RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => Topic started by: wendyBan on Thursday 05 February 15 20:33 GMT (UK)
-
Hello,
I wonder if anyone can help me with what is probably a common problem. I have a birth certificate dated 1868 but the fathers name and occupation box is left empty. Is there any way of finding out who the father may be or is it very unlikely that we would ever know
Gemma
-
Hi
or is it very unlikely that we would ever know
Unless the child made contact with or was given the name of the father and named that father on their marriage cert - then no, you will not find out.
If a fathers name is given on the marriage cert and the surname is the same as the childs - then bear in mind that numerous illegitimate children made up a fathers name when they married to appear "respectable"
If the child had a surname as a middle name - that can sometime be a clue but you would have to research it
-
Sometimes the mother goes on to marry the father. Though as Carol says you would need some other proof that this man was the child's father.
Sometimes I believe a baptismal record names the alleged father.
A few other suggestions here though it probably depends on the area in which they lived as to what records were taken and what survive, and also the status of the family:
http://www.rootschat.com/links/01eos/
-
That's great, its given me a few things to look into.
Thank you.
Gemma
-
It is frustrating but sometimes you just have to accept that you have a dead end on one line of your tree. I have two similar things on my paternal line. On the certificate for my great grandparents' marriage in 1887 both father's name & occupation columns are blank. The bride's mother never married. The groom's mother married 9 months after he was born and her husband was shown as father to him (and his father as grandfather to him) in the censuses thereafter, the boy using his stepfather/father's surname. However when he married and for following censuses and in life thereafter, he used his mother's maiden name.
-
Yes that sounds very similar to the family im researching. It is frustrating isn't it but we can only find out what the family wanted us to know don't we.
Gemma
-
Hello,
I wonder if anyone can help me with what is probably a common problem. I have a birth certificate dated 1868 but the fathers name and occupation box is left empty. Is there any way of finding out who the father may be or is it very unlikely that we would ever know
Gemma
It may sound an obvious thing but have you tried the Census records for 1861, and 1871. Either side of that birth. Perhaps the father is there, with all the info you need.
Cheers.
-
With no fathers name on the birth certificate - how do you determine who the father was by viewing the 1861 and 1871 census?
-
In the 1861 Census The mother is living with her parents and siblings and by the 1871 census she is married. The husband could be the childs father but on the 1871 census the child is described as 'child of wife'. I am going to try and see if there was any Bastardly Warrants or Bonds available at London Met Archives for this period to see if the family are named here. Thanks for the advice though, something simple like that can be easily overlooked.
Gemma
-
I think bastardy bonds ceased around 1834 or so
-
With no fathers name on the birth certificate - how do you determine who the father was by viewing the 1861 and 1871 census?
Presumably the mother is known, as is the childs name and the dates/area etc. With that info, one could do a bit of inferring and logical deduction, to reduce the pool of information to more likely people.
-
Presumably the mother is known, as is the childs name and the dates/area etc. With that info, one could do a bit of inferring and logical deduction, to reduce the pool of information to more likely people.
Please see reply 8 - she was living with her parents in 1861 and was married by 1871. The child is shown as "wife's" on the 1871 so clearly not her husbands child
-
Presumably the mother is known, as is the childs name and the dates/area etc. With that info, one could do a bit of inferring and logical deduction, to reduce the pool of information to more likely people.
Please see reply 8 - she was living with her parents in 1861 and was married by 1871. The child is shown as "wife's" on the 1871 so clearly not her husbands child
We cant be sure about that.
"The husband could be the childs father but on the 1871 census the child is described as 'child of wife'" from reply 8.
If she is re-married by 1871 her previous surname may be on the marriage cert. It may be another route to search.
All roads lead to Rome, or a ditch with mud and water in my case.
Cheers.
-
If she is re-married by 1871 her previous surname may be on the marriage cert. It may be another route to search.
It was her first marriage - she was single when she had the child.
-
Sounds like a tough one to crack. Wish you all the best with it WendyBan.
Cheers.
-
Yes she was a Spinster on her marriage certificate, but thanks everyone for taking the time to reply. it is a bit of a brain twister. Just another one of those dead ends.
Best Wishes