General Chat

Don't know why everyone is worrying about the certificate - looks a though there might not be any!

It's all going digital - no parish register to sign either.

What a shame :-|

Another bit of family uncertainty -

Archive on 4 - BBC Radio4 this evening at 8pm. Topic: 'The Death of illegitimacy'.

Not a chance.

Chope's constituency is Christchurch nr Bournemouth.
It has a large and well organised UKIP branch which promises to install its own MP if Chope goes and the Tories propose anything other than a very hard line brexiter.
The last thing May needs right now is a bye election she cannot win.

Chope may well end up in the Lords but not this year.

They may be thinking about kicking him upstairs, Rollo. :-0

It's a start. :-D

And then what?

Amber Rudd has made it clear that she will not give government time to the proposed change. C Chope MP has a long record of blocking many very worthy private member's bills and this one will be no exception. Chope objects to all and any private member bills on general principle. He has been allowed to get away with very undemocratic behaviour for far too long.

As he has recently been knighted we must assume his approach is ok with no.10. The bill will probably fail.

Well England/Wales ***civil partnership certificates*** do have the mothers name.aswell as the fathers name.


:-).

Someone may know but I have a feeling that it is difficult to get a hard copy of a cert if the person/people are still alive unless you are the person or a close relly.

I do know that when registering the death of my grandmother, my uncle gave the wrong date of birth. When he died a cousin wrote to ask them to make a change and without her birth certificate they would not do so. I have it but we decided not to bother.

I have used the GRO Register online because it gives mmn. It fills in the gap to 1917. It has raised one anomaly in the family. More than 100 years ago the MOTHER was not the person we expected so we now wonder whether the child was born following an affair and raised by the father and his wife. One of us probably going to buy the BC to see whether it's an error.

I agree that hard copies are essential even though I have one with false information on it.

Well that's fine and good. Just the small matter of getting Christopher Chope MP (bane of private member's bills) on side. Given Chope's heated opposition to all previous changes in marriage law people had best not count their chickens.

I'd be happy to see it.

I was not married to son's father ( now deceased) .

His name will be on son's marriage cert ( if son marries lol). But for future generations who might want to research their tree it will help to know that my son's surname is mine, and that I wasn't married.

At very least it would save them some time working it out :-)

I'm not sure whether it's traditional Maggie but some members of my family (not only Scottish ones) do have - both sons and daughters. I am not one of them,

In the Netherlands, France and many other countries details of births, deaths and marriages are considered totally confidential such that they are only available to immediate relatives for 100 years from the creation of a record. The chances of in laws, cousins etc being able to access a family's BMD records without permission from the family is nil. They can ask the pater familias and will have to live with the answer.

Such a scheme is fine when everybody is on good terms and the relationships known. Again fine when the person is in reasonable standing but some might not wish to see a name on their marriage cert. As it is one of my GGM put down "Grand Old Duke of York" for her father and it took over 100 years to work out the truth.

Where that doesn't apply the registrar may just have to settle for a blank. As it is around a third of children are born to parents not in a formal relationship. Insisting on MIL's name on the marriage cert would be no encouragement for many.

It would be a super mega mistake to abandon the hard copy register. An electronic only register would be wide open to all kinds of abuse.

Fully agree, JoyLouise!

Am I right in thinking it used to be traditional for the daughter to have the mother's surname as well?

It is about time the mothers' names were on the MCs. The Scottish certificate for one set of my great-great grandparents has that information on it; mother's married name and maiden name.

The information on the DCs for my gg and ggg uncles is much better than the info on the English DCs.

The BCs in Oz have mother's maiden name, age and birthplace as well as the father's, and the names and ages, living or deceased of previous issue of the parents.

I'd say it's about time England caught up.

Kath :-D :-D :-D

..Which is why I think the mother's name should be on the marriage certificate :-D

It's about time England recognised the mother is as important as the father in aspects of genetic field/upbringing/wealth.

The days have long passed when a woman gave up all her possessions/money etc to her husband on marriage.

I don't think the parentage of in laws is or will be an issue on marriage certts.
Just how is MIL's name to be entered? Presumably following GRO convention it will be her maiden name.

Not everybody is in possession of such details as parent's names in any case. There is plenty of evidence that the father's name is often someting of a guess so there is no reason for the MIL name to be any different.

Sure add the name if both bride and groom are happy to do so but don't make it compulsory.

One of my late mother's sayings:-

Mother's baby,
Daddy's - maybe!!

Kath. x

Well, a mother knows almost definitely that the baby's hers - does the father know if it's his!!! :-0

OK only if it is optional.

I totally agree.

Kath. x

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42919441

Probably about time.

Andy