Author Topic: Adoption and the 1939 register  (Read 360 times)

Offline Annie65115

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 4,432
  • HOLYLAND regd with guild of one name studies
    • View Profile
Adoption and the 1939 register
« on: Thursday 26 November 20 13:54 GMT (UK) »
On the 1939 register, if someone changed their name (usually by marriage or occasionally by deed poll), the register was amended to show this.

What about if a child was subsequently adopted? I think that adoption had been formalised and properly registered in England by then. Was the 1939 register amended to show the adopteeís new name?
Bradbury (Sedgeley, Bilston, Warrington)
Cooper (Sedgeley, Bilston)
Kilner/Kilmer (Leic, Notts)
Greenfield (Liverpool)
Holyland (Anywhere and everywhere, also Holiland Holliland Hollyland)
Pryce/Price (Welshpool, Liverpool)
Rawson (Leicester)
Upton (Desford, Leics)
Partrick (Vera and George, Leicester)
Marshall (Westmorland, Cheshire/Leicester)

Offline DianaCanada

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 294
    • View Profile
Re: Adoption and the 1939 register
« Reply #1 on: Thursday 26 November 20 22:41 GMT (UK) »
This is a good question! I have a relative, with her husband (no children born to them) in Hayes, Middlesex. They have an 8 yr old girl with them. This is how the household is listed:
Conroy, Michael
             Mary E.
(written in green ink), Gilbert, Constance M.
Jeff, Alfred (Maryís brother)

In the 1950ís Constance M. Conroy married a Gilbert, but the listing for FreeBMD lists her twice, as Constance M. Podgur.  A child by that was registered Jun Q 1931, Marylebone, MMN Podgur.
My assumption was that the Conroys brought her up, but was there a formal adoption.
From the 1939 there are no actual surnames or dittos for Mary or Constance, which plays havoc with the indexing!
Not much help to you, but a similar issue.

Offline CaroleW

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 62,866
  • Barney 1993-2004
    • View Profile
Re: Adoption and the 1939 register
« Reply #2 on: Thursday 26 November 20 23:43 GMT (UK) »
Just registering an interest for notification purposes.  May shortly have a similar situation when a birth cert arrives
Census Information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk


Offline rosie99

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 35,753
    • View Profile
Re: Adoption and the 1939 register
« Reply #3 on: Friday 27 November 20 08:09 GMT (UK) »
This is a good question! I have a relative, with her husband (no children born to them) in Hayes, Middlesex. They have an 8 yr old girl with them. This is how the household is listed:
Conroy, Michael
             Mary E.
(written in green ink), Gilbert, Constance M.
Jeff, Alfred (Maryís brother)

In the 1950ís Constance M. Conroy married a Gilbert, but the listing for FreeBMD lists her twice, as Constance M. Podgur.  A child by that was registered Jun Q 1931, Marylebone, MMN Podgur.
My assumption was that the Conroys brought her up, but was there a formal adoption.
From the 1939 there are no actual surnames or dittos for Mary or Constance, which plays havoc with the indexing!
Not much help to you, but a similar issue.

In this case I would have thought that the 'original' birth certificate from GRO should show whether an adoption has taken place. 
Census information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline Mvann

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 160
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Adoption and the 1939 register
« Reply #4 on: Friday 27 November 20 10:37 GMT (UK) »
Hi all

I have seen a family on 1939 with 2 children that have had the surnames changed afterwards an adopted written next to the names

Jon

Offline DianaCanada

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 294
    • View Profile
Re: Adoption and the 1939 register
« Reply #5 on: Friday 27 November 20 14:51 GMT (UK) »
This is a good question! I have a relative, with her husband (no children born to them) in Hayes, Middlesex. They have an 8 yr old girl with them. This is how the household is listed:
Conroy, Michael
             Mary E.
(written in green ink), Gilbert, Constance M.
Jeff, Alfred (Maryís brother)

In the 1950ís Constance M. Conroy married a Gilbert, but the listing for FreeBMD lists her twice, as Constance M. Podgur.  A child by that was registered Jun Q 1931, Marylebone, MMN Podgur.
My assumption was that the Conroys brought her up, but was there a formal adoption.
From the 1939 there are no actual surnames or dittos for Mary or Constance, which plays havoc with the indexing!
Not much help to you, but a similar issue.

In this case I would have thought that the 'original' birth certificate from GRO should show whether an adoption has taken place.

Thank you, Rosie.  I will add her to my list of certificates to purchase!

Offline CaroleW

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 62,866
  • Barney 1993-2004
    • View Profile
Re: Adoption and the 1939 register
« Reply #6 on: Friday 27 November 20 17:02 GMT (UK) »
I have today received the birth cert I mentioned earlier & it has Adopted written in the margin.  This was a child born legitimately in 1929 but whose mother died when the child was only 9mths old.

Suspect the child was given a new name but itís linked to another post so we shall see what we can find
Census Information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk