Author Topic: Single Mothers 1934 - Birkett baby left behind.  (Read 508 times)

Offline vdavison

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 5
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Single Mothers 1934 - Birkett baby left behind.
« on: Monday 12 February 18 16:37 GMT (UK) »
Please advise.

A family member gave birth in 1934 in Goole. She then moved away for 4 years over 200 miles away leaving the baby behind. She met a gentleman and returned to Goole where they married. They then collected the now 4 year old, changed his surname to her new husbands name and they returned to their town and lived happily ever after.

I am trying to find the real father. I can not find any marriage for her previously or any record of a baptism for the baby in his real name.

What would happen with a baby born out of wedlock? Where would he go for 4 years in 1934?
Would he have a new birth certificate as he had changed his surname?

Any advice would be gratefully received.

Thank you

RootsChat is the busiest, largest free family history forum site in the country. It is completely free to use. Register now.
Also register instantly with Facebook or Twitter (and other social networks). Start your genealogy search now.


Online CaroleW

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 55,092
  • Barney 1993-2004
    • View Profile
Re: Single Mothers 1934 - Birkett baby left behind.
« Reply #1 on: Monday 12 February 18 16:55 GMT (UK) »
Do you have a copy of the 1934 birth cert?  If no father is named on it then you stand virtually no chance of establishing his paternity.  If no father is on the birth cert then itís equally unlikely he would appear on any possible baptismal record

Did her husband legally adopt the child or was the child just given the husbands surname?
Census Information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

RootsChat is the busiest, largest free family history forum site in the country. It is completely free to use. Register now.
Also register instantly with Facebook or Twitter (and other social networks). Start your genealogy search now.


Online groom

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 20,071
  • Me aged 3. Tidied up thanks to Wiggy.
    • View Profile
Re: Single Mothers 1934 - Birkett baby left behind.
« Reply #2 on: Monday 12 February 18 18:14 GMT (UK) »
Quote
Where would he go for 4 years in 1934?

If she left him in Goole possibly she left him with her parents or another relative. The fact that she went back to collect him makes it sound as if it was a private arrangement, rather than anything official.
Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline avm228

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 20,279
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Single Mothers 1934 - Birkett baby left behind.
« Reply #3 on: Monday 12 February 18 19:04 GMT (UK) »
Is Birkett the surname?  I canít see a relevant birth registration in Goole district in 1934.
Ayr: Barnes, Wylie
Caithness: MacGregor
Essex: Eldred (Pebmarsh)
Gloucs: Timbrell (Winchcomb)
Hants: Stares (Wickham)
Lincs: Maw, Jackson (Epworth, Belton)
London: Pierce
Suffolk: Markham (Framlingham)
Surrey: Gosling (Richmond)
Wilts: Matthews, Tarrant (Calne, Preshute)
Worcs: Milward (Redditch)
Yorks: Beaumont, Crook, Moore, Styring (Huddersfield); Middleton (Church Fenton); Exley, Gelder (High Hoyland); Barnes, Birchinall (Sheffield); Kenyon, Wood (Cumberworth/Denby Dale)

Offline vdavison

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 5
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Single Mothers 1934 - Birkett baby left behind.
« Reply #4 on: Monday 12 February 18 20:24 GMT (UK) »
Thank you everybody. Yes, she was Margaret Birkett and gave birth to Removed Birkett in 1934. She got married in 1938 and returned to Bishops Castle with the baby and the new husband.
I haven't applied for the 1934 birth certificate yet, maybe I should.
Maybe it was just a private arrangement and we will never find out who the father was.

The gentlemen in question is still with us and says he hasn't got his birth certificate. It seems his birth wasn't register for nearly 12 months!

Offline avm228

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 20,279
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Single Mothers 1934 - Birkett baby left behind.
« Reply #5 on: Monday 12 February 18 20:28 GMT (UK) »
Ah - youíll probably be asked to edit out his first name on here if he is still living, under Rootschat policy. 

Search www.freebmd.org.uk for index details of the registration to enable you to order a birth certificate from GRO Online (Iím afraid I still canít see it, even with the new information).

Ayr: Barnes, Wylie
Caithness: MacGregor
Essex: Eldred (Pebmarsh)
Gloucs: Timbrell (Winchcomb)
Hants: Stares (Wickham)
Lincs: Maw, Jackson (Epworth, Belton)
London: Pierce
Suffolk: Markham (Framlingham)
Surrey: Gosling (Richmond)
Wilts: Matthews, Tarrant (Calne, Preshute)
Worcs: Milward (Redditch)
Yorks: Beaumont, Crook, Moore, Styring (Huddersfield); Middleton (Church Fenton); Exley, Gelder (High Hoyland); Barnes, Birchinall (Sheffield); Kenyon, Wood (Cumberworth/Denby Dale)

Offline avm228

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 20,279
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Single Mothers 1934 - Birkett baby left behind.
« Reply #6 on: Monday 12 February 18 20:32 GMT (UK) »
Canít see the marriage either ???
Ayr: Barnes, Wylie
Caithness: MacGregor
Essex: Eldred (Pebmarsh)
Gloucs: Timbrell (Winchcomb)
Hants: Stares (Wickham)
Lincs: Maw, Jackson (Epworth, Belton)
London: Pierce
Suffolk: Markham (Framlingham)
Surrey: Gosling (Richmond)
Wilts: Matthews, Tarrant (Calne, Preshute)
Worcs: Milward (Redditch)
Yorks: Beaumont, Crook, Moore, Styring (Huddersfield); Middleton (Church Fenton); Exley, Gelder (High Hoyland); Barnes, Birchinall (Sheffield); Kenyon, Wood (Cumberworth/Denby Dale)

Offline Annette7

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 5,823
    • View Profile
Re: Single Mothers 1934 - Birkett baby left behind.
« Reply #7 on: Monday 12 February 18 20:38 GMT (UK) »
I agree with avm228 - there is no birth entry for him in Goole 1934 nor can I see a marriage there for his mother in 1938.

Annette
Scopes (One-Name Study - Worldwide)
Suffolk - Grist, Knights, Bullenthorpe, Watcham
Scotland - Spence, Horne, Cowan, Moffat
London -  Monk

Don't walk behind me, I may not lead.   Don't walk in front of me, I may not follow.   Just walk beside me and be my friend.

Census Information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline vdavison

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 5
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Single Mothers 1934 - Birkitt baby left behind.
« Reply #8 on: Monday 12 February 18 20:43 GMT (UK) »
It would help if I spelt the name right. (Rolling my eyes right now.....)

Birkitt    Removed    Birkitt    Hull    9d   476