Genealogy Chat

Hi all I was searching for kids on the 1837 last night and I have found 4 out of the 6. The query I have is the size of the gaps between kids as so far I have found that it was normal to have roughly one kid every year or 18 months. The ones I have found so far are born 1914, then 1916, then 1919 and then 1924. This last gap is possibly due to the war as I know the father was in the army. However, I have then searched every year from 1924 up to 1931 but can't find any more kids. Was this normal or have I missed them 'cos of skenning??? Opinions or ideas please.

Andrea That time scale between babes was about the norm in both sides of my family. Sometimes there was only 18 months between the births - born end of 1914 and near the beginning of 1916. Kathleen

Kathleen Sorry for tbeing thick - are you saying that the 18 months was the norm or that the gap between 1924 and 1931 (or beyond) was the norm? Thanks for replying to the annoying advert thread too! Lucky you, I can tell you. It's driving me nuts!

Andrea: Do you think the long space may have been due to the mother's age? As they got into their forties the gaps seemed to get bigger (maybe their husbands got tireder?) I have a g/grandmother who had five before the age of 27 and then no more. She was married for another 40 years. Sometimes something went wrong with the plumbing I think. If you can get to the church records, you can pick up the deaths, but even then you need death certificates to be sure?

Andrea Don't forget miscarriages and early infannt death were quite common in those days. Also, what did the father do before the war? If he was a travelling salesman or suchlike that could explain the big gaps. Jeanette

Thanks all for the replies. The father was in the army and before that a cotton grinder (?? whatever the hell that is!). I know there are definitely at least 2 more kids somewhere, I just wanted another opinion on whether it was worth searching further as the gap was getting bigger, or whether I had missed them or something - as I am searching the 1837 so you end up skenning after a bit. Never mind, hubby loves me so I will just keep spending his money and I am sure I will find them eventually!! Poor hubby! Thanks again.

Sorry Andrea No that is a longer gap than usual but someone else has suggested miscarriages and also infant deaths plus mother's age. Also that era saw the beginning of contraception - albeit somewhat primitive! Kathleen

I have a gap of more than 10 years inbetween 2 births,one was born in 1904 and the next was born in 1916,normally though i have gaps of 2/3 years with some families having 10 children over the space of 20 years Anna

Andrea my Mum always spoke of an Aunt of hers who married at 17,but did not have a baby till she was 42 a son Thomas Since doing my tree,Ive found this lAunt on 1901 cenus and she had two little girls,have since found out they both died as tots,I just wonder how many others she may have had and then lost before she eventually had her boy,who sadly was kileed in ww2 aged 20 Kathleen

Thanks all. I have since found another one of the kids born in 1933 (the one before was 1924) but have now searched up to 1942 and still can't find the one that I know definitely existed!!!! The Mother would be about 50 at this time - is this still the norm??? This side of the family are driving me nuts! Sorry to keep being a pain everyone! I really appreciate all the help.

Not being funny, but is there a norm when having babies? As others have said, babies did die, and some women had thirteen or more in a small time space. One of mine had fifteen to two brothers. Others had only one and that was that Whether they felt they had done their duty or their body just didnt work as nature intended who knows. Not sure what 'skenning' means, but I think you may have to go back over your years, or try and see parish records. 50 does seem a bit old to be having children.

Andrea: One of my ancestor's had 14 children (a few died very young). I found several of the "first-born" on the IGI and several of the last to be born on the IGI, but have never found "the ones in the middle". I know they existed, but have never been able to find proof. The first-born children were born in Shipley, Sussex; the last ones in Albury, Surrey -- perhaps the ones in-between were born in yet another area. Who knows.

Hi Andrea, I had some large gaps in my husbands family, his gr-grandma had children born 1887, 1890, 1898, 1900, 1911! I was so sure I was missing some, till mum-in-law remmbered her gran (apparenly) had 3 set of stillborn twins. Explains the large gaps. Debbie

Been looking at my tree and most women seem to have had their last child at 42/43 years old. The oldest Mum was only 46.

Thanks again everyone. I am sure the last child will turn up somewhere along the way. I double checked all the sheets I looked at on 1837, so I don't think I missed her, but who knows. Barbara - skenning is when you have been looking at something so long that your eyes are tired and you can't see properly any more!!! Sorry, slang word!! If anyone happens to come across a Rose (or Rosie) Casey with a mother's maiden name of Flannaghan (or Flannagan), please let me know!! Thanks for all your help and advice.