Family Historian User Group

How to show on chart illegitimate child of mother who then married.

I put the child under the mother's name with no spouse. If she then marries then her spouse name will be under a separate tab as if he was her second husband.
If the husband happens to be the father of her child then it could be listed as the couple's child.
My grandfather was illegitimate and baptised with his mother's maiden name. She then married Charles Markham and he was known as Markham since then. I had a DNA test to see if Charles was his father. He isn't.
My grandfather's mother had children by Charles and I have listed them all separately

Victor

I also add an unknown spouse, then the first married man becomes the second spouse. I have also had the problem with my gt grandmother, there was an unknown spouse first, then a husband and then another unknown spouse!
Ann

That’s the same approach as I use. It’s often a matter of judgement whether the subsequent husband is the father. Was the birth a month before the wedding or 5 years...?

Mark1834 wrote: ↑

25 Mar 2021 09:03

Was the birth a month before the wedding or 5 years...?

Even 5 years doesn't rule out the subsequent husband, if he had an inconvenient first wife who hadn't died yet when the child was born...

Indeed - it is often a matter of looking around for what other evidence there might be. Obvious clues such as an apparent surname used as a middle name, or more subjective ones such as did the child appear to be fully integrated with the subsequent family or not? I've a couple of examples of illegitimate (I hate that word, but it's the usual description) female births where the alleged father (not the mother's husband) has been named on their subsequent marriage certificate.

Mark1834 wrote: ↑

25 Mar 2021 10:21

Indeed - it is often a matter of looking around for what other evidence there might be. Obvious clues such as an apparent surname used as a middle name, or more subjective ones such as did the child appear to be fully integrated with the subsequent family or not? I've a couple of examples of illegitimate (I hate that word, but it's the usual description) female births where the alleged father (not the mother's husband) has been named on their subsequent marriage certificate.

Agreed. I have such a case in my tree. My Greatgrandfather was illegimate son of Sarah Thompson, who later married John Bailey. In the records like censuses and marriage, my Greatgrandfather is variously shown as Frederick Bailey Thompson and Frederick Thompson Bailey.
At least he kept both surnames, which proved useful in tracking him. I just need a DNA match with John bailey to confirm he really is my 2'GGrandfather, I live in hope

Thanks to all for the advice -much appreciated.