Anything's a possibility!
The main problem with that or with things in general, (or one of the main problems!) is that we haven't found hide nor hair of the family in 1911.
I've looked at every Sidney/Sydney born in 1909 and none leaps out at me. Ditto no Joan/joannas. As for the parents, Charles and Emily are quite common names and without having a year or certain place of birth, it's like the proverbial needle and haystack puzzle. Nonetheless, it should have been possible to track down the parents if the children were with them - but as I said, there's no sign that I can see of the children. And if they were in a workhouse or hospitalised, they would still show in the census returns. (I did get quite excited over a Charles Young in the workhouse in 1911 but turns out he was born in manchester and there was no sign of any other family member).
As far as 1911 goes, 4 possibilities strike me, or combinations of some of them:
1. The family wasn't in the country
2. The family used an assumed name
3. The family didn't fill in the census or the relevant census sheet is missing/lost/damaged
4. The family was fragmented and would need to be searched for individually - but we've done that and still not found the children.
I did wonder if the children had been fostered out, if Charles wasn't around and Emily was having to cope on her own, but as I say -- no Sidney anywhere ----- I know that fostered out children were sometimes given different names so that's a possibility but hardly helpful.
And without knowing any more about origins etc, we can't confidently say which of the variety of Emilys and Charles on offer pre-1911 are yours, though I'm still drawn to the Charles Young living in Islington, Liverpool, in 1891.
I feel as though I've hit your brick wall, I'm sorry to say, moogaloo. I'll keep an eye on the thread and if I can think of anything else sensible to add, I'll do so.
