|
Gosh - is there any point in trying to explain myself further.
I agree with everything Porkie_Pie has said when it comes to legality and how things are supposed to work. The code was written against my record just as you have stated.
I know I now have 2 different certs - the original I was only able to get 3 years ago shows the hospital and address I was born in Kensington London.
The one issued in 1960 has the birth address in Sale, Cheshire. Nobody challenge me when I asked for my sisters original as well.
My distant cousin is the one that reaally surprised me. She herself had found her bio sister so was able to get facts about her own birth. Her adopted birth cert she sent to me had her adopted parents on where they live now.
Going on what she was told about her actual birth I took pot luck on an entry I found in Peterborough. Nobody challenged me about the cert. There is nothing in the register about her being adopted by another family.
I was estatic when it arrived and proved to be the correct record - same details as her older sister confirmed it.
Regardless of any cert the key thing to note is that any adopted child has an enty in the records the date they are registered not their actual date of birth. It makes trying to trace them more difficult.
Since the original post I have just found another one. My paternal first cus his wife was given up for adoption. Birth mother went to AUS and they traced her.
Daughter gave me the info and I found the original birth entry in the records with her original birth name.
They don't seem to be so strict about releasing records if the person is over 18
|
|
This person died of leukemia at age 27 in 1968 and both his adoptive [?] parents are also deceased. It may always remain a mystery but will get certificate in any case.
|
|
NS,
Just a thought.
Perhaps the reason that you were able to obtain copies of both your original and "Re-registered" certificates so easily is because of the way your original birth was registered. Your birth was originally registered under two different surnames and your mothers maiden name is indicated differently on each entry. Only one of those originally registered entries has been marked giving reference to the "Re-registration", the one which accurately indicated your mothers maiden name. The other original registation which shows another possibility for the mothers maiden name remains unaltered showing the volume and page details and a copy would thus still be available for anyone to purchase.
An interesting trick that others may like to try when trying to see when and under what name a new certificate was issued is as follows. If when looking for an original registration on Ancestry (It may be similar on other sites) and you discover the page number as "0" you can click on the "0" and it should take you to pages showing a list of all "0" entries that were made in England and Wales during that same quarter. As "Re-entries" are always made in the same registration district as the original it is relatively easy to scroll down the list looking for a "Re-entry made in the same district with the same mothers maiden name. That will also have a page number indicated as "0" but indicates the re-registration year so searching in that registration district in the same quarter/month should provide the actual page number for the entry.
It doesn't work every time but I have found that it works in most.
|
|
NS, The point is the code written against your name had nothing to do with an adoption, that code is just a reference to the fact the BIRTH had been re registered at a later date or was a late entry.
You appear to be saying that it does but often the info is not passed on to the GRO or entered on the index
The original birth record is not removed following an adoption, however,
the entry in the birth register is annotated with the word "adopted" in
the margin subsequent copies of the entry will show the
annotation
Note; "birth register" is not the same document as the "birth index"
I challenge you to produce just one example of an entry on the GRO index over the last 176 year of civil registration that had the word "adopted" written at the side of an entry
As i said before, When a birth is listed on the index and the page number is crossed out and the words See M60 in its place then that indicates that the birth has been re registered in March 1960 so that the GRO no not to issue the original birth cert and they will then only issue the re registered "amended" birth certificate choose which one you order wherever it be the original 1950 entry or the 1960 entry they will only issue the latter,
However If you want the original 1950 entry then you can still apply for it providing you clearly identify that entry - this means that any
applicant should provide the relevant details including child's name and
surname, date and place of birth and parent's details, if known
Roy
|
|
Jonesey, I have come across this quite often
"Only one of those originally registered entries has been marked giving reference to the Re-registration"
I suspect its because the end result is that the re registered birth is under the legitimacy act as the original one tends to have the exact same details as the re registration, "child's surname and mothers maiden name" but i'm only guessing
Roy
|
