illegitimate baby

[suzyvan]

She says the adoptive mother was only 10 years older than the mother who was only 14 years old so would have made adoptive Mother 24.

>>>I have the name of the adoptive Mother, who was a only 10 years older than my relative and was a single woman until 1941, at which point my relative was 14 years old<<<<

[chempat]

Sorry, suzyvan, but it does not read like that.

'I have been researching a female relative born 1927

I have the name of the adoptive Mother, who was a only 10 years older than my relative and was a single woman until 1941, at which point my relative was 14 years old.'

It does not say that the birth Mother was 14 years old.

[sylvieme]

Hi sorry but there seem to have been some technical issues and my replies haven't posted.

Yes, I have a copy of the birth certificate. The date is 27th May 1927 (which I believe is shortly before adoption was formalised in law) which gives her place of birth in Surrey.
I don't think it was a formal adoption because her birth certificate shows her birth Mother's surname, and she kept that surname until her marriage.

Sorry for confusing about the adoptive Mother, She was born in 1917 in Sussex. The adoptive Mother's family are all in Sussex - Brighton and Horsham area.

The birth Mother's family are all in Surrey, mostly around the Chertsey area.  I can't find any family link between these two families and the distance between them means it's unlikely that there was any chance they somehow knew each other.

I've looked at 1939 register and have both birth and adoptive Mothers.

The birth Mother married (not my relative's Father) 7 months after giving birth and by 1939 had 4 children and was living in a cottage in a tiny village West of Horsham.

The adoptive Mother was working as a drapers assistant in Brighton, her Mother (then aged 66 and a widow) and brother are at the same address. There is also a 10 year old girl, whose name has no connection to my research and another child whose record is closed. I am considering sending my relative's death certificate to see if this record can be opened, but as I do not know where she was living in 1939, there's no guarantee that this is the correct record.

On the birth Mother's side of the family I've come across a number of instances of children living with other relatives (while the parents were working away in service) and some of them have taken in foundlings – which I know there was a payment for. So what really puzzles me is why this child wasn't taken in by any of her own family, and how did she end up in another county?

[sarah]

Hello sylvieme,

You had started off a new topic with your last reply that is why it was not showing on your topic  I have now merged them together for you.

Regards

Sarah

[sylvieme]

Many thanks - I only found this site yesterday so it's all still a bit confusing!

[chempat]

If she has the same name as at birth when she married, then was it an adoption, or a fostering?  If she never had the same surname as the adoptive 'Mother' it is not an adoption.

As she kept the same surname then someone was a connection between the two to place her with the new family.  Possibly the 'adoptive' mother took her on once she was of an appropriate age, but could not possibly do so when the the child was still a baby.  So you would think that the 'grandmother' was doing the looking after for a long time.

Have you looked into the family history of all members of both families?

[chempat]

Are the entries in 1939, the ones where the redacted lines have been mis-aligned with the entries?

[sylvieme]

Yes, you're probably right, the correct term would be fostering, it's just that the family always referred to it as having been adopted.

I wondered about the 'grandmother' and am still looking into that side of the family – but not getting very far. No-one seems to have had much money so it made me wonder if there was a financial reward for taking in foster children in those days – and if so who paid it? Obviously she was fed and clothed and was sent to school so someone must have had to lay out something for that so where did the money come from?

The birth Mother's side of the family were mostly agricultural labourers, laundresses or in service  with huge numbers of their own children,  so no money to spare from them, and yet they did look after various children while parents were working so why not this one?

[sylvieme]

yes, the redaction is misaligned and I can see the birthdate of the closed record, which is 13.5.1927 - incredibly close to my relative but not exactly the same.
Obviously it would be easy to get the date slightly wrong so I can't quite say yes this is her, or no it's not.