Genealogy Chat

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.

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

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

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.

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.

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

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

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

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~

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

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

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

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.

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?