Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

1915 birth, Child adopted

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 1915 birth, Child adopted

    I sent for what seemed might be a birth certificate of an illegitimate child born in an area , where I had relatives of the same name.
    The cert. came today and the baby girl was born to a single mother, but the far right hand side notes 'Adopted'.
    Would the adoption have had to have taken place after 1927 for it to be noted such?
    If this is the case, it is likely that the child perhaps kept her given names.

    Any illegitimate births I have come across so far have been absorbed into the family group in some way.

    Gwyn

  • #2
    Originally posted by Gwyn in Kent View Post
    I sent for what seemed might be a birth certificate of an illegitimate child born in an area , where I had relatives of the same name.
    The cert. came today and the baby girl was born to a single mother, but the far right hand side notes 'Adopted'.
    Would the adoption have had to have taken place after 1927 for it to be noted such?
    If this is the case, it is likely that the child perhaps kept her given names.

    Any illegitimate births I have come across so far have been absorbed into the family group in some way.

    Gwyn
    I don't know for sure but that sounds right because before that all adoptions were private and the GRO not involved.

    Margaret

    Comment


    • #3
      Did the mother marry at all?
      I'm wondering if the legal adoption was as a result of the passing of the adoption act, which enabled husband of the mother to legally adopt the child as his own.

      Jay
      Janet in Yorkshire



      Genealogists never die - they just swap places in the family tree

      Comment


      • #4
        I know of a child born 1919 who was adopted in 1937. He did not keep his birth name because he had been with his adoptive parents all his life and was known by the name they gave him, not by his birth name.

        OC

        Comment


        • #5
          Thank you for your thoughts. I will investigate further, now that I'm in after a busy day.
          I too thought perhaps her mother and a new husband might have adopted the child, so I will look for a possible marriage.

          I don't know if they are any connection to my tree. Unfortunately they were indexed on GRO with a different spelling to that on the photocopied cert. and I probably wouldn't have ordered had I known this. The family groups tended to keep to particular spellings, although I realise of course that anything is possible and they might yet link in.

          Gwyn

          Comment


          • #6
            OC that is very interesting.
            I have alot of searching then to see if I can work out what happened with this child.

            Gwyn

            Comment


            • #7
              I have just come across an instance of a child, born in 1906, who was adopted in 1913. When she married in 1928 the event was registered twice. Once in her birth name and again in her adopted name.

              Comment


              • #8
                brentor boy

                There was no legal adoption until 1926, so an "adoption" in 1913 would have been informal and not registered anywhere.
                She probably used both names at marriage because she thought she had to!


                OC

                Comment

                Working...
                X