chat

my cousin was registered as a baby in 1974 under her unmarried mum's name as normal with a handwritten - if you look under her dad's name it is hand written on the index at the bottem to see a quarter in 1978 when you go to 1978 she is duely listed again, I only found her cos I know her parents married just before the 2nd child was born so I knew to look under mum's name but checked dad's for clarity.

You clever peeps He has two registrations One in 1979 under his mothers maiden name And the other in 1986 under his parents married names Bless him, he knew they weren't married when he was born, but no-one ever told him about re-registering his name again after they were married and then after I droon on and on about family tree's he decides he is going to look into his families and what is the first thing he looks at............. His own registration - lol he thought he was younger than they had been telling him - lol he wishes, he saw the funny side but my friend wasn't too happy about it all to be honest..... We never thought he would also be there in 1979 under her maiden name Thanks everyone!

I had a similar thing with my boys, born 1995 and 1998. Orginally registered under my maiden name .We married in 2002. And as we'd married we'd legitmised their births( registars words not mine) they needed to be re-registered. The orginal entires are still there, under my maiden name, but i have been assured by the registar that if anyone applies for their certs using the orginal refs, they won't get them, but will get the updated versions from 2002. Tho i agree if some one is researching them in the future, it will be hard to find them. As the person will be looking in 95 and 98 for their current surname... but hey who said this hobby was easy?????

P.s Shirley's comment is much better 'Original entry should still be there with poss a ref to the amendment' check under mothers maiden name and orginal yr of birth.

Have you looked under the mothers maiden name? I'm pretty sure that even if it was registered then the other registration should still be there but perhaps with a notation beside it. Mhairi

Have they checked to see if his original birth is still recorded. I think the amendment they made to his birth constitutes an new entry so thats why its recorded as they did it. His Original entry should still be there with poss a ref to the amendment

I dont know the ins and outs, but they had my name spelt wrongly on the GRO index and I emailed them. In theory the index doesnt show when he was born, simply when he was registered. Have you checked to see if he is still under her maiden name in the year of his birth? If you go to the GRO site you can probably query this for her.

If they were unmarried, he would have had to have been there in person to register the birth, for the cert to contain his name

My friends son was born in 1979 When they went to register his birth because my friend and her now husband at that time weren't married they had to register him without the fathers name ( I think that the reason ) Later when they got married (1986) they went back and changed the birth cert etc But now when you search on ancestry he show 's as been born in 1986!! Is there anything they can do about this?? In years to come if anyone is researching their family history it will be so inaccurate