Genealogy Chat

This is a current situation so I am not sure how much relevance it has here but it has certainly given me food for thought over the accuracy of the certs we use to "prove" links.

A young couple set up home together and the girlfriend becomes pregnant. After several months it transpires that she has been seeing someone else and the relationship breaks down. The young lady then moves in with the other man. Despite this the first young man never doubts that he is the father of the child and the young lady says she is 99% sure that he is. The first man asks for contact as is denied as it is the second mans name that appears on the childs birth cert.

After months of court hearings the lady is forced to provide a DNA test which proves the first man is the father and so the details on the cert are incorrect. The first man contacts the GRO to enquire about correcting the details and is told it is up to the mother and the father named on the cert if they want to change it. If they do they sign a declaration and a correction is made. The second mans name will still be visible on any copies of the cert ordered after the correction but there will be a note at the foot of the cert saying that information in sections 4,5 and 6 have been removed. No note will be made of the real fathers details.

If the mother and her partner do not wish to remove the name the real father can apply to the court for a declaration of parentage which would order that the child be re-registered in the mothers name and no fathers details would appear at all.

As I said at the beginning this is a current situation and if certs can be knowingly allowed to remain inaccurate even today when proof of a persons identity is a common requirement it really makes me wonder just how much faith I can really place in certs.

Thank you for taking the time to read this.
Caz

I have always thought that we should really concentrate on the female line as being the main line rather than the male line because we can be much more sure of who a child's mother is (generally) rather than who the father is.

Kath. x

You are so right Kath. It has always struck me as strange that a childs next of kin is deemed to be the father. Even more so now.

Caz

My thoughts exactly Kath and Caz - surely the mother's line is the one we should all be concentrating on, as there's far less likelihood of error or doubt.

Straying away from the original posting (apologies Caz) but still on topic as far as current social situations go......I often wonder what the likelihood is of half siblings marrying each other/producing children without realising. The percentage rate of this happening is much higher these days, is it not?

K

You are right Karen. It is a frightening thought. What the long term implications will be. I don't think I would fancy family history as a hobby a hundred years from now lol.

Caz x

Good points made

May I also add that when a marriage certificate says father deceased, this is not always true. it is up to the persons getting married to say whether or not they are still alive and no proof is asked for as to the fathers sittuation!

i had this with my uncles marriage certificate where it stated his fther was dead...he was in fact in a lunatic asylum!
Ginny

Oh Ginny, how sad to think that someone would prefer to think of their father as dead rather than ill. Thank goodness time has changed some things.

Caz x

I am registered twice in the records.

I was born in 1960 and as my parents were not married my mother was not allowed to use my fathers name to register me so I had her maiden name, then when my parents married they applied to have my name changed on the records this was done by having another registration in my fathers name. so I look under my mothers maiden name and there is my birth then I look under my fathers surname and there I am again. if I apply for my birth cert in either name the certs I get are identical other than my mothers name saying sofie dukes also known as sofie walters (not used real names for mums sake as she does not know I have found out) on the one in her name and on the other it states mother as sofie walters.

so I guess if your parents were not married and you were born in the sixtees look under both father and mothers surnames see if you were "so good they named you twice"

Caz yes you're right how sad. i think my uncle had been told that his dad was dead so he wouldnt know any different.
just shows though that not all the info on certs is corect adn can lead you down the wrong path.

Ginny

Hi all

Wot it means is that if we don't do our family history now, there will be no chance in the future, so lets all get cracking!. My daughter is getting married this year, and I am delighted for all sorts of reasons, but one of them is that she will be traceable by future generations. But I'll have done it all by then, I hope.

Love

Margaret

Thanks everyone for your replies they certainly raised some very interesting points.

Margaret I think you are absolutely right. We all need to get on and research our families as accurately as the records allow before even with advancing technology it all becomes too difficult to unravel.

Caz x

....... and so many fathers shown on a marriage certificate (whether marked deceased or not) did not exist because the "child" was actually illegimate.



Also remember that there used to be a phrase that was used in the higher levels of society ......... the wife had to give the husband "an heir and a spare", then she could do what she liked.


sylvia

The thing is, History re creates its self.

Mother registered a birth of her child, her husband as father, despite the fact that she isn't actually married to him.

Child then marries, and uses A) a name he isnt really entitled to bear B) Names his father who May or may not really be his father at all.

My great Uncle went to his grave only two years ago, aged 80, his father who died 83 years ago being named on his birth cert .

He never married, but had he done so, he'd have named his father as Frederick, a carter. He went to his grave none the wiser.

The other point being - cases where the mother simply does not know who the father is....out of several possibles......some awful morning TV programme comes to mind where the mum and several potential fathers with girlfriends sit in front of an audience airing their dirty washing for all and sundry, waiting for the programme presenter to give them the results of a paternity test!!! It usually ends up in a punch up, sometimes even the blokes get involved! LOL
But at least they've had a paternity test, what about those who don't. Surely we will have cases of half siblings marrying each other without even the parents knowing they are related!
Not impossible when you think of current social situations.
K

Is there not a legal aspect to all this-a child that is registered under the male name is presumably his heir ?

.................... and don't even mention test tube or IVF parents!


One guy in Denver (I think that's right) was a sperm donor for several years when he was young. He has something like 40 known children, around the US. He had a "reunion" with about 12 of them about 2 years ago.




Elizabeth .... you could well be right!



sylvia

On the flip side, sometimes honesty did prevail.

My grt-granny had four children 1901 - 1911 where she declared on their birth certificates that none were her legal husband John Fields. She stated that all were the children of another man James Morrison who she eventually married in 1914.

I might add tho, she told fibs when she married John Fields (husband No2) she reverted back to her maiden name stating she was a spinster. Somehow she forgot husband No1 who had recently died.

Now she has made my research very interesting :-)

Helen

I hope Susan doesnt mind me re- posting this, from her thread........The last 10...



The Terrific Register
1825

THE UNCONSCIOUS INCEST.
A young woman of Glasgow having the misfortune to become a mother before she was a wife, and at so early an age as fourteen years, for the better concealment of her unlucky situation, retired to Edinburgh to lie in, where she was delivered of a boy.

The lad, at the age of twelve years, either from a disposition incapable of submitting to the control of his guardians, or the severity of his preceptor, ran away from school, nor could any tidings of him be afterwards obtained. The mother, in the meantime, set up a house in Glasgow, for the reception of boarders, to which the better, sort of sailors in the merchants' service generally resorted.

A young man of about twenty-two years of age, master of a West-India vessel, happened to take up his abode with her, and in a short time, by his attractions and assiduity, awakened a flame in the breast of his landlady; a mutual attachment ensued, which was cemented by matrimony.

The happy couple lived together for three years, without interruption to their domestic felicity, eash year producing them a child, as the reward of their conjugal fidelity ; when one morning, the husband putting on his shirt in the presence of his wife, she discovered a mark on his shoulder, by which she knew him to be her long lost son. She instantly became frantic, and seizing him by the hair, tore him to the ground; her madness supplying her with strength, she would probably have destroyed him, had not his cries procured him the assistance of some of the family. She afterwards, however, recovered reason sufficient, to give an almost unintelligible account of the melancholy circumstance that bereft her of her senses, and then relapsed into an incurable delirium.

The consequences of an eclaircissement were equally fatal to the unhappy son and husband, whose reason was entirely overturned.

My 2x great grandmother (surname Coles) had a son Oliver before marrying my 2x great grandfather.

This son took on the surname of his stepfather and when the young man married he did so under this surname and even said my ancestor was his father. He also used as a middle name the probable surname of his actual biological father (Evered).

The marriage was witnessed by 2 siblings of his mother (an aunt and an uncle). I recognised them by their first names and for some reason they were calling themselves Everett!

If I hadn't spent hours studying this lot and unravelling the muddle they left, I'd have been really confused. I am glad I wasn't trying to do the family history coming upwards via Oliver.

So certificates can be very deceptive. They need backing up with other evidence at times.

Sue

One of my strangest certificates is for a birth in 1888.
A child was recorded as a girl born to a married couple, and the mother later registered the birth, making her mark..

Fast forward to 1901 and the mother and father made a declaration that the 'girl' registered, was in fact a boy.

I think this probably came about because of a misheard name, Evan ( rhymes with Even ) which the registrar recorded as Eva. Mum not being able to read probably took the cert. home where it most likely wasn't checked until the child was about to start work.

Gwyn