RootsChat.Com
Research in Other Countries => United States of America => Topic started by: Erato on Sunday 17 December 17 18:42 GMT (UK)
-
How are still births recorded in California? Are they in the birth index? Are they in the death index? Are they in both? The birth I am interested in was recorded in 1943, so no names mentioned. I am coming to suspect it was a still birth but I can't find any death record that corresponds to the birth.
-
There's a separate register but only mother or father have access (not sure how far back these records were kept)-
https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CHSI/Pages/Vital-Records-Obtaining-Certified-Copies-of-Fetal-Death--Still-Birth-Records.aspx
Added- could the birth have been registered under mother's maiden name?
-
The child is recorded in the California birth index. She has first and last names. The mother's surname is recorded and, since it is not especially common, and since the birth occurred in Los Angeles, I am quite sure I have the right family. I can find no record of her death or marriage. She does not appear in family photographs with her younger siblings [whose births were also recorded in LA]. She is not mentioned in her parents' obituaries though the other two children were mentioned.
-
Bottom line - I still don't understand whether still births are recorded as births, deaths, both or neither.
-
If a child is recorded in the California birth index then it was a live birth. Doesn't matter whether the infant only lived 2 hours or 2 days, a birth and a death record will be recorded.
A stillborn infant is not a live birth and would not appear in the California birth index.
Being that the child you mention name(birth) appears in the California birth index then it was a live birth and whether a still birth/born is recorded is kinda a moot point. I'm certain still birth/born don't appear on the CADI.
-
In short, then, there are three indices: 1) births [live only]; 2) deaths [not including still births]; and 3) still births [which amounts to a combination birth and death listing]. So I will take it as a given that hers was a live birth. What became of her thereafter is a mystery since, aside from the birth index, I can find no other record attached to her name. Absolutely none.
-
So I will take it as a given that hers was a live birth. What became of her thereafter is a mystery since, aside from the birth index, I can find no other record attached to her name. Absolutely none.
Could the family moved out of state (even for a short period) and she died somewhere other than California? or could she be known by another first/middle name(s)?
-
"Could the family moved out of state (even for a short period) and she died somewhere other than California?"
That is a possibility but I think it's a remote one. The second and third children were born in LA in 1944 and 1949. The family lived at the same address well into the 1950s. The family moved away from California in about 1969. When the mother died in 1979, only two children were mentioned in her obituary. And when the father died in 1986, those two children were listed and it was noted that he had been predeceased by his wife but no deceased daughter was mentioned.
Theories:
1) She did not use her given name, perhaps used a nickname or a middle name, instead; grew up leaving no trace and eventually got married outside of California; died young, before 1979; was inexplicably omitted from mention in her parents' obituaries.
2) Even though her birth was registered under her father's surname, she was born before they were actually married, was given up for adoption and received a new name. She may or may not still be alive.
She isn't an important figure in my family tree - a second cousin. But I was curious.
-
I'll give you theory #3 that popped into my head when you first mentioned this - maybe there was a serious disability and she was institutionalized. Or she didn't appear in pictures because of that. I believe that sort of thing was unfortunately common in that era.
The 1950 census release is only 5 years away, so maybe that will clear up some mysteries.
-
Yes, that's another possibility. I can wait five years and, meanwhile, turn my attention to the other disappeared and problem individuals who plague the fringes of my tree.
-
...Theories:...
2) Even though her birth was registered under her father's surname, she was born before they were actually married, was given up for adoption and received a new name. She may or may not still be alive.
This is a bit late for a reply, but I was looking through California threads and found yours.
Was she born before the marriage, or it is a theory that she could have been born before their marriage? If she was born before their marriage, she could have been adopted soon after birth. It is possible that her siblings were never told which could explain why she was not mentioned in an obituary.
Also, do you know if the couple ever visited family (outside of their area)? Perhaps they visited family members soon after the baby's birth and the little girl passed away while they were in another state?
-
"Was she born before the marriage, or it is a theory that she could have been born before their marriage?"
Just a theory; I don't know the date of the marriage.
Out of state relatives?
Possible, but only remotely so.