1939.....amazing what you cannot find

[mike175]

Thanks Carol, that explains a lot. I must have missed those other threads. I will be submitting corrections, as I always do with any errors on FindMyPast and Ancestry.

I decided to renew my subscription after a few months' lapse, mainly to gain access to the 1939 Register. It has exceeded my expectations in its usefulness; one of the biggest benefits so far has been providing/confirming dates of birth.

Mike.

[Treetotal]

Whilst I understand the process of adding both maiden and married names to the register...I have one entry where the lady in question remarried in 1944 after losing her first husband in the second world war...however, her two sons have the surname of their Father who was still alive in 1939 but their Mother's married name is crossed out and replaced by her second husband's name...this could be misconstrued as it appears as though it is her maiden name and that she isn't married to the Father of the children.

I too have many absentees...but I can be patient as it is a great resource to have at your fingertips 

Carol

[rosie99]

It should not be taken that the surname quoted on the 1938 register is the maiden name - it is the name they were known as on the date the register was taken.  It is only the maiden name if the woman did not marry before then.

[Treetotal]

Do you mean 1939?...but the name she was known as at the time the register was taken has been crossed out Rosie?
Carol

[smudwhisk]

It would show as crossed out because she remarried in 1944.

As Rosie says, the surname they are shown as on the Register is the surname they were using in 1939.  If they were already married, it won't show their maiden name.  That wasn't the intention of the Register.

[Treetotal]

That's not the issue here...the issue is that they crossed out her married name of who she was married to in 1939 and her children of that marriage are named and her name has been altered to her husband's name of 1944...that doesn't make sense to me as her children have their Father's name and her name is listed as her married name as of 1944....why cross out the name she was known as in 1939?
Carol

[Mean_genie]

When the lady re-married in 1944 she would have taken her new husband's name, and part of that involved going to the Local National Registration Office to get a new identity card in her new name. Then the local office notified the Central Register, and her new name was recorded there. This was a legal requirement until 1952, when National Registration ended. By then the Register was being used for NHS purposes, and changes of name continued to be recorded in it until 1991.   

[Treetotal]

Thanks for that MG...that makes sense....but I don't understand why they crossed her name out...another rellie who had been married before had both surnames listed without them being  crossed out...Whilst I understand the need to update....I can't see the reason for crossing her previous married name out.
Carol

[ScouseBoy]

There are those women who get divorced, and then at some point subsequently (maybe years later ) start using their maiden name once again.