Genealogy Chat

Well, it was fairly close! :0

I tracked a birth certificate of an illegitimate child born in 1882. It took me a while to find it, as she was registered in her mother's name, but was seen in the following 2 census in her father's surname and living with him., his wife and their family.

The certificate indexed in her mother's surname shows no father in the appropriate parent column, but he is the informant and named as 'father' in that column.
Her mother died and he married someone else and together they raised Florence, although she married in her birth name, father unknown !

Gwyn

DetEcTive isn`t quite right - to be named as the father on a b.cert where the parents aren`t marr, it was necessary the father give written permission, but he never HAD to accompany the mother - he usually did, though.

If you look at a b.cert issued pre-1969, you`ll see if doesn`t specify the child`s surname, just the parents surnames. It`s presumed the child will use one or the other (although the parents could decide otherwise), but it`s not up to the GRO, so they allow the child might use either, and they index both surnames in their index (but both index entries point to the same b.cert) so the kid can order a copy without too much hassle.

My g gran had 2 half bros, both born to the same father, called Andrew Bloggs and Alexander Thingy. When Alex was 16ish, his parents wed, and he changed his name to Alexander Thingy Bloggs. (My g gran & her other half-bro both used their own fathers` surnames).

Thanks for clarifying it for me Detective.

My curiosity was aroused as my parents were discussing it with me tonight, and they automatically assumed that the baby would have been registered and known by the mother's surname.

Detective & K in the Desert have confirmed my thoughts that the baby could use either surname.

It's the same as its always been

Joe, father Bob Bloggs, mother Mary Thingy

That's why you might see someone on the index listed twice

Joe Bloggs mmn Thingy
Joe Thingy mmn Thingy.

Joe (or his parents) can choose which ever of the 2 surnames he wishes to use.

It used to be that the father had to attend the Registration to admit/claim paternity to have his name added to the certificate. Since the father attended in the only unmarried couple birth I know of, I don't know if this has changed - probably not otherwise you could have the boy next door being named when all he has done is say 'Good morning'!

Thanks K - thought that would be the case.

I believe it's the parents' choice.

Out of curiosity, if a child is born to unmarried parents who are living together now, which surname would be put on the birth certificate - the father's or the mother's? Or is it a case of whichever surname the parents decide on together?