Unexpected birth registration - missing death registration?

[katemart]

Hi all

I looked up my great-uncle's birth in FreeBMD (1920) and found a twin nobody had ever mentioned. The twin's name is added by hand at the bottom of the printed page which contains my great-uncle's registration: obviously, the volume and page numbers are the same.

Should I therefore assume that the twin was born alive but died shortly after being born, rather than being a stillbirth?

However there is no death record for him in the several years after his birth. Is it worth writing to the GRO to see if there is a stillbirth certificate? Grateful for anyone's advice.

Puzzled.

[stanmapstone]

Stillbirths were not made registrable until the Births and Deaths Act 1926, 7.-(1) The birth of every still-born child shall be registered by the registrar in a register of still-births containing the heads of information prescribed in the First Schedule to this Act.The formal registration of stillbirths began on 1 July 1927
If it was the birth of a twin the time of the birth is shown on the birth certificate

Stan

[avm228]

Have you looked for a death in the neonatal period under "Male" [Surname]? If he died soon after birth it's possible the death was registered before the birth was registered (the deadline was sooner) and perhaps a given name had not yet been decided upon when he died?

[katemart]

Thanks for your reply, Stan. Does that mean there are no records prior to 1927 so I would be wasting my time writing to the GRO? Another stillbirth I have come across in my family has a burial certificate but no birth or death registration. That side of the family were a bit more open than this branch, however, and didn't keep secrets....

Kate

[avm228]

A child stillborn in 1920 would not be recorded in civil birth or death records.  The fact that the birth of the twin was registered means that he was born alive.

Which district was the birth registered in? District offices can be helpful if you give them a call.

[katemart]

Hi avm228

It has been a year or two since I first came across this anomoly and I'm sure I did check all the jpgs from FreeBMD from the beginning of the year of the birth (May 1920) until about 1938 (!!!).  I'm just going to do it all again with a set of fresh eyes so thanks for reminding me to check for "Male".  However, there aren't many Rumsbys on any one page so I'm pretty sure I would have spotted it last time...

If it weren't for the fact that I have another ancestor who has no death registration (although I have the date and place of burial) I would be imagining all sorts of fanciful things...

[katemart]

Thanks, avm, I think that is going to have to be the next step. 

[avm228]

I can see two male Rumsby entries in the June qtr of 1920 in the same district (Tendring) with the same mother's maiden name. (First initials G and R). G's registration was on page 1689;R's on page 1689a which denotes that one or more amendments were made.  R appears to have died in the Colchester area in 2000.  If R was your great uncle have you ruled out the possibility that both registrations are his and simply reflect an early change of heart by his parents as to what his given names should be?

[katemart]

Them's the ones. The typed entry, R, is how my great-uncle was always known and he did indeed die in 2000. Do you think there might be more information on the amendment?