RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => Topic started by: CelticMom on Thursday 18 October 18 23:05 BST (UK)
-
Why would a birth be on the birth index twice. Once in 1972 and again in 1984. 1972 is when the person was born, so why is it on the index again in 1984?
-
England or Scotland?
-
Did the parents marry each other in 1984?
Did they need a passport for the child and realise that something was registered incorrectly on the birth cert?
-
Parents married in 1973, but again in 1983 (long story) - all the children were reregistered in 1984 under the same names.
-
Parents married in 1973, but again in 1983 (long story) - all the children were reregistered in 1984 under the same names.
Where - England/Ireland/Scotland? You have posted on the Common Room board so no clues at to location?
-
Parents married in 1973, but again in 1983 (long story) - all the children were reregistered in 1984 under the same names.
From the GRO site
"If the parents have married after the child was born, they are required to re-register the birth to have the natural father’s details added to the birth record." So if this was England or Wales it looks as if that may be what has happened.
-
It was in England, sorry I though I put that already.
It doesn’t make sense though as they father was mentioned in the original birth cert, the names are also no different the were all registered under the fathers name originally, so I’m confused as to why they were all reregisteded again in 1984. I didn’t think this was possible?
It’s very likely the marriage in 1973 was not legal because he wasn’t divorced from first marriage, so this perhaps explains the second marriage to the same woman 10 years later, but not the reregistering of the children, as all names etc are the same.
Sorry if that’s not very clear. All people are living, so can’t give names.
-
.
It’s very likely the marriage in 1973 was not legal because he wasn’t divorced from first marriage, so this perhaps explains the second marriage to the same woman 10 years later, but not the reregistering of the children, as all names etc are the same.
That doesn’t make any difference, if the first marriage wasn’t legal, it would be the same as if it had never taken place. Therefore, when they married the second time, in order to make the children legitimate, they would have to register them again.
“If the parents have married after the child was born, they are legally required to re-register the birth. This is the case even if the father is already on the child’s birth certificate. This particular requirement stems from The Legitimacy Act, section 9. “ That Act was 1976.”
-
And copy certificates will be made from the later entries, which show that the parents are married to each other.
Melbell
-
I have come across a birth registered in the same quarter and year ( still living) but as the parents weren't married one entry was in the mother's surname and the other in the father's surname.
First names are the same
So one person has two birth certs!
I wouldn't have believed this could happen legally
-
They only have one birth cert ! It's just that it's been indexed twice under both parents names.
-
No there will only be one birth certificate. Look at the ref numbers, are they the same?
It’s perfectly normal. My great nephew and his two sisters are on the register 3 times. His parents aren’t married. He is indexed once as John Brown * ( mother’s name) once as John Smith (father’s name) and once as John Smith-Brown ( the name he uses) His birth certificate is in the name of John Smith- Brown. There is only one birth certificate.
* not real name.
-
Thank you Carole. (edited)
That's a worry off my mind
Wonder if the baby was asked to choose which one!
-
Yes Groom - the ref nos are the same
Thanks for your explanation
-
I have come across a birth registered in the same quarter and year ( still living) but as the parents weren't married one entry was in the mother's surname and the other in the father's surname.
First names are the same
So one person has two birth certs!
I wouldn't have believed this could happen legally
Quote finishes here.
All certificates are copies of entries in the register. If the person re-registered already has a copy certificate (of the first entry) it will still be valid, but future copies will be produced from the second (amended) entry.
There is always a lot of confusion about the original registration(s) and the copies made from it/them!! There's nothing illegal going on at all.
Melbell
-
So because the marriage in 1973 was not legal because he was already married even though a marriage certificate existed for it. When he married her again in 1983 legally when the divorce finally came through they would have had to reregister the children’s births even though it was 10 years later? And the children’s names didn’t change? I didn’t know a child’s birth registration could appear twice in the index only in the year they were born. So that’s interesting to know.
-
I have come across a birth registered in the same quarter and year ( still living) but as the parents weren't married one entry was in the mother's surname and the other in the father's surname.
First names are the same
So one person has two birth certs!
I wouldn't have believed this could happen legally
Quote finishes here.
All certificates are copies of entries in the register. If the person re-registered already has a copy certificate (of the first entry) it will still be valid, but future copies will be produced from the second (amended) entry.
There is always a lot of confusion about the original registration(s) and the copies made from it/them!! There's nothing illegal going on at all
Melbell
Thanks Melbell
We live, and learn, about all these complications. You're right about the confusion!
-
If the person re-registered already has a copy certificate (of the first entry) it will still be valid, but future copies will be produced from the second (amended) entry.
Not necessarily. It depends where you apply, and what you ask for. I recently applied to the GRO for a 1900 birth that I knew had been re-registered in 1933 (under the 1926 Legitimacy Act). I ordered the 1900 record on the standard online order form, and that is the certificate I received.
-
Re-Registration is a complex subject, little understood by most researchers (myself included, before I worked as a registrar).
Births can be re-registered for a number of reasons - and often are - the most common being to add an unmarried father who was not named on the original entry, and to legitimise a birth after the later marriage of the parents.
The main thing is that a re-registration creates a new register entry, which can be months or often years after the original event (an 1892 birth being re-registered in 1939 is the longest I have found so far). The new entry can be in the same name, or a different name(s), depending on the circumstances.
Corrections to entries, which are a completely different thing, do not create a new register entry, although they might mean an amendment to the original index entry.
It is possible, and advisable, when researching such a birth to get copies of all the relevant entries.
-
Yes, I agree. Bookbox was ordering an 'historic' certificate for research purposes. I was talking about a person wanting a certificate for his/her own use and therefore needing one from the second registration, showing up-dated personal information.
Melbell