Child born in 1923, adopted in 1944

[Deirdre784]

Bit of a puzzle i’ve been asked to look into.... a child supposedly born to a couple in 1923 was adopted by the mother in 1944 shortly before her re-marriage (her first husband and supposed father of the child had died in 1941). The child’s date of birth was a few weeks out on the 1939 compared to the date given on the adoption certificate. There is no birth record in the child’s name on freeBMD, find my past or ancestry.

To me, it’s simple. The child wasn’t born to the couple as believed, but was informally adopted and brought up by them. With the impending 2nd marriage the ‘mother’ sought to formalise her daughter’s position (her husband-to-be had children from his first marriage). Maybe the real date of birth was only discovered when the adoption was going through, hence the difference on the 1939. Does this make sense?

What birth certificate would the child have? They have what i believe is a short certificate, literally giving her name, sex, date of birth and country of birth, dated in 1954.

Not looking to name names as it’s not my family and I don’t know if any family members are still alive, but any comments welcome.

Thanks.

[avm228]

Did the adoption take place shortly before the 21st birthday of the “child”?  This would I think have been the pressing deadline for formalising the relationship, as in the UK only a minor can be adopted.

When did the mother marry the supposed father?  Did they have any other children?

[chempat]

'They have what i believe is a short certificate, literally giving her name, sex, date of birth and country of birth, dated in 1954.'

Apply for long certificate?

[avm228]

'They have what i believe is a short certificate, literally giving her name, sex, date of birth and country of birth, dated in 1954.'

Apply for long certificate?

I presumed that this was a reference to the short form certificate issued on adoption (which contains very few details).  There should of course be a standard birth registration in 1923 but the birth name is not known.

[dowdstree]

Until 1970 the age of majority was 21 when it was dropped to 18 (16 in Scotland).

The process would need to have been started before her 21 birthday from what I believe.

Dorrie

[avm228]

Until 1970 the age of majority was 21 when it was dropped to 18 (16 in Scotland).

The process would need to have been started before her 21 birthday from what I believe.

Indeed.  I suggested upthread that this is likely to have been the pressing deadline motivating the adoption in 1944.

[Deirdre784]

Did the adoption take place shortly before the 21st birthday of the “child”?  This would I think have been the pressing deadline for formalising the relationship, as in the UK only a minor can be adopted.

When did the mother marry the supposed father?  Did they have any other children?

She was born on 30 April 1923 and the adoption went through on 18 April 1944.

The parents were married in 1918. No other children.

[Deirdre784]

'They have what i believe is a short certificate, literally giving her name, sex, date of birth and country of birth, dated in 1954.'

Apply for long certificate?

There doesn’t appear to be a record of her birth though, not in the name she was known by.

[Deirdre784]

'They have what i believe is a short certificate, literally giving her name, sex, date of birth and country of birth, dated in 1954.'

Apply for long certificate?

I presumed that this was a reference to the short form certificate issued on adoption (which contains very few details).  There should of course be a standard birth registration in 1923 but the birth name is not known.

That’s why to me it all points to the child not being theirs.