Genealogy Chat

So, reality, how many males out there can say 100% certain they are not fathers to children they do not know exist. Despite how people may respond to deny this possibility, in the past and present it is likely that this may be the case for some people and therefore taking a birth certificate's statement as true is rather naive. The mother is usually fairly sure, but what about your father? How can you be sure?

a father cannot be named on a BIRTH CERTIFICATE without having given consent. It all depends if the parents were married to each other at the time of the birth or conception. If they were, then either the mother or father can register the birth on their own. If they weren’t, then who goes to do it will depend on a number of factors: if you want the father's details to be entered in the register, then both parents can go and sign the birth register together. if the father is unable to go to the register office with the mother, but you still want his details included, then he can make a statutory declaration on form 16 (or form 16W for births which took place in Wales) acknowledging his paternity, which the mother must give to the registrar. if the mother is unable to go to the register office with the father, she may make a statutory declaration acknowledging the father's paternity on the same form(s) as above, which the father can give to the registrar. where there is a parental responsibility agreement in force or either parent has obtained an appropriate court order, this document can be presented at the time of registration by either parent.

Jess - are those current, or long-standing rules ?

my angle is that if a father's name is on birth cert he has consented for it to be there. it cannot be there otherwise. So if he is named , he consented and must know about the child! current GRO

That's interesting Jess, how long has that been the case, do you know. Is it in recent years? I have birth certs naming fathers when I know they weren't married to the mother and weren't living with the mother - in the 1800s. Jan

I suppose,likewise, when i was born my fathers name wasn't on my birth cert.Everyone knew who he was etc but he couldn't be located and thus wasn't named on the certificate,although in paperwork pertaining to my birth. Needless to say the weren't married (well, to each other anyway...!) ~jess~

My sister's middle child is most definitely not her husbands but he was named on the cert.

What is says on a certificate and what is actually true may be two different things! This is the legal position on fathers' names on birth certs: ' there is still a fundamental difference between the way children born inside and outside of marriage are registered because there are still differences in law between the two. For example inheritance was affected by legitimacy in the past and nationality of a child still is. registrations between 1837 and approx. 1850 The Act of Parliament of 1836 reads 'And it be enacted that the father or mother of every child born in England................shall within 42 days next after the day of every such birth give information upon being requested so to do to the Registrar, according to the best of his or her knowledge and belief of the several particulars hereby required to be known and registered touching the birth of such child provided always that it shall not be necessary to register the name of any father of a bastard child.' Now some registrars interpreted that quite freely and put father in even where the couple were not married and only mother or someone else was signing the register and some did not allow fathers details to be entered in the register. By about 1850 the situation had been clarified and the instructions read quite clearly 'No putative father is to be allowed to sign an entry in the character of 'Father' '. From that time, therefore there are 2 kinds of entries in the register (1) Where the parents were married to one another, fathers details must be entered in the register and only one parent will sign the register (or some other informant) (2) Where the parents were not married to one another there will be blanks in Column 4 (fathers name) and Column 6 (his occupation). Registration Act of 1875 the instruction read 'The putative father of an illegitimate child cannot be required as father to give information respecting the birth. The name, surname and occupation of the putative father of an illegitimate child must not be entered except at the joint request of the father and mother; in which case both the father and mother must sign the entry as informants'. There are therefore 3 kinds of entry after this Act: (1) Described above (2) Described above (3) Where the parents are not married to one another but both attended the register office together, fathers details are entered in Column 4 and Column 6 and both parents sign. Looked at a different way - if both parents have signed in Column 7 regardless of what names they are using then the parents were not married to one another at the time of the birth of the child. 1953 the same 3 entries could still be made but there were other ways in which father when not married to mother could be included in the entry without being present to sign. If a mother was widowed before the birth of her legitimate baby the entry will show (deceased) after fathers name. The child will take its surname from that of father in Column 4 where the parents were married and from mother in Column 5 if they were not married and fathers name is not entered. The child could take either surname if it was a joint entry and both mother and fathers surnames are shown but are different. You have to remember that until the recent advances in fertility treatment - the maternity of the child has never been in doubt but the paternity is known only to the mother! Seriously - it is the reason why the mother has always been the prime informant for the birth of a child even since 1837. source of info: http://home*clara*net/dixons/Certificates/births*htm#COL4 replace * with . nell

Basically you never no for sure who ya dad is (without a DNA test) Roy

Another thing I've remembered. A woman I know has two sons who were both conceived using different sperm donors. Her husband has been named as the father on the birth cert. Apparently she has no intention of ever telling the boys the truth about their paternity, even if a health issue arose.

things like surrogacy(in various forms) are treated slightly differently The woman who gives birth – including a surrogate mother – will be shown as the child's mother in the birth registration. The man who is to be regarded as the father of the child will generally be the husband or partner who received treatment with the mother.

Lorna. father is the man with whom you are concieved ...the other is **dad**..... :-))))))))

Has she said why, Wendy? It's none of my business what the person does or doesn't tell her sons as they're growing up but I can't see any reason for not telling them, that's only my opinion of course. Jan

Jan - personally I don't think she's made a wise decision but she said she would be ashamed if the boys ever found out the truth and she thinks they would hate her for lying to them all this time. I know it must feel like a real mine field to her but I truly believe they ought to be told if it was for a serious reason. She is a very straight laced reserved lady and it seems incredible to people who know her that she ever went down that route in the first place. The boys are lovely people and I know she adores them.

When my son's daughter was born in 1997 he was named on her birth certificate even though he was not married to the child's mother because he was present at the registration. The baby was given her mother's maiden surname (which she had reverted to when she was divorced). The registrar said that when my son and the child's mother married he would have to adopt the baby in order for the child to have my son's surname. In the event, my son had to sign a declaration and her name was changed - no adoption needed. When my daughter's daughter was born in 1998 she was registered in her father's name even though her parents weren't married. When they did marry in 2000, there was no problem as the baby already had her father's name. Sue xx I just re read this - it sounds so impersonal - I am of course talking about my beloved grandaughters who I love to bits!

Christopher As far as I know, nobody, illegitimate OR legitimate, has a RIGHT to inherit anything, except a title, of course. You can make a Will and leave all your worldly etc to the Cat's Home if you so wish. The point at which this becomes an issue is where there is no Will - then the Estate is divided up according to legal rules, depending on which County the deceased lived in. Illegitimate children only get a look-in here in certain cases. It was of course, the Law for centuries for Landowners to inherit Father to Oldest son and in those cases, an illegitimate son could not inherit, especially where there was a Title involved (neither could a daughter, legitimate or not, unless the deceased had made provision in his Will to this effect - likely to be successfully challenged if there was a remaining son). As for never being sure of your father, that seems to be a typical male worry, and one which women rarely worry about! The only way you will ever have 100% proof is by a DNA test - but that comes under the heading of Genetics and not Family History. Marjorie

jess I TOTALLY disagree with you saying that a father is then man who helped you to bring you into the world and the man who brought you up and looked after you is dad. My Father was not allowed to see me as that was my mothers wish, and my dad who brought me up as a child is my dad. My father so to speak will always be a dad to me even though he never brought me up doesnt mean that I have never loved him as much as my dad, from the day I found out that my 'dad' was infact was not my dad made no differance, everyone has different opinions and I will always love my faher like a dad i never had

Kim Different circumstances evoke different feelings, thats all. To ME the man that did put the plasters on and held me when i Cried was dad, not the man whose sperm was introduced to my mothers egg. There is no right and wrong. I Hope your dad does come forward,as i know is your wish, and that what comes out if it is what you hope it will be. ~Jess~

Chris I think you're right about the Bio-Fathers. I'm sure...unless someone can correct me...that after April 2005...sperm donors will no longer have complete anonymity. The child conceived via sperm donation will have the right...from aged 16yrs...I think...to obtain details of their origin. They will be able to check future partners in order that they do not marry unknown siblings. Subsequently have access to the details of the donor. Personally for me, I think it is better than the current system. As an illegitimate child myself...I have spent 20 years trying to find my father...only have a name, address in 1970 and some work history......and I still CAN'T get anywhere. lol Not going to give up though!!! But sometimes, I think if I had been the product of a donor.....I may have more chance in finding out where my roots are!!! :o) Suzanne***

Does this mean that because my birth father isnt named on my birth certificate, he must have made a declaration about being my father? He knows I exist but we have never met each other. He also knows I am his daughter. Would his family have had to make a declaration as my mother was only 16 at the time (1968) and my father was either the same age or a few years older? Vikki xx