Find Living Relatives

Yes, I agree jooniecloonie. I will get onto it. Thank you.

so ... do you think you will get that 1914 birth certificate as talked about way back ?

Gail, I find your over exaggerated claim that I was 'forceful' unpalatable and Its disappointing that you resorted to distortion to imply this. Regarding the distasteful dig about upsetting the next family, how else is one supposed to go about finding a biological parent without solid facts without causing some sort of reaction? I seem to remember at the time, you didn't mind at all. If you were as adamant then as you are now, that I am not Eric's daughter, then why on earth did you invite me into your world? You chose not to go any further (which I respected) so maybe you shouldn't have been so accommodating in the first place!!!
I do not want to continue any conversations where you can drop in at any time and follow my progress or make snide remarks. You've made your point and I will say no more on this therefore, I would very much appreciate that you step back and refrain from commenting on this thread again.

and now moving along :-)

carole I have a sort of a theory about the 1914 Eric (but the recommendation still is that you get that birth certificate to learn something about him)

Births Jun 1912
Parker Leonard G - Vittis - Lewisham 1d 2009
(died in 1913)

Births Dec 1914
FOWLER Eric I _ - Vittiee - Lewisham 1d 1995

Births Jun 1916
Parker Male - Vittie - Lewisham 1d 2030
(died in infancy)

I would guess that all three mothers' names are really 'Vittie'

no marriage to match either birth ... but must be related ... unusual surname, same registration district, nothing else relating to that name in that vicinity

I have also tried the 1911 census for anyone with a similar surname in the vicinity but to no avail

if you obtain the 1914 birth certificate the birthdate and parents' names and other info really could possibly point you in a useful direction ... if only, again, for ruling out ...

Thank you J.C for removing the content. Yes I did meet with Carole, who at the time was quite sure Eric was her father to my utter shock, I did not promise Carole anything at the time, only that I would look it to it. Carole seemed very nice but very forceful. I am not unsympathetic to her needs, but she needs to obtain hard facts before she upsets any other family. The next family may have partners/spouses/family who do not Know their past. I wish Carole well in her search..

Fair point JoonieCloonie but to be honest, I didn't think (until now) that this avenue was a closed door. The reason I tried to reconnect is to see if it would prompt any second thoughts or reconsideration after 7 years. I never stopped believing that this lead 'could' have been my father but at the same time, I do still need to consider other routes just in case there is a chance that this lead may simply have been the wrong one and that Gail was just curious and wanted to check me out in person.

odd indeed, and I'm glad you clarified for us

(but I have to say that it would have been fair to let us know you had already pursued that possibility to that extent and I for one would not have set out to find information to help you find the man's family, which you had obviously already done)

How very odd Carole

Gail has made it sound that this is all news to her, when she has Known for 7 years....if she had concerns maybe she should have sent you a private message

I have just seen a couple of threads of yours from 2010 where you have mentioned this in one

Back in 2007, I posted a search for Eric Fowler and was contacted by the person above known as Gail. She was very pleasant and very curious. We messaged back and forth over a period of about 6 months, during which she gave me some information that seemed to match up. She gave me her phone number offering for me to call her if I wanted a chat. On no occasion did I push for any details or meetings and all along, I stressed how aware I was of the sensitivity of it all. To my delight, she asked to meet up with me and even though she told me she was adopted, I was thrilled to bits. We met up for a couple of hours and apologised a couple of times for staring, stating that my eyes were so like his. She went on to tell me that her father’s family were lovely and that she would pass on my photo to them. The whole meeting was emotional and (as far as I was aware) meaningful.
Upon departing, she agreed to send me a photo of Eric so I could see where I came from but after a couple of months with no news, I messaged her – just a gentle nudge. She finally replied saying that although it was really nice meeting me, the shock had hit her the next day and (understandably) had found things difficult to deal with but she then added that she was ‘ok now’ and would look through photos when she got back from her holiday. Nothing ever became of it and after a couple more gentle reminders with no response, I decided not to pursue any more. Looking back, I can only assume that there was a change of heart but I must emphasise that I feel I was led on by this woman to believe I was his daughter, (which is why the need to know continues.)
Moving forward to the present day, when I did this current search for Eric on here, I discovered that her daughter was the tree owner and tried to reach out again. Gail’s post above makes me come across as a nuisance, which has painted a bad picture of me and sparked a negative comment. Therefore, I am posting this response to make aware that I did not use any of the above information to try and contact this woman. It was already a very old and on-going concern between her and myself. And as for looking elsewhere, if I am his biological daughter, then there is no point in continuing with this search due to the hostility.

As this man was not mentioned on Caroles birth cert, his name may not have been Eric? How many of us have relatives/ancestors that were always known by their middle names, apart from on official documents?

Actually, there seem to have been two problems ...

the poster contacted someone who was not related ... this was as a result of her own research before posting this thread and the fact that one person she had identified and wished to investigate is included in a family tree at a well-known website that was referred to here ... the 'speculation' was the poster's own as set out in response to Reggie's question 'Have you done any research yourself?' and it was not unreasonable, nor was it unreasonable to seek information ... we don't know how the approach was made so we can't assess the situation

the gravestone details that are published at another well-known website were reproduced here and that is not 'speculative info' ... 'Unknown' may not be aware that this is all already on the world wide web ... it may well be that there is copyright in a gravestone inscription so if Unknown kept the content of this thread, or wishes to find the online source otherwise, they might want to complain to the online source


to my mind efforts like were made in this thread are really for the purpose of ruling out a potential person so that the person searching can focus their efforts in a more likely direction ... nothing untoward was said about the person in question (as is sometimes done when people who post here disclose unnecessary details about the marital problems of living people etc)

A perfect example of why giving speculative info in cases such as this is potentially harmful

One can never know how such info will be used............and how much distress may be caused

I am removing details I posted that refer to the wrong Eric ... I try to remember to do that when a trail proves to be the wrong one but tend to rely on the person who started the thread to come back with the results of the certificates they order and such ... and Carole has not done here.

I was the one who added the gravestone details -- which are published on the Internet at the link I gave when I added them here (which I have now deleted), although I agree that the context in which such information appears could be more problematic than the mere fact of the information being published on line, and I apologise as that does seem to be the case.

To Unknown, as an adopted child, you may understand that people who have never known one or both of their parents may feel a strong need to find them or their family ... I don't know how Carole framed her approach (and indeed one should be extremely sensitive in doing that) but I expect your daughter could understand that a person in that position has to ask or will never know ...

To Carole, Eric Leonard Fowler is not your father, he fathered no children. He did NOT work at the Sunblest Bakery. I am his adopted daughter. My daughter was very upset that you contacted her. You caused great distress in putting gravestone details on social media, it is most disrespectful.. In future to spare others feelings could you not private message contacts, especially as you seem to get so many facts wrong.You need to look elsewhere and we wish to have no further correspondence with you.

Just to let you all know, I'm not ignoring your comments, I am away for a couple of days but will resume this thread next week.
Thank you

Fairthorn I made myself crazy trying to find that result at Ancestry and Mundia ... it is in a _private_ family tree so it has to be searched for in that database at Ancestry ... the dob matches the death record


edited 23 April to remove all info about the wrong Eric and famiy

more info

edited 23 April to delete the info about the incorrect Eric

Are T & J Ellery just the stone masons, so unrelated?

https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/nra/searches/subjectView.asp?ID=B33904

You're welcome, google just found a bit more info about the 1919 Leonard

23 April - info deleted because this is not the person sought

There are a several Eric Fowlers living in Lewisham in the 1950's.

They include Eric, Eric J, Eric R, Eric G, Eric G F.

The 5 siblings were born, say, 1942 - 1952?
And were not necessarily born in Lewisham or Brighton?