RootsChat.Com

General => The Common Room => Topic started by: gbuttery on Wednesday 06 August 25 15:19 BST (UK)

Title: 1939 register
Post by: gbuttery on Wednesday 06 August 25 15:19 BST (UK)
On the 1939 register why are some names blacked out with the message "This record is officially closed"?
I tried looking, but all I found was that this person may still have been alive when the register was published. But my grandmother and grandfather were also definately alive at the time and they are not blacked out.
The 1921 census shows an 'adopted ' daughter at their address. I am trying to find out what happened to her. Phyllis Farnell aged 1 yr 10mths in 1921

My grandparents are George Henry Farnell b. 1892 in Hull and my grandmother is Minnie Farnell b. 1889. There are two blacked out records under their names; one is likely to be my mother (Ruth Farnell b.1924 and my auntie Amy b.1928)) I just wondered if Phyllis was still at their address. I cannot find her anywhere.

Regards, Gill
Title: Re: 1939 register
Post by: rosie99 on Wednesday 06 August 25 15:26 BST (UK)
People that are blacked are possibly still living.  They are automatically opened up when reaching 100 years old. 

FindMyPast has a female bn 1924 with the couple and one blacked out entry, Ancestry is not showing the 1924 entry
Title: Re: 1939 register
Post by: rosie99 on Wednesday 06 August 25 15:32 BST (UK)
Phyllis is not listed as Farnell in 1921, presumably it is her birth surname that is listed have you looked under that for her.

ADDED
There is a person that could fit in 1939 in Hull with what I assume could be her birth surname  :-\
Title: Re: 1939 register
Post by: Jebber on Wednesday 06 August 25 15:38 BST (UK)
It’s because of the strict rules of Data Protection.They can be opened before the 100 year cut of if you know they are dead and can provide a death certificate. They are gradually working their way through and opening all of those people who would now be over 100 yeas oldest it’s a slow job.
 FindmyPast update on a  regular basis, Ancestry are much slower so it depends on which site you are l looking at.
Title: Re: 1939 register
Post by: rosie99 on Wednesday 06 August 25 15:49 BST (UK)
On the 1939 register why are some names blacked out with the message "This record is officially closed"?
I tried looking, but all I found was that this person may still have been alive when the register was published. But my grandmother and grandfather were also definately alive at the time and they are not blacked out.


I think that means when the register was released and put online which was probably after George and Minnie had died
Title: Re: 1939 register
Post by: Jebber on Wednesday 06 August 25 16:48 BST (UK)
FindmyPast first released the 1939;Register in October 2015.

The Register  originally intended for the Issue of Identity Cards and Ration Books in the war. It was later used as a basis of information when the National Health Service began in 1948. It was gradually updated  in part until the early 1990s that is why you can find some younger people and children opened before the 100 year cutoff. But it was hit and miss if a death was notified to the Register so there is a certain amount of inconsistency
Title: Re: 1939 register
Post by: ShaunJ on Wednesday 06 August 25 17:06 BST (UK)
Quote
Phyllis Farnell aged 1 yr 10mths in 1921

In the 1921 census she's listed as Phyllis Taylor
Title: Re: 1939 register
Post by: ShaunJ on Wednesday 06 August 25 17:17 BST (UK)
In the 1939 Register there is a Phyllis Taylor (name changed later to Martin) working as a domestic servant at 44 Goodwin Street in Hull. The birth date (August 1919) is about right. Have you ruled her out?
Title: Re: 1939 register
Post by: PatLac on Wednesday 06 August 25 17:30 BST (UK)
ShaunJ, is she listed as Taylor in the image of the 1921 Census? Because the transcription on Ancestry says Phyllis Farnell.
Title: Re: 1939 register
Post by: ShaunJ on Wednesday 06 August 25 17:32 BST (UK)
Quote
ShaunJ, is she listed as Taylor in the image of the 1921 Census? Because the transcription on Ancestry says Phyllis Farnell.

Yes. Never trust a transcription!
Title: Re: 1939 register
Post by: ShaunJ on Wednesday 06 August 25 17:36 BST (UK)
There was another Phyllis Taylor, also born in August 1919, who married a Leonard Sensier in 1936 and is with him in Hull in the 1939 Register.
Title: Re: 1939 register
Post by: PatLac on Wednesday 06 August 25 17:36 BST (UK)
Great, thanks! I thought she could be Phyllis Houghton Pettigrew, born 3rd quarter 1919. Her mother had 6 children registered under her maiden name Pettigrew, all born in Hull between 1917 and 1926. The eldest, John William Pettigrew, was born in 1917 and died in 1919. His burial record says mother Elizabeth Pettigrew (spinster). I couldn't find any other records for Phyllis Houghton Pettigrew.

I think her mother Elizabeth PETTIGREW married William H. HOUGHTON in 1928 (Sculcoates).
Title: Re: 1939 register
Post by: softly softly on Wednesday 06 August 25 18:16 BST (UK)
There was another Phyllis Taylor, also born in August 1919, who married a Leonard Sensier in 1936 and is with him in Hull in the 1939 Register.

This Phyllis died 2011.

SS
Title: Re: 1939 register
Post by: softly softly on Wednesday 06 August 25 18:50 BST (UK)
In the 1939 Register there is a Phyllis Taylor (name changed later to Martin) working as a domestic servant at 44 Goodwin Street in Hull. The birth date (August 1919) is about right. Have you ruled her out?

This Phillis died as Phyllis Pilgrim 1990--dob 17.8.1919

She is with her parents in 1921 census.

SS
Title: Re: 1939 register
Post by: softly softly on Wednesday 06 August 25 19:37 BST (UK)
Believe the parents of Phyllis Taylor living with the Farnells in 1921 were Albert Alexander Taylor and Annie Matilda Barnes.

Marriages Jun 1908   
BARNES    Annie Matilda                Sculcoates    9d   382    
Taylor    Albert Alexander        Sculcoates    9d   382

Marriage image on FindMyPast

-------------

Death

TAYLOR, ANNIE  MATILDA     aged 28 
GRO Reference: 1919  S Quarter in SCULCOATES  Volume 09D  Page 196

----------
TAYLOR, ANNIE       mmn SMITH BARNES 
GRO Reference: 1908  S Quarter in SCULCOATES  Volume 09D  Page 267

TAYLOR, ALEXANDER       mmn BARNES 
GRO Reference: 1914  J Quarter in SCULCOATES  Volume 09D  Page 430

The above 2 children are with their father in 1921 census who is a "widower" and their mother "dead"

-----------------
TAYLOR, PHYLLIS       mmn BARNES 
GRO Reference: 1919  S Quarter in SCULCOATES  Volume 09D  Page 356

Mother appears to have possibly died in childbirth.

SS

added

TAYLOR, ALBERT  ALEXANDER     aged 68 
GRO Reference: 1954  M Quarter in HULL  Volume 02A  Page 330
Title: Re: 1939 register
Post by: softly softly on Wednesday 06 August 25 20:42 BST (UK)
1947 article.


SS
Title: Re: 1939 register
Post by: DianaCanada on Thursday 07 August 25 01:09 BST (UK)
The process of opening up entries must be very slow as my great aunt is still blacked out and she would be 124 years old now.  She died in 1991.  Her daughter is blacked out and she died about 20 years ago.  My mother lived with them, but she would only be 102 later this year.
Title: Re: 1939 register
Post by: KGarrad on Thursday 07 August 25 06:55 BST (UK)
Unredacting entries requires proof of death.
Have you contacted The National Archives or FindMyPast?

Ancestry update their database on an annual basis.
FindMyPast update more frequently (monthly?).
Title: Re: 1939 register
Post by: DianaCanada on Thursday 07 August 25 07:34 BST (UK)
Unredacting entries requires proof of death.
Have you contacted The National Archives or FindMyPast?

Ancestry update their database on an annual basis.
FindMyPast update more frequently (monthly?).

I thought, and as was earlier pointed out, that unredacting would occur after the person would have been 100 years old, automatically.  In my mother’s case, proof of death would have been needed up until her birthdate in 2023, as she died in Canada in the 1990’s.  For her cousin and aunt, both died many years ago, in England.  Why were they not unredacted when the 1939 was released?  In the same household my aunt’s husband and father were unredacted when it was released.
Title: Re: 1939 register
Post by: MollyC on Thursday 07 August 25 08:52 BST (UK)
Did it partly depend upon the deaths being recorded by the NHS while the register was still in use?  Some later deaths may have been missed in the checks made before the release in 2015.
Title: Re: 1939 register
Post by: Nick_Ips on Thursday 07 August 25 09:03 BST (UK)
The process of opening up entries must be very slow as my great aunt is still blacked out and she would be 124 years old now.  She died in 1991.  Her daughter is blacked out and she died about 20 years ago.  My mother lived with them, but she would only be 102 later this year.

My guess would be an error or uncertainty in the birth year - either the source or the transcription.

I've seen a few cases where the redaction line is wobbly enough to see the birth year, which is either blank, indistinct, or amended.

So not knowing the year of birth presumably means the record wouldn't be automatically unredacted until 2039?

I thought, and as was earlier pointed out, that unredacting would occur after the person would have been 100 years old, automatically.  In my mother’s case, proof of death would have been needed up until her birthdate in 2023, as she died in Canada in the 1990’s.  For her cousin and aunt, both died many years ago, in England.  Why were they not unredacted when the 1939 was released?  In the same household my aunt’s husband and father were unredacted when it was released.

I think when they matched death records to redacted 1939 entries it was easier for males because their name at death would more likely be the same as their name in 1939.  Whereas married/widowed/divorced women wouldn't neccessarily have the same name at death as they did in 1939.  In that case an automated process would need to look at marriages as well to work out who the death record belonged to on the 1939 register.

I'd also think that process couldn't be very reliable, and so a significant %age of records of women who had died couldn't be matched to a 1939 entry with enough certainty to justify automatic unredaction.

And to throw a spanner in... both my mum and one of her sisters have been unredacted since the original launch, but both are very much alive and under 100.  Their other sister seems to be a still-redacted entry in the household (also still alive and under 100).  The only difference between them is the redacted sister married twice, whereas mum and the unredacted sister only married once - although that shouldn't be a factor in their redaction/unredaction.
Title: Re: 1939 register
Post by: Andrew Tarr on Thursday 07 August 25 09:36 BST (UK)
My guess would be an error or uncertainty in the birth year - either the source or the transcription.
I've seen a few cases where the redaction line is wobbly enough to see the birth year, which is either blank, indistinct, or amended.
And then there are those who forgot their true birth year.  I have one on the 1939 register born 1 October 1880; actual birth 1 October 1878.  So they should have appeared two years before the 1939 figure indicated. (actually they had died well before)