Genealogy Chat
Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!
- The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
- You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
- And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
- The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.
Quick Search
Single word search
Icons
- New posts
- No new posts
- Thread closed
- Stickied, new posts
- Stickied, no new posts
How would someone die of this?
| Profile | Posted by | Options | Post Date |
|---|---|---|---|
|
An Olde Crone | Report | 17 Aug 2006 19:15 |
|
Robyne In answer to your question - no, it was not necessary to prove a cause of death until the law was tightened up in 1875. Not having to prove a cause of death, or indeed, not even having to prove that a death had taken place, led to such widespread abuse (fraudulent insurance claims on burial clubs and a good few murders) that the Government were forced by the financial institutions to change the law. The change in the law meant that a body could not be buried without a Doctor's Certificate of Death, giving a cause of death.Up to this point it had been possible to bury a body without EVER registering the death, let alone registering the death before burial. It should be remembered though, that the Doctor's guess often wasnt any better than anyone elses in those days. OC |
|||
|
Robyne | Report | 17 Aug 2006 19:08 |
|
Thanks you two. whatever it is it doesnt sound nice. i think i will add it to my ever increasing list of ways i dont want to die!! |
|||
|
An Olde Crone | Report | 17 Aug 2006 19:06 |
|
Robyne Well either cancer or some sort of irregular bleeding, perhaps a previous childbirth injury? (They didnt have stitches in those days!) OC |
|||
|
Janet in Yorkshire | Report | 17 Aug 2006 19:06 |
|
It means disorder of the periods, which may, or may not, mean irregularity. Perhaps she had continual bleeding and died of anaemia, or haemorrhage - which could indicate several kinds of nasty causes. Jay |
|||
|
Robyne | Report | 17 Aug 2006 19:03 |
|
Would a doctor not have to give a cause of death in those days? she could have died of anything!!! |
|||
|
Robyne | Report | 17 Aug 2006 19:02 |
|
Her husband was the informant, and im guessing that this sort of thing wasnt mentioned in those days. i wonder if you might be right with possible cancer. i wonder if she was maybe bleeding from there so could have been ovarian or somewhere in those regions. |
|||
|
An Olde Crone | Report | 17 Aug 2006 18:56 |
|
Wonder if it was a euphemism for the dreaded C word (cancer). As it wasnt certified, it could just have been a wild guess on the part of the informant. The Registrar might have coaxed the information out of the informant 'What do you think she died of?' I don't know' Well, had she been ill long?' No, not really, except her periods werent very regular (But I bet it was put a bit more coyly than that) Who was the informant? Man or woman? OC |
|||
|
Robyne | Report | 17 Aug 2006 18:48 |
|
Hi, just got a grandmothers death cert from 1855 and she died from Paramenia (not certified). As far as i can tell this is just irregular periods, and she didnt have a child after 1853 (unless it was stillborn or died before 1861) so dont think its anything to do with childbirth. Have googled for info, but just seems as though its not lethal so just gives 'irregular periods' as a description. Many thanks |
|||