RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => Topic started by: brionne on Saturday 18 May 19 08:46 BST (UK)
-
Just a had look at the latest royal babes birth certificate in printed format, published in one of the main UK newspapers yesterday.
Notice that there is no mention of the childs mothers previous married name,just her maiden name.
Why is this.
-
Because, so far as I am aware, a BC only asks for maiden name not all previous names
Added: Just checked BCs in my file and the column is : "Name, surname and maiden name of mother"
-
Because that's not one of the bits of information that is required.
Only the name she is known by at the time the baby is born, her maiden name, and the surname she married in ( if not the same as her maiden name) are needed.
I'm not sure she ever used her previous husband's name anyway ?
-
They used to have maiden name and I have also had "formerly" on previous birth certs, I have a few here, helped a great deal with research
Louisa Maud
-
My daughter was married and divorced. She later remarried and had two children in 2002 and 2005. On their Birth Certificates it only her maiden name that appears. After her divorce she had reverted back to her maiden name.
This is in Scotland.
Dorrie
-
Thanks for the interesting four varied replies,and time taken to reply.
Also it would appear that former names are no longer required to be entered,perhaps due to so many children being born in unmarried relationships these days.Must admit having as much detail as possible has always helped with research,especially when one of the parents has married several times. [speaking generally now, without any reference to the unnamed person in my initial post.]
-
Former names are asked for but they don't have to be shown and many people ask that they aren't.
For instance a woman may not want her ex-husband's surname mentioned at all on the birth certificate of a child from a new marriage.
-
I agree with you about so many children being born to unmarried parents nowadays. My niece has two children to different partners. On each occasion when registering the birth both parents had to attend the Registrars.
One good thing now is that a child no longer has the word "illegitimate" on their Birth Certificate.
This has caused heartache for many in the past.
Dorrie
-
Yes,strongly in favour of everyone having the right to their correct birth details.
In some cases so much was covered up years ago,fathers name left blank,money changing hands,for certificates with completely made up details.
Lets hope this type of scenario is a thing of the past.
-
In these days of computers it is easier for the registrar they can enter a name etc and all the information they need is there at the press of a button.
Going back to the "old days". My mum was born in 1918 and due to circumstances of WW1 was fostered. Legal adoption was not available in Scotland until 1928/1929 I think. Her birth mother who kept in contact and gave financial support gave permission for mum to use her foster parents surname. Mum was 14 before she was told about this.
On her birth certificate is the Surname of Patrick and obviously illegitimate.
On her marriage certificate it states Lovell formerly Patrick.
On the birth certificates of her two daughters it gives mother's maiden name as Lovell.
On her death certificate it gives her maiden name as Patrick - The Registrar would not include the surname of Lovell.
Dorrie
-
Dowdstree,What an interesting story.
At least you were made aware of your circumstances,my own family were so secretive.
Now all passed on so nobody to ask.
I have very early memories of being in another country.
Being on a large ship in wartime,with unknown females.
Sailors in uniform,made quoits with rope on deck,remember throwing one overboard, I was very small.got a good hiding,taken below to a dark cabin with other wooden bunks stacked up. the memory has never left me.Others in the cabin complained about my crying.
My birth certificate with a stamp,states 1941,born in a private nursing home in Wiltshire.I can remember VE Day and the flags.
Perhaps am not supposed to find out the rights of this,but would dearly like to.
I have spent a fortune on trying to get to the bottom of this,my early records if any,must be in another unknown name. Brionne.
-
Thank you Brionne. My mum always felt she was "inadequate" for some reason. Unfortunately her foster father passed away when she was only 8 and her foster mother when she was 20. She always had an uneasy relationship with her birth mother. However, that is another long story.
I cannot even begin to imagine how you must feel. What horrible first memories you have. I assume that you were legally adopted and have tried to gain access to your records in England with no luck.
As you say you have already spent a fortune but sometimes it's not about the money but seeking the truth.
Good Luck,
Dorrie
-
In some cases so much was covered up years ago,fathers name left blank,
Even today, for unmarried parents the father must attend the birth registration to be named on the certificate
-
In these days of computers it is easier for the registrar they can enter a name etc and all the information they need is there at the press of a button.
There is no link between birth, marriage, and death records so they can't be cross referenced at all. Looking up stuff on computer is specifically not allowed - the registrar must take the information from the informant, checking a year or place of birth on Ancestry (or similar) is a big no-no.
On her marriage certificate it states Lovell formerly Patrick.
...
On her death certificate it gives her maiden name as Patrick - The Registrar would not include the surname of Lovell.
Maybe a quirk of Scottish registration but under the rules of GRO in England/Wales her maiden name should be recorded as Lovell (being the name she first married under).
Even today, for unmarried parents the father must attend the birth registration to be named on the certificate
True - it was always a shame when a mother desperately wanted the father's name to be put on the register, but he wasn't there so the law doesn't allow it.
-
Marmalady,Thanks for your input on this. I had no idea that my original post would evolve like this.
Have been researching for years,but still have so much to learn.
-
AntonyMMM - the only thing we took with us when we registered my mother's death in 2010 was her marriage certificate. The registrar did something on her computer and said her maiden name would have to be Patrick. We rightly or wrongly assumed that she had checked her original birth registration.
We certainly did not give her any information on mum's background.
On Edinburgh Electoral Registers prior to mum's marriage in 1945 she is Lovell.
Dorrie
-
AntonyMMM - the only thing we took with us when we registered my mother's death in 2010 was her marriage certificate. The registrar did something on her computer and said her maiden name would have to be Patrick. We rightly or wrongly assumed that she had checked her original birth registration.
We certainly did not give her any information on mum's background.
On Edinburgh Electoral Registers prior to mum's marriage in 1945 she is Lovell.
Dorrie
Scotland (?) have a different system and different rules, so can't help with that.
-
brionne your reply #8
My 1st husband now deceased was born in 1934. He was brought up by his mother - who incidentally had been widowed in 1925 - so this gentleman could not have been his father. He was given some details regarding his father's name, occupation and so on. There is what we call an RCE here in Scotland - a Register of corrected entries.
Some years after his death I was researching at Scotlands People and was able to look at the RCE which named his father. Being curious I asked a member of staff about this and was told his birth was open to reregistration. We completed the paperwork and I now have an amended birth certificate to pass on to his children and grandsons.
Dorrie
-
Dorrie,so is it possible that I was born somewhere else earlier in 1941, abroad say.
Trying to get my head around this.
How do I proceed about finding out from here, thanks Brionne.
-
The law is that a birth must be registered in the district in which it took place, so you can't have been born somewhere else.
Stan
-
Birth could be earlier in the same year than the registration shows.
-
Parents are allowed 42 days to register a birth, if not they could be fined, a friend of mine's father had a different birth date from his actual birth because he we registered late, parents obviously lied, only a few days but no one found out till he had died.
You must have been registered where you were born, your birth cert must be right
Louisa Maud
-
There is a fine for none registration, not late registration.
Stan
-
Really Stan, I was always led to believe there was charge for late registration
Louisa Maud
-
Thanks everyone for all your input.
DNA Test may be helpful.
Which is the best firm to use.
-
Parents are allowed 42 days to register a birth, if not they could be fined,
Really Stan, I was always led to believe there was charge for late registration
Louisa Maud
A penalty not exceeding £2 was introduced in Section 39 of the 1874 Registration of Births & Deaths Act, for the non-registration of a birth (the wording of the Act is actually for “failing to give information concerning the birth…….. as required by the said Acts”). http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1874/88/pdfs/ukpga_18740088_en.pdf
Under the 1836 Registration Act, If the birth was not registered within forty-two days there was also a fee of two Shillings and Sixpence entitlement for the Superintendent Registrar, and five shillings for the registrar, Section XXII. http://www.rootschat.com/links/0mvp/
Stan
-
I can't find any information about people being fined for non-registration. I don't think there would be many, how would they be found out? The possibility of a fine was probably put in the act to encourage registration.
The current fine for non-registration would appear to be a maximum of £200 See https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/what_is_the_maximum_penalty_for
Stan
-
I can tell you as late as circa 1920 a birth registration has never been found to date, parents were still together and all previous children were registered,
I am sure pre 1875 there were many not registered didn't it become law about 1875?
Louisa Maud
-
I can tell you as late as circa 1920 a birth registration has never been found to date, parents were still together and all previous children were registered,
I am sure pre 1875 there were many not registered didn't it become law about 1875?
Louisa Maud
It became law in 1837, although some people failed to do so, believing that baptism sufficed. Prior to 1875 it was the responsibility of the Registrar to go out and seek out the births, from 1875 the onus was on the parents, or someone present at the birth to go and register the birth.
-
Thank you for clearing that up Jebber,
Louisa Maud
-
Thank you for giving details of the law as it stands.
Believe during the wartime period early 1940s things were much more relaxed.
DNA next.
-
I can tell you as late as circa 1920 a birth registration has never been found to date, parents were still together and all previous children were registered,
I am sure pre 1875 there were many not registered didn't it become law about 1875?
Louisa Maud
It became law in 1837, although some people failed to do so, believing that baptism sufficed. Prior to 1875 it was the responsibility of the Registrar to go out and seek out the births, from 1875 the onus was on the parents, or someone present at the birth to go and register the birth.
See https://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=804060.msg6622711#msg6622711
Stan
-
I know someone, well knew who had 2 birthdays. Her actual birthday and the one on her birth certificate. Her Dad had been late going to register and lied to avoid the fine. He didn't tell anyone else. She only found out when she was an adult and applied for a passport.
-
PharmaT Interesting.Due to my old wartime memories I am looking into this subject.
To all intents and purposes my birth certificate is quite ok.
I know that its one day out.5th not 6th as entered.
I never had a passport,was always on my husbands [ex soldier]
After divorce 1980 I applied for one.
This came with explanation that I qualified re changes under the 1981 Emmigration Act.
Out of my depth on the legal side.
Sorry exact details not to hand.