Births registered in two surnames

[KGarrad]

Clearly, the more we discuss this, the more it becomes necessary to see the certificates!

maxD

Which is what I advised in reply #2?!?!

[california dreamin]

Hi max

Glad you were back and picked up the messages!  But do remember that FreeBMD is a voluntary transcription project and therefore not every year for B,M or D's is complete.

FreeBMD say:The database is updated approximately monthly with additional records and the number of records transcribed since the previous update is shown in a lighter colour. Please note that the percentage completions are based on estimates and, in particular, a value of 100% does not guarantee that all entries have been transcribed

http://www.freebmd.org.uk/progressB.shtml

But I agree, if you can manage to get one or all it may explain the situation.  Do keep us posted!

[MaxD]

KGarrad

I did acknowledge the sense of sending for the certificates in my post yesterday about 8 minutes after your first reply so my most recent post was in no way to be interpreted as ignoring helpful advice given by you and others in this thread.  If my wording was clumsy then I apologise, I am saddened that it should have had you reaching for the exclams!  I do though note the grinning emoticons – or are they bared teeth?

As I have yet to see a birth certificate with a column saying “reasons for dual registering”, my original post was meant to elicit RCs’ views/thoughts on what sort of scenarios might have given rise to the 2 certificates situation.  I was, dare I say it and in the hope of not being misinterpreted, less interested in the mechanics of the certificate process but more the social interactions that may have caused them to be produced.  What seems to have happened, as many of you will have seen before, is that the thread wandered off a bit, although all very useful and I learn something from each reply.  Of course the certs will perhaps give additional clues.  Those of you with a military background may recognise the radio phrase “Roger, wait, out”

maxD

[KGarrad]

Apologies!

That was my attempt at humour! (Hence the 2 smilies!)

What I have been trying to say is that there can be a number of reasons for the dual registration.
Purchasing a birth certificate can help to eliminate some of those reasons?
It's probably the simplest solution!

Perhaps the father was known by 2 names?
Perhaps the birth was re-registered? In which case I would expect to see something; a note perhaps?

Don't forget that, when a married woman (or one who purported to be married!) registered a birth, the child was assumed to be of the husband.

[Jebber]

After all  the speculation, I hope you will  let us know your findings when you have obtained one or more of the certificates?

Jebber

[MaxD]

KGarrad - delighted to hear all is well and of course you are absolutely right!  There were in fact two fathers, the events are near enough for the older family members to have clear knowledge of that but not the background reasons!

Jebber et al - will do, wouldn't like to suggest which one I should send for would you, name one (ie that of the earlier children) or name two!

maxD

[heywood]

I have reread this thread again and it does seem as though it is being made more complicated by the various views.

There can't be two fathers.

I am reading that Mr A was married to Mrs A and they had 6 children - registered once.

Then there was a divorce but Mrs A retained her name. Hence any children would be registered in that name but not  with Mr A as a father because he wasn't.
Mr B and Mrs A then had three children who were registered with the surname A from her but also in  Mr B's name because he and Mrs A were the parents.

I have relatives who were registered in single mother's surname and also in father's surname.

The scenario you describe maxD does seem to be more complicated because it seems as though Mr A was still around- you mention older family members not knowing the reasons but you also say that the 3 children were known by Mr B's surname so they must have known something was different 

[Galium]

There will only be one registration for each child, and one b/c. It is indexed twice.

I think that if you get a birth certificate for one of the last three children you will find that it gives the mother as eg Mary Smith formerly Jones, and then the father is eg. John Brown.  Hence the child's forename appears in the index with the mother's current surname (Smith), and also with the father's surname (Brown). Obviously, in both entries the mother's maiden name is the same.

On birth certificates up until 1969 the child does not have its surname entered at all, so it is not a question of the children being registered with a particular surname.

[Jebber]

I agree with Galium, if it was me  would order the certificate of the youngest of the thee.