Registration Question

[Anstey Nomad]

First off, I'm probably missing something obvious here, but I can't for the life of me think what it might be.

Five siblings were born between 1957 and 1965. They are registered in one of two adjacent registration districts in the quarters of their births, with the same surname and mother's maiden name.

Those registrations are all repeated in 1972, in the same districts as the original registrations and with the same surname and mother's maiden name.

On the original registrations, the page number is crossed out and there is a handwritten note that says D72 and a reference number that does not seem to tie in with the 1972 registrations.

I wondered if these children had been adopted, but couldn't quite see how that would work as (i) the names are the same (ii) the parents details appear to be the same and (iii) I know at one time if a step parent wanted to adopt a child in fact the natural parent had to as well, but I can't see how that could happen if both parents are the natural parents. Anyway, if a child is adopted I know there will be a note on the birth register, but there won't be another birth registration, will there?

As I said at the top, I'm obviously missing something obvious. Could I trouble someone to tell me (gently) what it is please? I've googled but can't find anything relevant.

Thanks

AN

[kiterunner]

Could it be the parents got married in 1972 and so the births were re-registered?

[Anstey Nomad]

I wondered about that, but I haven't yet found a marriage, although it is possible that the mother married under a previous married name and then put her maiden name on the birth registrations.

Is that a legal requirement then, that if you subsequently marry you have to re-register your children?

I wonder how many people do? When we got married they didn't ask if we had any children who needed to be re-registered...

AN

[kiterunner]

I wondered about that, but I haven't yet found a marriage, although it is possible that the mother married under a previous married name and then put her maiden name on the birth registrations. It could also be that they got married abroad, or that she was already using her husband-to-be's surname and got married under that name.

Is that a legal requirement then, that if you subsequently marry you have to re-register your children?

Yes, it is. I seem to remember them telling us about it when we registered our children's births, i.e. they said if you get married later you will have to re-register the birth.

[Merry]

Five siblings were born between 1957 and 1965. They are registered in one of two adjacent registration districts in the quarters of their births, with the same surname and mother's maiden name.


The original registrations should show two entries for each child if the parents were not married but the father was named - one set with his surname and her maiden name and another set with her previous surname (might obviously be her maiden name) and her maiden name.

[Olde Crone]

Adoptions don't appear in the birth indexes.

There is another slightly more sinister possibility......the 1972 corrections were to remove a father's name from the birth certificates. This happened to a friend of mine. Not real names.

Registered 1943, son of Mr Brown and Mrs Brown, nee White.

Mr Brown returned from the war in 1946 and the birth certificate was amended to remove his name from the cert - this appears in 1946 as

Boy Brown, mmn White. (Because she was definitely Mrs Brown nee White, but Mr Brown wasn't the daddy).

Boy Brown was subsequently adopted out of the family but of course there is no indication in the BIRTH indexes of this fact.

OC

[Anstey Nomad]

Thanks ladies

In this case the two entries are identical. They come up in pairs when you search.

OC - that's interesting, but in this case there are five children!


AN

[Olde Crone]

Well, not beyond the bounds of possibility that all five were cuckoos, but I would cede that it's more likely they were re-registered because the parents married each other!

OC

[Kit]

I had an issue similar to this once and the change was minor.

Dad was known as John Smith JONES and John SMITH JONES. Smith being his mother's surname. He and his 2 sisters could not decide if they had a double barrelled surname.

John had 3 children and they were registered as normal Mary Smith JONES etc. About 6 months after the 3rd child was born all were re-registered as SMITH JONES. It was hard to work out as they all had Smith in their name but Dad seems to have decided their names should have been ouble barrelled.