Genealogy Chat

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

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

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.

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.

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

Thanks, Roy :)

Cherilyn, Anything is possible, even when I registered my children I was not asked for evidence

Description of informant. The current list of eligible informants reads, in order of preference

(1) In all cases - mother

(2) Father - if he is married to mother

(3) Father and mother jointly where they are not married to one another

(4) A person present at the birth

(5) The owner or occupier of the house or institution

(6) The person in charge of the child

see http://home.clara.net/dixons/Certificates/indexbd.htm for info on BMD certs

Roy

you may also find this link useful, their are also other links on the page to "Historic Hansard"


http://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/transformingsociety/private-lives/relationships/overview/legitimacyadoption/

Ok just asked my mum and she says she was told by his mother that it was a private arrangement made with the baby's unwed mother (this is the 1941 birth)...not exactly sure what this means but if it was not a formal/legal adoption, then I assume the birth certificate would not be helpful.
???

Is this even possible - wouldn't there usually have to be a wtiness to the birth i.e. midwife or doctor?

:-(

Wow, now I am confused...I think I understand what has been said, in that births can be re-registered if the original parent(s) marries....this is actually the case with my husband and sister-in-law, whose parents married some years after they were born (in Australia) - their 'new' birth certficates were registered the same year, even though their birthdates are 12 years apart! We were told that even they cannot access their 'original' record so can only accept what the new record states.

So it does seem likely in this instance that my chap was not adopted but was in fact born to the same parents. The surname is very unusual so the notion of sisters being involved to explain the same mn is VERY unlikely, also considering the whole Australia-UK-Australia migration of parents and children. At least I don't have to worry about never finding out who his real parents were I guess!

Might still get the cert, will have a chat to my mum.

Thanks again :-)

I will just Add that if a child is born out of wedlock or not to each other, but the father accepts responsibility then the child is registered in both names and the index will have two entries, One in the mothers name and one in the fathers name but their will only be one certificate

example

Births Mar 1956
Smith John jones Hertford 4b 170

Births Mar 1956
Jones John Jones Hertford 4b 170

(names are not actual)

Roy

In that example if the parents went on to get married to each other they could re register the birth and the new entry would be in the year and quarter it was re registered and the page number 170 of the original entry would be crossed out and replaced with See then the quarter and year, of the reregistration

I think the point being made is that most adopted children have their original names changed and there is no way of tracing them after that once they have gone to new parents.
It is totally different to a parent adopting their own child or changing the name of one parent.
Kind regards
Amanda

NS, 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

see M60 or S46 means just that

Their are a couple of reasons allowed for a reregistration and Adoption is not one of them, The main reason is under the The Legitimacy Act 1926 where by a couple who were not married and had children together but then got married at a latter date could legitimise the child by re registering the child's birth

The Legitimacy Act 1926 has had several amendments over the years and act was modified by the Legitimacy Act 1959, which extended it to children whose parent(s) had been married to somebody else when they were born

Roy

Edit See M60,J60,S60 or D60 could also refer to a birth that is a late entry

NS, quote my own the 1960 entry is clear in the records makes it look like I was born in that year.

The birth index is not a record of when a birth took place, Its a record of when that event was registered

I've gave 3 examples of 3 types of adoptions involving 6 people.
Just rechecked my own the 1960 entry is clear in the records makes it look like I was born in that year.

What I have just noticed is that the births were in complete different parts of the country to where the adoptions and reregistations took place. My cuz and friend had never seen the original certs I obtained.

One thing I do accept is before the freedom of information act came into place in UK when my sisters and I requested a cert it was only the 1960 entry we received. My friend said he used his adopted one to obtain his passport.

NS, Your example is not one where a child was adopted and has "adoptive parents" but one when the child was adopted by a partner of one of the biological parents, I have seen examples where a biological father had go through the adoption proses to adopt his own child. (often due to him not being named on the original birth cert)

Edit, your claim quote, All adopted people have a replacement cert issued with the date in the records as the date of re registration, un quote

That statement is not correct, Adopted people don't have re registered entries in local registry officers or on the GRO index (FACT)

When an adoption has been granted by a court in England and Wales, the
court issues an order which is the authority for an entry to be made in
the Adopted Children Register held at the General Register Office.
Adoption certificates are then produced from this register under the
child's new details. The adoption certificate replaces the original birth
certificate for legal and administrative purposes.

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 and all subsequent copies of the entry will show the
annotation

The information contained on an adoption certificate is as follows -

* The name of the adopted person, the date and location of their
birth and the sex of the child
* The name, address and occupation of the adopter(s)
* The date of the adoption order plus description of the court who
made the order
* Signature of the officer at GRO deputed by the Registrar General to
attest the entry

source; date October 2009
Austin Hayes
GRO Adoptions Manager
Room C202a

T:0151 471 4393

I also have a friend who was adopted at birth in 1960 he was told that he was adopted by his adoptive parent so it was never a secret and they even helped him apply for his adoption file, His original birth cert is in his birth name but their is no sign of a birth registration in his adoptive name.

As you say local registration offices do have all the markings in their records where their has been a change? but these changes where adoption is concerned are only available at the GRO but a re registered birth is available and can be purchased from the GRO or a local office in the same way as an original birth cert but when you apply they will only release the re-registered cert regardless of which one you apply for

I have also re registered 2 of my children and they have references on the GRO index,

Roy

Good point JMW my friend born and registered in Cumbria but adopted to a family in Yorkshire, Local officers all have their own system of referencing and would not know if a child born in one place was adopted in another unless they where informed by the GRO.

Just to clarify a point in NS response.
The entry made in the local registers at local register offices are made on the direct instruction of GRO and no one else. Often the local register office is unaware of a potential adoption until that instruction is received from GRO

Many months ago a program based on truth showed children who could not be adopted here in england being transported to Oz for adoption ....terrible carry on as now these children want to know who their parents where ....

Many be a line to think on or look into

Yes father had to adopt us - says so on the 1960's issued birth certs.

You were not adopted though were you NS?

This post has surprised me and I have to disagree with you.

All adopted people have a replacement cert issued with the date in the records as the date of reregistration.
The local registation offices do have all the markings in their records but very often this info was not transferred to the national registers. So there is no evidence of any adoption

My self and siblings were all reregistered 1960 the DOB are correct but address on the certs is where we were living then. (Parents married)

I used my experience and checked various records and found my original and my sisters issued in the 1950's . Now have them both.

My long term business friend born 1951 has as similar cert isssued 1954 and asked me if I could find his original. Found it. (Adopted by stepfather)

Another distant cousin was adopted out my her mother 1944. She had found her sibling who was kept by the mother and with that name I found her original birth cert dated 1941. (adopted by a stranger)

All these are when the first name remains the same. When I applied for the certs nobody mentioned adoption.

Now I know some adoptions are closed and records more difficult to find.


:-D :-D

a sister with the same maiden name maybe ?

The certificate will be what holds the answer anything else is just speculation

jan