Question about re-registration of children

[Merry]

Nothing to add to BK6 from this thread

I just need to know if this is a possible scenario - all names are made up:

Mary Smith marries Peter Bloggs in 1983.

Later in 1983 a child, Sarah, is born and is indexed as Sarah Bloggs, mmn Smith - so completely normal.

In 1987 (edited from 1986 sorry!) a second child is born and these seem to be the registration index entries for her (all seven of them!):

July 1987 Alice Bloggs mmn Smith (Vol 19 Page ABC)
July 1987 Alice Smith mmn Smith (Vol 19 Page ABC)
July 1987 Alice Smith mmn Smith (Vol 19 re-registered 1988)
July 1987 Alice Taylor mmn Smith (Vol 19 re-registered 1988)
Oct 1988 Alice Taylor mmn Smith (Vol 19 Page XYZ)
Oct 1988 Alice Smith mmn Smith (Vol 19 Page XYZ)
Oct 1988 Alice Bloggs mmn Smith (Vol 19 Page XYZ)

So, is the most likely scenario....

When Mary Smith has her second child it is registered without a father's name (though Mary is still using the surname Bloggs) and so there are two index entries made (Bloggs and Smith)

Later Mr Taylor wants to be acknowledged as the bio-father so the child is re-registered with his surname, but he and Mary were not married at that point.

Any other possibilities?

[kiterunner]

My brain hurts!

She was born in 1986 but her birth wasn't registered until the middle of 1987? I would think that's very unusual, isn't it? Does it actually say "re-registered 1988" in the entry? I would have thought that it meant that Alice was originally registered as the daughter of Mr Taylor and Mrs Bloggs, formerly Smith. Then Mr Taylor and Mary got married after Alice's birth and so they re-registered her after their marriage.

[Merry]

She was born in 1986 but her birth wasn't registered until the middle of 1987?

Oh cripes, I'm so sorry - 1986 is a typo. I don't know when she was born but presume 1987. (I will amend in a minute)

yes, it does say 're-registered 1988' and no page number, so I guess those entries are like the "at the bottom of the page entries in earlier registers" (can't view as it's post paper records!)

[kiterunner]

Oh right, so Mr Taylor's name wasn't on her original birth registration but could it be that her parents got married after her birth and then re-registered her in his name? I don't know how the computer system works but maybe it generates index entries for the year of birth when a birth is re-registered.

[Merry]

My brain is hurting too.

Since putting up my first post I have found the family on 192.com. Mary Smith remarried in 2003 using her maiden surname. She is on 192.com with her husband and the two daughters are both with them and are using their mmn of Smith as their surname.

It doesn't really matter to me exactly what happened in the 1980s (now that I've found them!), i was just curious to know if anyone else could work it out. (as a learning experience for the future!)

[kiterunner]

Maybe your original theory is correct, then.

[Merry]

I don't think Mary every married Mr Taylor (the 2003 marriage was to another man) - Mr Taylor was just the father of the child born whilst she was still using her first husband's surname.

I guess she could have married abroad though? Some of my friends have done that - very inconsiderate! lol

[kiterunner]

I don't think Mary every married Mr Taylor (the 2003 marriage was to another man) - Mr Taylor was just the father of the child born whilst she was still using her first husband's surname.

I guess she could have married abroad though? Some of my friends have done that - very inconsiderate! lol


Yes, I was thinking she might have married abroad but then when you said she married in 2003 I thought you meant to Mr Taylor.

[Langley Vale Sue]

Two of my grandaughters were born before their respective parents married.

E was born in 1997, registered with my son's surname and then 5 entries later she is listed again with her mother's surname. Her mother had reverted to her maiden name after her divorce from her first husband and wanted both her children to have the same name as hers, but this was decided before E's birth. In 2002, a year after her parents marriage, E has another entry with my son's surname. Anyone looking for her birth in the future would be confused by that fact and may assume there are two people with the same name and mother's maiden name. Familiar scenario? I have 2 great uncles with the same name, born 3 years apart and it took me quite a while to find the elder one's death as an infant.

A was born in 1998 and registered with her father's surname which she has always been known by. She is also listed with my daughter's surname, but has never been known by that name. Her registration reference numbers are the same in both cases though. There is no listing for her after her parents marriage though. :confused::confused:

[JBee]

If you sent for the birth certificate they would send the most up to date.

[Olde Crone]

GRRRRRRRR, posted reply and it vanished!

Merry, maybe the earlier re-registration was to REMOVE Mr Bloggs' name from the cert? (By Mr Bloggs, that is).

Sue - The law requires parents to reregister their child following the parents' marriage, even if the father is named on the birth certificate. She should do it really, as there are possible legal implications.

OC

[Langley Vale Sue]

Thanks OC, I'll tell them to look into it.

[Kit]

I had a Mr Jones marry a Mrs Smith. They had 3 children who over time used the name Jones or Smith Jones or Smith-Jones. I think Smith Jones had Smith as the middle name.

One of their children seemed to have Smith as a middle name and married and had 3 children of his own. By the third child he changed the surname to Smith-Jones and later re-registered the others as Smith-Jones. The re-registrations occurred about a year after the third child.