* Birth Re-registered after marriage

[ThorpeDave]

Hi.

Relatively new to FH and I am not sure how to correctly enter details of a particular birth.

A child was born in 1963 with no details of the father - so I have entered the birth with the mother's maiden name

However, about 18 months later, It appears that the birth was re-registered with the Father's surname after the couple were married.

There are 2 GRO references for Q1 1963 with both surnames with the same Vol & Page No's while in Q3 1964 there is a GRO Ref with a different Vol & Page No's although I believe that this ties with the marriage of the parents.

Should I enter the original birth details or the re-registered birth details? or both & how do I do it?

Regards

Dave

[tatewise]

Welcome to the FHUG Dave.

The general principle is to record all the details available.

You don't say, but lets hope you create Source records for each document such as Birth, Marriage & Death Certificates.

Are you saying the GRO entries for Q1 1963 refer to original & re-registered Birth and Q3 1964 entry is for the Marriage?
Have you copies of the actual Birth and Marriage certificates, or just the GRO Indexes?

In general you should create a Source record for each document and cite them from the relevant facts.

The Primary Name of the child should normally be their Birth Name which in this case I think should use the re-registered Father's Surname as that is probably how the child was know from soon after birth.

If any of the above concepts of Source records and Citations are new to you then please ask for clarification.

BTW: As a newcomer I advise you study how_to:key_features_for_newcomers|> Key Features for Newcomers and in particular in this context see Sources Methods 1 & 2 and Ancestral Sources but do not overlook all the other topics.

[ThorpeDave]

Hi Mike

Thanks for the welcome

The GRO record for Q3 1964 is the birth registration which I believe is where the change of name occurred.

Logic says to me that the first birth record from Q1 1963 should be the one that is recorded although it is right that when the birth was re-registered in 1964, when the Father was named, that that should also be recorded - somehow ?? and that is where I am struggling!

With regards to this particular record, I only currently have GRO references rather than certificates

Where I have birth certificates I use Ancestral Sources but admit that I do need to read up and understand using sources and citations. Having previously used Roots Magic I am rebuilding the tree but, to be honest, I found using sources and citations in RM a LOT easier than FH 6.2

Regards

Dave

[rocksrock]

How sure are you that the two records really refer to the correct person, if you only have the GRO references?

I ask only because, in my experience at least, it is not at all unknown to find two totally different people with the same Family and Given names, registered at the same register office, in the same or adjacent quarters.................untangling this requires the certificate not just the GRO reference, particularly in cases where the GRO ref does not include mother's maiden name, or the mothers were cousins who married brothers or cousins, or the fathers were cousins! My mother's family name is not common, yet I have several examples of this. It can get even worse where the father's are cousins with the same Family and Given name and they gave their offspring the same Given names.......and they just happened to be born at the same or very similar time!

[tatewise]

But you say there are two Q1 1963 entries, one under each surname?

Interestingly, on a Birth Certificate it does not state the Surname of the child, only those of its parents.
So it is a matter of conjecture and custom as to the child's Surname, even in the conventional case of a single registration.

Anyway, you should create enough Source records to capture all the document details as evidence for what you record.
Maybe one Source record is enough, as long as it identifies all three GRO Index entries, and the Birth Certificate(s), ideally with Media images for each one and their transcripts.

In genealogy, a person has only one Primary Name but you can enter as many Alternative Names as you like, with a citation for each one, which is where having separate Source records for each GRO Index may be advantageous. It all depends on how rigorous you like to be. See how_to:handle_people_with_multiple_names|> How to Handle People With Multiple Names.

In what way is RM easier than FH?
Perhaps in RM you can only have a simple one to one Fact to Source citation.
Whereas, for say a Birth Certificate, there would be Facts for the Birth itself, and for the parents Residence and Occupation and Name each with a citation to the same Source.

[ThorpeDave]

How sure are you that the two records really refer to the correct person, if you only have the GRO references?

As sure as I can be without the the birth certificates - which I will of course apply for!

On both Q1 1963 records the mother's maiden name is the same - and it is an unusual name and of course the 2 christian names of the child are identical on both records

The mother was definitely unmarried at the time as the father was married to someone else (known fact)

The child in question, WAS born early January 1963 (Known Fact

The Q3 1964 GRO record has identical christian names and surname of mother as one of the Q1 1963 records and the Father is most definitely the same. Again the Father's name is unusual and the child was definitely NOT born in 1964!

I am, as certain as I can be, that the Q3 record, is the re-registration.

Regards

Dave

[AdrianBruce]

... There are 2 GRO references for Q1 1963 with both surnames with the same Vol & Page No's ...

My understanding is that this is symptomatic of a child's birth being registered with both parents named but unmarried. Practice is then to index the child under both parents' surnames. And of course that means that there are 2 indexes to one certificate. (If you look at a BC there is actually no ability to specify the child's surname until later - about 1969, it was suggested to me).

... in Q3 1964 there is a GRO Ref with a different Vol & Page No's although I believe that this ties with the marriage of the parents ...

Assuming I understand Antony Marr in the WDYTYA? Forum, correctly, re-registration only happens for two reasons - to add a father's details that weren't included on the original registration (not the case here, it seems) or after the subsequent marriage of the parents to legitimise the child (sounds like it).

[ThorpeDave]

Hi Adrian

... There are 2 GRO references for Q1 1963 with both surnames with the same Vol & Page No's ...

My understanding is that this is symptomatic of a child's birth being registered with both parents named but unmarried. Practice is then to index the child under both parents' surnames. And of course that means that there are 2 indexes to one certificate. (If you look at a BC there is actually no ability to specify the child's surname until later - about 1969, it was suggested to me).

Do I assume from that that there would be 2 separate birth certificates - which is what appears to be the case from the Q1 1963 GRO records?

... in Q3 1964 there is a GRO Ref with a different Vol & Page No's although I believe that this ties with the marriage of the parents ...

Assuming I understand Antony Marr in the WDYTYA? Forum, correctly, re-registration only happens for two reasons - to add a father's details that weren't included on the original registration (not the case here, it seems) or after the subsequent marriage of the parents to legitimise the child (sounds like it).

That all makes perfect sense to me - thank you - and agree that the Q3 1964 registration would legitimise the birth as they married in the same quarter.

Sounds Like I will need to apply for 3 birth certificates from GRO!?

[AdrianBruce]

... There are 2 GRO references for Q1 1963 with both surnames with the same Vol & Page No's ...
Sounds Like I will need to apply for 3 birth certificates from GRO!?

TWO! You've already said that the first "two" have the same Volume and Page Numbers. Just get that one of that Vol & Page Number combination - if it's not got unmarried parents, under the 2 names, then we can start head-scratching and wondering about ordering the missing combination of name Vol & Page No.

Thing is - if you order the first one under both combinations, there's every chance you'll get charged 2 lots of cash and end up with two copies of the same certificate - no-one will look at both because they'll probably be processed by different people.

The 2nd certificate to order will be the one with the later date.

[ThorpeDave]

Hi Adrian

... There are 2 GRO references for Q1 1963 with both surnames with the same Vol & Page No's ...
Sounds Like I will need to apply for 3 birth certificates from GRO!?

TWO! You've already said that the first "two" have the same Volume and Page Numbers. Just get that one of that Vol & Page Number combination - if it's not got unmarried parents, under the 2 names, then we can start head-scratching and wondering about ordering the missing combination of name Vol & Page No.

Thing is - if you order the first one under both combinations, there's every chance you'll get charged 2 lots of cash and end up with two copies of the same certificate - no-one will look at both because they'll probably be processed by different people.

The 2nd certificate to order will be the one with the later date.

Sorry, having read your message and my reply again, I believe that there will only be one certificate for Q1 1963 which will list the Mother and Father with Different surnames instead of the same surname with the Mother also having "Formally"

The Q3 1964 certificate will be the usual format

Thanks again for your explanation

Regards

Dave

[DavidNewton]

An interesting thread and it has made me look much more carefully at the few certificates that I have.

The comment that the Child's surname is not stated on the certificate is true unless you have Short Form Certificate: I have an original short form certificate (1916) for my mother (available for 3p from the Registrar at the time of birth registration) which gives her name and surname, also the date (and time, she was one of twins) of her birth, but no mention of the names of her parents. Basically a certification that the birth of someone with that name etc was registered. Interestingly in a different situation I have a short form certificate for my wife which gives her (adopted) full name with date of birth

In my own birth certificate (1942) and the Registrar's book entry of my Great Grandmothers birth (1848) the Name headings in the birth certificate columns read: Child: Name, if any. Father: Name and Surname, Mother: Name and Maiden Surname. There is an inference here that Name is being used for Forenames in which case by the same logic the Mother's surname at the time of the birth should not be included, unless of course it is the same as the Maiden Surname. I suspect it was common practice, or maybe an instruction, by the Registrars to include both names where appropriate; otherwise a large percentage of births would have double index entries because of the uncertainty about the child's surname.

This minor logical problem about the mother's name was resolved, at least by 1995, by the change of the mother's name header to: Name, surname and maiden surame of mother.

David

[ThorpeDave]

I have now ordered the certificates from GRO - via telephone - and the lady immediately identified the Q3 1964 registration as a re-registration to legitimise the 2 Q1 1963 birth records (a 3rd Q1 birth record was also found which turned out to be a mis-spelling of the Mother's surname!)

I was informed that there would be 2 birth records with the same Volume and Page No's so that both parents could be identified. I was also informed that it was convention for the child to adopt the Father's surname at birth.

As someone has already pointed out, The birth record does not identify the surname that the child will use until 1969

I will now go and have a look at a couple more birth records, which may be similar to this one and I will now do a double search on birth records, particularly for the first born when close to the date of marriage.

Thanks, Adrian for your help.

[AdrianBruce]

Nice to know the telephone answering service plugged into some expertise... (It does happen - it even happened to me with HM Revenue & Customs, who have always been very useful to me on the phone!)

[ThorpeDave]

Nice to know the telephone answering service plugged into some expertise... (It does happen - it even happened to me with HM Revenue & Customs, who have always been very useful to me on the phone!)

Revenue, Customs, Helpful ? Hmm those words do not quite fit well with me!

Actually on the phone for about 45 minutes chatting. I also raised a question about my Mum who's surname changed in 1938/39 after her Mum started cohabiting with a "gentlemen". My Mum believes that a short form birth certificate does exist for her new name but we could not find it. I was eventually referred to the Registry Office in Chester-Le-Street where my Mum's birth was originally registered.

Again a lengthy chat with another helpful young lady. Although the query will not be given priority, I was told to email as much info as possible and they would look into it for me.

So pleasing and encourage to have helpful people on the other end of a telephone who genuinely seemed interested and wanted to help!

Regards

Dave