Genealogy Chat
Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!
- The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
- You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
- And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
- The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.
Quick Search
Single word search
Icons
- New posts
- No new posts
- Thread closed
- Stickied, new posts
- Stickied, no new posts
Illegitimate in 1919
| Profile | Posted by | Options | Post Date |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Sue | Report | 17 Jul 2005 21:35 |
|
I know that a great aunt had an illegitimate baby girl in 1919-the same year that her own youngest sister was born. Have found birth certificate for the sister with correct mothers name on it and now looking for the illegitimate baby. I presume there was no way that the illegitimate child could be passed off and registered with grandmother as mother? Would my great aunt have had to 'go away' to have her baby? I have found several girls with the correct surname for both mother and baby and all are within 30 miles of home. Any thoughts appreciated! Thanks Sue |
|||
|
Unknown | Report | 17 Jul 2005 22:33 |
|
How old would this youngest sister's mother (or grandmother) have been when she gave birth. If she was in her late 40s/early 50s it would not be impossible, but it would be less likely that she was the real mother. nell |
|||
|
An Olde Crone | Report | 17 Jul 2005 23:45 |
|
There are several incidences in my own family of a 62 year old Granny staring the Registrar out and registering the daughter's child as her own. I don't suppose the Registrar cared much anyway!And if he did, he would hardly be so rude as to ask the woman how old she was. Don't forget, medical knowledge wasnt as advanced, even in 1919, and it would have been a very brave Registrar indeed who argued with any of MY rellies that they were too old to have produced a baby! Old Crone |
|||
|
Sue | Report | 31 Jul 2005 16:57 |
|
Thank you for the replies, and sorry I have taken so long to acknowledge them. The youngest 'sister' was born when her 'mother' was 43 and the eldest was 23. It could really be either! Guess I am going to have to get hold of some certificates as suggested, specifying that I only want them if names match. Thanks again Sue |
|||