Author Topic: Princess Mary Maternity Hospital..... sensitive subject!  (Read 1203 times)

Offline erin31

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 218
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Princess Mary Maternity Hospital..... sensitive subject!
« on: Saturday 19 September 20 13:44 BST (UK) »
Quite a sensitive topic but I am hoping someone can help me.
My great Aunt died from cardic failure and sepsis in childbirth at the Princess Mary Maternity Hospital in Newcastle in 1935 and she was then buried at Blaydon Cemetery. I have a death certificate to confirm this.
Thus far I have not been able to find any record of a birth, death or stillbirth for this child and I have relied on the memory of one uncle who has told me that the child was born and buried at the hospital.
I know that hospitals had mass graves for stillborn babies but am not sure why the child would not be buried with the mother if she was also deceased?
There are three possibilities I can think of re the child...
1. The mother was in the early stages of labour when the she passed away and the child was not actually born.
2. The child was extremely premature and the body was incinerated.
3. The child was born and buried but not with the mother for some reason I have yet to find.

Does anyone know if the Princess Maternity Hospital had a burial ground and where I could find records of burials there or if there is anyway I can find records of stillbirths at the hospital?

I know this will seem irrelevant to a lot of people as it was so long ago but if this child was born I would like to know whether it was male or female and put him or her in their rightful place on my family tree.

 :)











Offline Jebber

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 4,324
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Princess Mary Maternity Hospital..... sensitive subject!
« Reply #1 on: Saturday 19 September 20 14:11 BST (UK) »
The Stillborn Register, is not available to the public, only the parents, or if they are deceased then the siblings can apply.

It's possible that the mother died a few days after the birth, if so, the infant would have been disposed of by the hospital. Things were very different then.
CHOULES All ,  COKER Harwich Essex & Rochester Kent 
COLE Gt. Oakley, & Lt. Oakley, Essex.
DUNCAN Kent
EVERITT Colchester,  Dovercourt & Harwich Essex
GULLIVER/GULLOFER Fifehead Magdalen Dorset
HORSCROFT Kent.
KING Sturminster Newton, Dorset. MONK Odiham Ham.
SCOTT Wrabness, Essex
WILKINS Stour Provost, Dorset.
WICKHAM All in North Essex.
WICKHAM Medway Towns, Kent from 1880
WICKHAM, Ipswich, Suffolk.

Offline River Tyne Lass

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,623
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Princess Mary Maternity Hospital..... sensitive subject!
« Reply #2 on: Saturday 19 September 20 14:54 BST (UK) »
http://www.tyneandweararchives.org.uk/DServe2/dserve.exe?dsqIni=Dserve.ini&dsqApp=Archive&dsqCmd=Overview.tcl&dsqDb=Catalog&dsqSearch=(RefNo=%27HO.PM%27)&dsqPos=1&dsqNum=50&PF=No

Tyne and Wear Archives have patients records - as you have the death certificate it might be worth you contacting them to see if they can supply more information.  The archives is still closed to the public but I think staff will still do paid research.

I should add that as the date is less than one hundred years ago it will only be the staff who can find out more for you.  This is because you might come across a record for someone still living if you looked yourself which would not be permitted under data protection. (i think archives staff could do this as you can prove this relative is deceased)

I don't know if this might be relevant or but I wonder if the baby might have been placed in a nearby cemetery.  I think I recall that there is an area in Old Jesmond Cemetery (not too far away) marked with a plaque as having a stillbirth area.  It might be that the baby might appear in the records for here perhaps.  Possibly might be worth looking into, perhaps, although no guarantees.

http://www.margaret-hall-genealogy.com/page6.htm

Added: on this local website link above if you check Tyne and Wear Archives User Guides then Cemeteries then Jesmond General Cemetery (jesmond Old) see page 2 - you will see that there is a register for still births available. 

Also if you look under the subheading of 'Medicine' on the User Guides (under 'Trades, Crafts & Professions' this will take you to various hospital records and what is available for Princess Mary. (See page 5 'Patients records 1903 - 1985'

I might add that I don't think this is irrelevant - I agree with you about having these babies in their rightful place on our family trees.
Conroy, Fitzpatrick, Watson, Miller, Davis/Davies, Brown, Senior, Dodds, Grieveson, Gamesby, Simpson, Rose, Gilboy, Malloy, Dalton, Young, Saint, Anderson, Allen, McKetterick, McCabe, Drummond, Parkinson, Armstrong, McCarroll, Innes, Marshall, Atkinson, Glendinning, Fenwick, Bonner


Offline erin31

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 218
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Princess Mary Maternity Hospital..... sensitive subject!
« Reply #3 on: Saturday 19 September 20 18:59 BST (UK) »
Thank you Jebber.
Thank you River Tyne Lass. I have found the still births for the Princess Mary Maternity Hospital at Old Jesmond Cemetery as you suggested and have searched the Still Births burial register but sadly there is no record of the baby I am looking for.
I will contact the archives on Monday re the hospital records for my great Aunt.
Thank you so very much  :)

Offline Tickettyboo

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,851
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Princess Mary Maternity Hospital..... sensitive subject!
« Reply #4 on: Saturday 19 September 20 19:14 BST (UK) »
I assume you have already looked at the stillborn burials register for Blaydon on Family Search?
If not then 1935 stillborn burials starts at the bottom of this page:

https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3QHV-P3VC-Z7KF?i=143&cat=825173

Though the parents are named, no sex is given for the baby which, as you will have guessed from the Jesmond register, seems to be the way these were recorded.


Boo

Offline jonw65

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 6,686
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Princess Mary Maternity Hospital..... sensitive subject!
« Reply #5 on: Saturday 19 September 20 19:19 BST (UK) »
There were burials of stillborns at Blaydon
Possibly 11 in 1935, including one on previous page
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3QHV-L3VC-Z46T

See previous post by Boo

The mother of one of them seems to have died at Princess Mary Maternity and was buried at Blaydon, 12 June
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3Q9M-CS6T-N9L3-4

They are buried together in F 117

not sure why the child would not be buried with the mother if she was also deceased?

It seems a bit strange that you can't find anything similar, there must be a reason
Good luck in your search.

Offline jonw65

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 6,686
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Princess Mary Maternity Hospital..... sensitive subject!
« Reply #6 on: Saturday 19 September 20 19:20 BST (UK) »
Sorry Boo, you beat me to it.
I did have a look to see if any of those mums might have died (found one)
John

Offline jonw65

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 6,686
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Princess Mary Maternity Hospital..... sensitive subject!
« Reply #7 on: Saturday 19 September 20 19:33 BST (UK) »
They are buried together in F 117

That is in the non-conformist section
The graves register does not mention the stillborn child in F 117

The other burial noted is Thomas Westwood in 1942, possibly Elizabeth's father? Likely a relation anyway.
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3Q9M-CS6T-N9KH-D


Offline erin31

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 218
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Princess Mary Maternity Hospital..... sensitive subject!
« Reply #8 on: Saturday 19 September 20 20:54 BST (UK) »
Thank you Boo. I had checked the Blaydon still births register a few years ago and the baby is not there and this was when I asked my uncle about the child and he told me he or she was buried at the hospital.

Thank you Jon.
I should of said that the surname I am looking for is Dunbar.

I did wonder if my great aunt died days after the child and thus the child may of already been buried at the hospital when she passed but my uncle and mother both felt quite sure that she died 'during child birth'.
They were both very young when my great aunt died so they are going by what they themselves were told so it is possible there was a little more to my great Aunts death and she did die a few days after the child.  I can't really think of any other reason.
I have another ancestor who died shortly after child birth and although she is not in the same grave as her child they are both in Blaydon Cemetery. The mother in one section and her baby in the still birth section.