illegitimate child given fathers name after first registration

[AnneToday]

Hello,  When looking at birth records, i.e. those we can see on various ancestry sites, how would it show if an illegitimate child was first registered in the mother's name and then later changed to the father's or perhaps there was an adoption?   Expecting to find a mother's name only, using a free bmd site, I recently came across a child registered on the same page and line number with two different surnames and "C J"  after both names.  Could it be a "court judgement" allowing/forcing the biological father to accept his child?  Or, is it likely that two children of the same names, not popular ones, coincidentally were registered on the same page and both had "C J" included?  This was a late 20th century registration.  Thanks.  Anne

[KGarrad]

After 1874 (I think!) the reputed father had to be present at the registration,mand give his consent, in order for his name to be attached to the Birth Registration.

Also remember, what you see on sites like FreeBMD is the Index.
If the father gave his consent, then there would be 2 index entries - 1 for each surname.

If AnthonyMMM sees this he may have a better idea - he was a registrar!

[AntonyMMM]

Birth regsiter entries (in England/Wales) don't show a surname at all for the child before 1969, so the indexes always show the surname(s0 of one or both parents depending on their marital status.

As KGarrad rightly says - if a birth (after 1874) was registered to unmarried parents then the father had to be present to have his name entered on the entry. It would appear twice in the index ( such as that used on FreeBMD) - with the same reference- but under each surname.

If the father can't/won't attend it is possible for the mother to have his name entered by either producing a statutory declaration signed by him confirming his paternity, or by her obtaining a court order naming him as the father.

I'm not aware that such an order is reflected in the indexes, so would have to see the entries to be able to comment further.

Don't assume anything from the index entry alone (you can't), you need to get a certificate to know what's on it.

(note - that the new GRO index uses different rules from those above).

[AnneToday]

Thank you KGarrad for your response.  I was not thinking of the websites from GRO records as listing from an index, but more like the older parish records from the detail.   Which I now admit was stupid!

Thank you AntonyMMM for all these details.  Keeping them in mind, and KGarrad's information, I’ve been back to the Freebmd records for my current case and, on the same surname search, have found a record where changes made later are noted by a blue ‘tick’ against the record.  Therefore, I assume the absence of a tick means there were no comments to add and so the couple were there together.  C J must just be two more names for the child.

I did send for a copy of the records from GRO, but they refunded all of my money saying -  “The information stated on the application does not match the entry identified.”  I was a bit unsure of the correct first name of the father, but as I know he would not have gone to the registration I clearly have the wrong record and I need to do some more research.

Thank you both again for your help

Anne

[AntonyMMM]

I've never heard of changes being shown by a blue tick .... if you want to send me details of the search you are doing (via Personal Message) I'd be happy to have a look at it for you.


Antony

[AnneToday]

AntonyMMM, thank you for this suggestion.  Sorry for no repsonse.  I'm currently tied for time for a few days, but I will respond shortly with a private message.   Regards,  Annetoday.