Search for content in message boards

Birth Registered Twice?

Birth Registered Twice?

Posted: 26 Sep 2008 2:22PM GMT
Classification: Query
Edited: 27 Sep 2008 6:19PM GMT
Hi. I'm a little bit confused after finding my great grandmother's birth registered twice in BMD records. Exactly the same name is used (including middle name) and exactly the same district but 5 years apart. Both volumes were the same (7a) but the page numbers were different (611,695). IS it possible that she was registered twice two years apart? Any advice would be appreciated, thank you:)

Re: Birth Registered Twice?

Posted: 13 Feb 2013 7:46PM GMT
Classification: Query
Hi Newdawn00,

Did you ever find a reason why the birth was registered twice? I have just come across the same phenomenon with my grandmother. I found the GRO index confirming the registration in 1949. However, when I ordered a copy of her birth certificate, it said that it was registered in 1972. I have also found some odd GRO indexes hinting at other events in 1972 and at an earlier date.
If you can help with anything you found out I would be grateful.

Cheers

Re: Birth Registered Twice?

Posted: 7 Mar 2013 7:09PM GMT
Classification: Query
Forgive me, but I don't believe the dates you have given could be correct.

They are 23 years apart.

More likely, it seems to me, is that you have been given the record pertaining to someone else with the same, or similar, name. This is probably an error at the records centre when they searched for the name. Did you question it at the time with the records centre ?

If the registration was confirmed as occurring in 1949, how could it also be done in 1972 ? it does not make sense to me at all.

Re: Birth Registered Twice?

Posted: 9 Mar 2013 10:51PM GMT
Classification: Query
Hi Tim Tracker,

Yes I found the whole thing bizarre too: the birth for the same person registered twice, 23 years apart, had me completely baffled. Both records were for the same person; dates, parents names, everything exactly the same.

However, I have since discovered that if the parents of a child marry after the birth, they can request to re-register their children under the married name. The new certificate is completed on the authority of the Register General, which these were.

I had originally presumed that my grandparents had been married at the time they begun having children, but I was never able to find any evidence to support this theory. Therefore I delved further.

I found a marriage record for my grandparents in Jun 1972, just days before the recorded date on the birth certificate. I also discovered that each of their children had two birth certificates: one in their mother's name and one in their father's name - with one exception - their second eldest son had died a few years previously to 1972 and therefore could not be re-registered (as the child must be living to be re-registered.

The only puzzles I have left to try and solve are, why my grandparents waited so long to marry and why they re-registered the births when all of their children were grown. I guess that it was that important to them.

Re: Birth Registered Twice?

Posted: 10 Mar 2013 6:59PM GMT
Classification: Query
Well, you live and learn. I was so surprised by this that I checked it with the government sites. But, yes, you are absolutely right.

The 23 year difference really surprised me, but there is no age limit that I can see.

Re: Birth Registered Twice?

Posted: 30 Apr 2013 9:51AM GMT
Classification: Query
I happened on this be chance as it seems to point to a question of mine. My great grandfather is shown on the birth certificate as having a different mother from the one on his baptism. The former is someone whom his father married after his true mother's death so reading the exchanges here it looks probable that the birth was re-registered although the new mother was unlikely to have my great grandfather's biological mother.

I'll dig a little further but my appreciation for the light shed to all on this line.

Re: Birth Registered Twice?

Posted: 30 Apr 2013 9:53AM GMT
Classification: Query
I have posted a thankyou on the board for shedding light on a similar question of mine.

Re: Birth Registered Twice?

Posted: 30 Apr 2013 5:16PM GMT
Classification: Query
Only the natural parents can re-register a birth after marriage. This is a formal, legal procedure.

A baptism record is NOT the same as re-registering the birth. It records a baptism, that is all. A re-registered birth appears on the legal birth register. A baptism will not. So, if you searched the birth record for your Great grandfather I suspect that he only appears once on that.

The original birth record should ALWAYS show the natural birth mother. It would be very difficult to get this wrong. Sometimes the wrong father could be registered, for a variety of reasons. A re-registered birth also can only legally show the natural mother.

However, what may have happened here is that the natural mother died at or after the birth, but before the baptism. Or perhaps the natural parents separated. Then the father entered another relationship, and it is this that is shown on the baptism record. The baptism record is made by a church and has no legal weight. The church may not have been aware that the 'mother' was, in effect, adoptive, or may have known and not worried about it as they recognised the relationship. This could be down to whoever was in charge at the church at the time.

To repeat, ONLY natural parents can formally re-register a birth after marriage.

Re: Birth Registered Twice?

Posted: 1 May 2013 9:34AM GMT
Classification: Query
Thanks for the helpful clarification. It was always my understanding that only the natural parents could register a birth and that the baptism record has no legal standing. The difficulty in clearing my mind is that the baptism took place 3 days after the birth was registered and the presumed (by me) natural mother was the name given at the church. The birth certificate shows another woman altogether as 'Sarah Thomas formerly Cooper' but she and my great great grandfather did not marry for another 7 years (1856). What seems to be emerging is that my great great grandfather had an irregular household with a complaisant wife and in registering the birth in question he misrepresented the mother's status. What bewilders me is that he misrepresented Sarah Cooper's status when it would have been more logical to assign the child to his legal wife which he did at this baptism.

Re: Birth Registered Twice?

Posted: 1 May 2013 10:05AM GMT
Classification: Query
I think we have to remember that what happened and what "should" have happened can be very different things and many people (including our ancestors) told as many lies and fantasies as happens nowadays. I came across records for four children of a first cousin of my grandfather. The first (all girls) died a few days after birth but all of them were registered by the father with the Mother being Jessie B., formerly B... However there seemed to be a problem with the marriage - no trace thereof, until it occurred to me to look later and lo and behold, Harry B., had married Jessie B., SPINSTER, in 1895, 15 years after he registered the birth of the first child, 1880, and five years after the fourth, 1890. Were these birth entries "legal" - it clearly indicates the mother was married to the father which she obviously was not. Why were they not married? Not a clue. His father had made a lot of money and risen from being a "warehouseman" to being a "gentleman" and was very busy presenting his eldest daughter's children at courts and "drawing rooms" and hooking the daughter of an earl for her son - and his son was publicly "living in sin" but lying about it! Sometimes we just have to accept the actions will never be explained logically - although I am still open to "logical" suggestions. Good luck with further searches.
per page

Find a board about a specific topic

  • Visit our other sites:

© 1997-2014 Ancestry.com | Corporate Information | New Privacy | Terms and Conditions