A busy mommy!

[JKS60]

I was flummoxed recently running across a woman who was married, and gave birth, on the same day! No matter how looked at each screen, they kept giving the same date for both events, including checking to be sure that was the date of the event, not date-of-recording.

[LizzieW]

I wonder which event happened first? 

[danuslave]

Not so unusual.  My ex married on a Tuesday and his new wife gave birth on the Friday.  Some honeymoon!

Linda

[nanny jan]

Hi,

Are the dates from records (Parish Registers etc.) or "submitted" (estimates)?



Nanny Jan

[JKS60]

These are from the civil registers kept by the state of Michigan. A friend swears that the birth had been slightly earlier, and they held back reporting (a date) for a bit until after the ceremony.

[nanny jan]

These are from the civil registers kept by the state of Michigan. A friend swears that the birth had been slightly earlier, and they held back reporting (a date) for a bit until after the ceremony.

Ooops!

[BumbleB]

I've got the same:  married in Leeds and gave birth on the same day in Tadcaster. (according to mother's declaration 13 days later!!!) - certificates.  OK not a million miles apart, but this was 1861.  The 1861 census was a few days earlier, and no sign of the child - but then, hey 

[JKS60]

I understand from Victorian lit, such as No Name by Wilkie Collins, that out-of-wedlock meant ****-out-of-luck in terms of legal standing. Of course, that other great novel Bleak House indicates that even so 'which came first, the baby or the vows?' could really have dragged out.