1939 Register up and running (Part 2)

[andycand]

Hi

The 1939 Register is probably only accessable to a small number of people at Findmypast as anybody working on the Register is required to have a security clearance (from Tender Document).

As Guy has mentioned transcribing was done in columns not rows(as would be the norm) so transcribers did not see a whole line let alone a page.
 
Unlike other releases it is likely that The National Archives dictated what could be released and how so I think blaming Findmypast without knowing the facts is a bit unreasonable. Whilst it seems logical that all addresses should be included even if there are no unredacted occupants the instructions may not allowed for this.

There was a post on a Rootsweb list regarding the Register that is worth reading.

Dear all,
Between 1987 and 1990 I spent a lot of time working with, what was by then
called, the NHS Register.  The discussion about computerising patient
records had begun and I spent some time explaining the need for a unique
identifier and pointing out that the current NHS Numbers would not work. (I
will not give you're the technical details!).

The 1939 Register was used as the basis for the NHS Register.  The records
were kept up to date because they showed which patient was allocated to
which GP.  When a patient died the GP was supposed to return their medical
file and as a consequence would have their capitation fees reduced.  (You
might see a reason there why some of them did not report deaths.) If a
patient died in hospital, or in other circumstances, the GP might not have
known about the death and the patient would remain on their books until
there was some kind of audit (a rare occurrence!).  The level of inflation
in capitation fees was estimated as being between 10% and 30%.  No one would
do anything about it for fear of upsetting the doctors.  (When the NHS
started someone asked how the doctors had been persuaded to join and was
told by the politician in charge "We stopped their mouths with gold!")

Linking death registrations to the register may have been attempted but it
is fraught with problems.  Deaths are often reported by people with little
real knowledge of the deceased.  (My grandfather registered the death of
someone who had taken in grandma when her parents died and reported the age
as 101.  He would have had no idea of her age.  She might have been about
80!)  Doctors and care workers often know only what the person has told them
and exaggerating you age is not uncommon. For married women there will be no
clues to their birth name and lots of people change or misspell their own
names.  You only have to look at the census records to see how mangled a
name can get when the recorder has only heard it and the speaker cannot
read.

My expectations of this new data set were pretty low.  It might help you
find A date of birth but I know all of my direct family ones for this period
from Grandma's Birthday Book.  Bear in mind that this set suffers from the
transcription errors of the original recorders as well as those introduced
by FindMyPast.

I hope this helps.


Andy

[smudwhisk]

When a patient died the GP was supposed to return their medical
file and as a consequence would have their capitation fees reduced.  (You
might see a reason there why some of them did not report deaths.) If a
patient died in hospital, or in other circumstances, the GP might not have
known about the death and the patient would remain on their books until
there was some kind of audit (a rare occurrence!).

Interesting, that would tend to explain why my Great Aunt is still closed because she died in hospital in 1975.  Thanks for posting that.

[CarolA3]

Many thanks Andy, for taking the trouble to post that helpful explanation.

My father's record is redacted although he died in 1989 - in hospital.  Now I know why.

Carol

Added:  We can only hope that some of the people who are complaining to/about FindMyPast will read this and revise their opinion.  (Fat chance!)

[Guy Etchells]

Guy, I understand your points in defence of FindMyPast, but surely with such a major piece of data and considering the undoubted costs involved, they could have taken a little more time and done some analysis (perhaps using people like yourself and others experienced in genealogy) in order to identify topics and pitfalls that might show up when the public were allowed to view it. It all seems a bit rushed to me - returning to a point I made earlier, why are complete lines redacted and not just the personal details - someone didn't think it through before release

Steve

It is not as simple as that all people working on the data had to have the appropriate security clearance.

From the tender document
“For material that is CLOSED, as is the case with the 1939 Register, additional security requirements apply which include a requirement for all staff working on the 1939 Register must have approriate security clearance.”

That means they are restricted who they could “employ” to advise on the 1939.

The Data Protection Act 1998 states the following-
“personal data” means data which relate to a living individual who can be identified—
(a)from those data, or
(b)from those data and other information which is in the possession of, or is likely to come into the possession of, the data controller,”

That means that a name when located in a house with others from the same family is personal data which must be redacted.

If you want to blame someone blame Tony Blair and his Labour government who brought in the Data Protection Act 1998.

The tender went out in 2013 and FindMyPast have been working on it for at least a year, part of the time was spent testing the “database” using a panel of testers from the genealogical community. But due to the restrictions they could not use real data so had to test using made up data which is never satisfactory.

There are a number of faults I can find with the way things have been handled but none of these faults has yet been raised on the forums or in answer to the various blogs.

Incidentally FindMyPast are taking all the flak at present but many of these problems are going to be experienced by other providers when they are allowed to bid for the 1939 register

Cheers
Guy

[ScouseBoy]

Do you mean "security clearance"   or do you simply mean   "confidentiality declaration"

Are people Positively vetted?   I doubt  that they are?

[Norrette]

The 1998 Act replaced and consolidated earlier legislation such as the Data Protection Act 1984 and the Access to Personal Files Act 1987. At the same time it aimed to implement the European Data Protection Directive. In some aspects, notably electronic communication and marketing, it has been refined by subsequent legislation for legal reasons.

[clairec666]

Poor Findmypast have probably been bombarded by emails since the 1939 register was released, so it's a little much to expect them to answer every query. And no dataset is ever perfect... perhaps we're expecting a little too much? (Thanks to Guy and andycand for your explanations - very interesting reading!)

That being said, if Findmypast were aiming for an accuracy rate of 98.5%, I think they've failed. I've found numerous transcription mistakes so far. Maybe they felt under pressure to release the register this year, so it was a little rushed?
I'd rather have waited a little longer in return for more accurate transcriptions. Maybe they could have released one county at a time? (As long as they did Essex first... )

[carol8353]

If they transcribed it column by column,it is amazing they would ever be able to tie up a person with a death cert then?

[Aulus]

For instance on my mother’s entry on the 1939 there is a subsequent date in the address field in blue ink (25/11/1946 SAA.  M.)
I assume that refers to her change of name as she remarried on 21 October 1946 in Scotland and it would take a while for the information to trickle through the system.
The is also an entry in the address column next to her son in green ink (7_12_57 then the symbol for a half ½ followed by something I cannot make out and the initials EDB) this could possibly be when he changed doctors as he went up to Edinburgh University in 1957) there is also a change of name in green ink.
It could be that the first notification of change of name they had came with him going to university, but that I will never know.

I do know that some amendments on the register were in blue, some in green and some appear to be in pencil by do not know if this is significant at present.
Perhaps when others have downloaded images we might get a clue to the significance of colour or whether it just depended on what pen was to hand at the time, maybe time will tell.
Perhaps someone who worked on the register when it was used by the NHS may know and reveal the details.

Cheers
Guy

PS I have also seen snippets of alterations in Red ink but these were under a closed record so don't have further details.

Green ink seems to be used for changes of name on re-marriage I have seen

Perhaps the most fascinating aspect of the 1939 register for me so far is that it was maintained (to some extent) by hand until 1991.  I would love to hear more about this. Unless some of those who maintained it come forward, I guess the only way to find out anything about the instructions (like what colour ink to use for what) given to those maintaining the record, would be a FOI request to the NHS.