Genealogy Chat

I have a situation where I have found an illigitimate child born in 1885. She is obviously born with her mothers maiden name (Scott). A few years later her parents were married. On the next census she is was listed as Brotherston, her mothers married name. Which name would be correct to use on my family tree? Thank you.

I would think if the man her mother married was the child's natural father then the child would take the the married name .

This does open a whole new can of worms. For example I have a whole family of Templers except for one whose name in the Parish Register is spelt Templar. I have always taken the view that the first record ie the birth/baptism record should be used throughout for that individual's progress through this vale of tears, but that is only my opinion. Is there anyone out there who can tell me what is the correct Genealogical practise? Jim, Gosport, HAM.

Hi there Column 10 on a birth certificate is for this purpose. If a mother later marries the father of her illegitimate child the child legally takes on their fathers name and it becomes their registered name. It is one of the only situations where you can change a name after registration. If the father had been present when the child was regitered the mother would have been able to give him or her the fathers name anyway. Hope that helps Chris

On most family tree programs you can enter variations on names under AKA - I usually put the wife's married name there. GenesConnected has no provision for this but I can't see any reason why you cannot enter the same person twice with the two names and a note of explanation. Then someone searching under either name will find a match. Martin Briscoe

Thank you all so much for you responses - much appreciated. Margaret