Mother of record

[EdCan]

I have parents who show as having a child in 1924. They married in 1902 and had children in 1903/04 and 05. The 1904 birth was for a daughter. Because of the large gap in birth years my guess is that the 1924 birth was the 1902 daughter but no way to prove it. The mother of record could be the actual mother since she would have been 42 in 1924.
I assume that I have no choice but follow the records. How do others handle the 1924 birth

Ed

[lizdb]

I would take the mother as the person named as such on the birth cert.  Why question something that is quite possible. If the alleged mother had been in her 70's then clearly something was not right.

These things happen - I know of a couple who had two children, then when they were off to Uni had a little late surprise!

[keyboard86]

Did the 1924 birth have the same maiden name as those in 1903/4/5?
Keyboard86

[EdCan]

Yes it did

Ed

[keyboard86]

Yes it did

Ed

Well the maiden name of the daughter would not be the same as her mother?
Unless of course the marriage was not a Smith to a Smith Jones/Jones etc?!
Keyboard86

[Jomot]

I had a similar situation in my family where the birth certificate gave the names of what I suspected were actually the grandparents. 

Fortunately in the next census he was listed as the nephew of what should have been his sister (according to the birth certificate), and he was baptised at aged 13 as the child of the eldest daughter of the couple named on the birth certificate.

I think all you can do is keep an open mind and follow the records looking for other clues.

[Sinann]

My grandparents married in 1904 and my mother was born in 1928, she is defiantly theirs (lots of proof) so it does happen.

[Daisypetal]

Hi,

I have a friend who became a grandmother when she was 42 then the next year found out she was pregnant, so now her son is younger than her grandson. So it definitely does happen

Regards
Daisy