Author Topic: Legitimising a child in the modern day  (Read 1390 times)

Online mckha489

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 10,996
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Legitimising a child in the modern day
« Reply #9 on: Thursday 01 September 22 11:00 BST (UK) »
Just found

https://childlawadvice.org.uk/information-pages/register-and-re-register-a-childs-birth/


“Application to re-register a child’s birth following marriage or the entering into of a civil partnership of natural birth parents
If the parents have married or enter into a civil partnership after the child was born, they are legally required to re-register the birth. This is the case even if the father is already on the child’s birth certificate. This particular requirement stems from The Legitimacy Act, section 9. “

It’s crackers!

Offline Andrew Tarr

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,023
  • Wanted: Charles Percy Liversidge
    • View Profile
Re: Legitimising a child in the modern day
« Reply #10 on: Thursday 01 September 22 11:42 BST (UK) »
I suppose it may depend on which parent's surname the child was given originally ?
Tarr, Tydeman, Liversidge, Bartlett, Young

Offline Rena

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 4,955
  • Crown Copyright: www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Legitimising a child in the modern day
« Reply #11 on: Thursday 01 September 22 12:24 BST (UK) »
I wonder if the child registration after the parents married had to change due to legal requirements of which child could inherit what when the parents died.   Maybe there was a question of legitimacy if the child was not registered again after its parents married.  On the other hand maybe "The law is an ass" after all.   ::)
Aberdeen: Findlay-Shirras,McCarthy: MidLothian: Mason,Telford,Darling,Cruikshanks,Bennett,Sime, Bell: Lanarks:Crum, Brown, MacKenzie,Cameron, Glen, Millar; Ross: Urray:Mackenzie:  Moray: Findlay; Marshall/Marischell: Perthshire: Brown Ferguson: Wales: McCarthy, Thomas: England: Almond, Askin, Dodson, Well(es). Harrison, Maw, McCarthy, Munford, Pye, Shearing, Smith, Smythe, Speight, Strike, Wallis/Wallace, Ward, Wells;Germany: Flamme,Ehlers, Bielstein, Germer, Mohlm, Reupke

Offline Rosinish

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 14,241
  • PASSED & PAST
    • View Profile
Re: Legitimising a child in the modern day
« Reply #12 on: Thursday 01 September 22 14:12 BST (UK) »
Might it be in-case the mother married a man of the same name & not the father of the child?

The info. on the legislation isn't clear at all.

Annie
South Uist, Inverness-shire, Scotland:- Bowie, Campbell, Cumming, Currie

Ireland:- Cullen, Flannigan (Derry), Donahoe/Donaghue (variants) (Cork), McCrate (Tipperary), Mellon, Tol(l)and (Donegal & Tyrone)

Newcastle-on-Tyne/Durham (Northumberland):- Harrison, Jude, Kemp, Lunn, Mellon, Robson, Stirling

Kettering, Northampton:- MacKinnon

Canada:- Callaghan, Cumming, MacPhee

"OLD GENEALOGISTS NEVER DIE - THEY JUST LOSE THEIR CENSUS"


Offline AntonyMMM

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,415
  • Researcher (retired) and former Deputy Registrar
    • View Profile
Re: Legitimising a child in the modern day
« Reply #13 on: Thursday 01 September 22 14:14 BST (UK) »
A child being made legitimate by the later marriage of the parents was introduced by the Legitimacy Act 1926. At that time it was optional to re-register the birth, but there was a condition that both the parents had to have been free to marry at the time of the child's birth (this was to prevent the law being seen to condone adultery apparently). The birth registers of 1927 and 1928 are full of re-registrations under this act, with some of the births having taken place many years before. I have an example of a child born in 1892 whose parents married in 1894 and who eventually got around to re-registering the birth in 1939.

The couple have to be the parents of the child - a re-registration can't be used to legitimise a step-parent relationship, nor does it ever have anything to do with adoption.

Even if the birth wasn't re-registered the child would still be regarded as legitimate under the provisions of the act.

That "free to marry" condition was removed in the Legitimacy Act of 1959, but re-registration was still optional.

The 1976 Legitimacy Act (s9) made it a legal requirement that the children must be re-registered, this is why a registrar will remind a couple who already have children when they come to give notice to marry, and usually also again at the ceremony itself. However many couples forget, or just don't bother, so it doesn't always get done.

Apart from the stigma, illegitimacy still mattered in terms of inheritance rules right up to The Family Law Reform Act in 1987.

The way the information on a birth certificate is shown makes it immediately clear whether the child is that of a married couple or not so the new certificate issued from the re-registration clearly shows that the child is legitimate and born to a married couple. Whether the mother has changed her name or not is irrelevant - a maiden name will be shown, even if it is the same as the married name she is using ( using "formerly" to indicate a maiden name hasn't been done for many years - the maiden name now goes into a separate space on the entry).

The child's name and surname can also, in some circumstances, be changed at the time of re-registration, although subject to quite a few restrictions.

As many couples do now marry after having children, these re-registrations are very common and happen all the time.



Offline roopat

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,112
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Legitimising a child in the modern day
« Reply #14 on: Thursday 01 September 22 17:21 BST (UK) »
My daughter had her first child in 2011. Both parents were named on the cert and the child took her father's surname. The parents married in 2012 and had to re-register the child (or go through some such official process) so that she would no longer be illegitimate. I suppose it's to do with inheritances etc. I was surprised when they told me.


Pat
King, Richardson, Hathaway, Sweeney, Young - Chelsea, London
Richardson - Rayne Essex
Steward, Hindry, Hewitt - Norfolk, North Walsham area

Online mckha489

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 10,996
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Legitimising a child in the modern day
« Reply #15 on: Thursday 01 September 22 19:23 BST (UK) »
Thank you!

Quote
The way the information on a birth certificate is shown makes it immediately clear whether the child is that of a married couple or not so the new certificate issued from the re-registration clearly shows that the child is legitimate and born to a married couple. Whether the mother has changed her name or not is irrelevant - a maiden name will be shown, even if it is the same as the married name she is using ( using "formerly" to indicate a maiden name hasn't been done for many years - the maiden name now goes into a separate space on the entry).

That is the crucial piece of information I could not find anywhere.