Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

1939 register - open vs closed records

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

  • 1939 register - open vs closed records

    Apologies if this has been posted before

    I've been spending time looking up all the twiglets in my tree and revisited my grandmother's and gt grandmother's families to double-check something.

    Horror of horrors, I found my mother listed. And cross-referenced to both of her married names.

    She was born in 1929 and still very much alive, so this record should be closed.

    According to their info, I can apply to have this record closed, but I have to supply her signature as permission!!! I tried to submit the form but it won't let me send a simple statement such as Check the DOB you morons! (Well, not exactly, but that's what I felt like after going through the details on the form!)

    Surely by their OWN rules, this record should still be closed, and I shouldn't NEED to provide any consent?
    Vicky

  • #2
    I suspect there are quite a few other open records too, which really should be closed, and vice versa. There is someone in my mother's household born in 1919 but died in 1955. They were supposed to be able to cross-reference everyone who died before 1991, so that record should be open.

    I have found several other people born in the 1920's whose records are still open, and one died as recently as 2008. I very much doubt that someone has applied to have that record opened.
    Vicky

    Comment


    • #3
      I just recently found someone known to me with her record open. TBH I don't think its that big a deal. The information available is also available in other places. For example there are people on this forum who 'found themselves' in the incoming or outgoing passenger lists, which often do include date of birth.
      Anne

      Comment


      • #4
        So you think you have the right to close the record of a third party who could be happy that their record is open or even very pleased that it is.
        What gives you the right to close someone else's record?

        As for being insulting!

        Checking the date or birth does not prove a person is alive, the person may have changed doctors in the past and the doctor may have informed the NHS that the patient had left his/her practice and the record marked as the person being deceased rather than simply removed from the practice.
        There may have been slippage when the 1939 was transcribed, it had to be transcribed in columns with only one column open at a time this method produced errors as there was no access to the lines of text to ensure each line read as it should.

        Remember in the UK there is no privacy law, there is no law that requires records to be close for 100 years (there used to be between 1966 and 2000 but that was repealed), these are simply non-statutory office policies.

        There was no assurance given to the public when the 1939 National Registration was taken and the public at the time were aware that many previous census had been opened to access after 70 to 80 years, so if there was any thought of closure it would have been for closure for 70 or 80 years not 100 years.
        The first census to promise a 100 year closure period was the 1981 census which was over 40 years after the 1939 National Registration was taken.

        Here is a final thought, if you wish further record sets to be opened then you must understand that some records will be opened that some people would rather not be opened. The companies that invest huge amounts of time and money digitising these records do so in good faith and try wherever possible to abide by the policies placed on them by the holders of the records.
        They are careful about not opening records that should be redacted but a few mistakes do slip through.
        If third parties start making complaints that the subject of the record is not worried about there is a good chance that the companies will take the view that it is too time consuming and or expensive to digitise and host such records and no other records will be released.
        Much censorship starts with good intentions

        Cheers
        Guy
        Guy passed away October 2022

        Comment


        • #5
          The record for my elderly friend (who had his 93rd birthday on Thursday) is closed, whilst that of his younger brother (a mere, sprightly lad of only 85) is open.

          My mother's name has now been opened and so at least I know that she had come home to her parents on the outbreak of war. Father is still missing, but I'm pretty sure he was called up and placed in barracks/at a training camp the day war was declared, so not expecting to find him.

          Jay
          Janet in Yorkshire



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

          Comment


          • #6
            Someone on another forum has been trying for many months to get her mother's record closed. Despite providing all the information required, "they" appear to be incapable of doing so. THAT is the worrying thing, Guy, that they cannot keep their OWN privacy promise.

            OC

            Comment


            • #7
              Guy, it is cross-referenced by both of her married names, and she has been at the same address with the same doctor since 1983.

              I think it is an error as the entry immediately above hers should be open, and it isn't. Slippage, as you say.

              The problem I have is that this is not the only example I've found, and I think its very worrying that out of a couple of dozen records I've looked at, I'm finding such a high error rate. They aren't adhering to their own policies, never mind how arbitrary they are. To be fair, I'm more annoyed at finding records closed when they should be open (because of the date of death).
              Is it too much to ask for consistency?
              Vicky

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Olde Crone Holden View Post
                Someone on another forum has been trying for many months to get her mother's record closed. Despite providing all the information required, "they" appear to be incapable of doing so. THAT is the worrying thing, Guy, that they cannot keep their OWN privacy promise.

                OC
                If it the case I have been following on another forum the mother had not been asked if she wants the record closed, the daughter or rather the daughters husband did not provide the required authorisation until recently but when he did provide the correct authorisation the record was redacted.

                It is just the same if you try to get a record opened, you have to send proof of death that has been deemed acceptable proof of death by the NHS and National Archives, it is not FMP making their own rules they are following the procedures they are required by contract to follow.

                Cheers
                Guy
                Guy passed away October 2022

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Vicky the Viking View Post
                  Guy, it is cross-referenced by both of her married names, and she has been at the same address with the same doctor since 1983.

                  I think it is an error as the entry immediately above hers should be open, and it isn't. Slippage, as you say.

                  The problem I have is that this is not the only example I've found, and I think its very worrying that out of a couple of dozen records I've looked at, I'm finding such a high error rate. They aren't adhering to their own policies, never mind how arbitrary they are. To be fair, I'm more annoyed at finding records closed when they should be open (because of the date of death).
                  Is it too much to ask for consistency?
                  I don’t understand what you mean by cross-referenced, if a woman marries or a man changes his name after the 1939 had been recorded her/his name is struck through on the record and the new name added, there is no cross referencing.
                  This was first carried out during the war to ensure the ID cards were correct then later by the NHS to ensure patient notes were correct
                  Cheers
                  Guy
                  Guy passed away October 2022

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    To add to the confusion I have been told by FMP that the record that is closed at my parents entry is not a record, but just a blank line.
                    Looking at the register I find that I do not have enough fingers and toes to count the blank lines that are not 'closed'.

                    Should add that they will not remove the 'this record is closed' from the blank line though....
                    DGJay

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      No, a different case. No husband input in this one. She keeps reminding them, they keep thanking her fulsomely for her patience!

                      My cynical take on all this - all record sets, not just 1939 - is that the companies involved do not wish to reduce their profits by correcting many mistakes. I had a sub to another site for two years and in that time submitted many HUNDREDS of corrections to their census transcriptions. In other words, I did their work for them AND I paid them to let me do it!

                      OC

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        This cross referencing of names thing is wonderfully inconsistent too. I thought that the index should give the female's maiden surname with any later changes shown in brackets. I had given up on finding two different people but by accident I found one in a relative's house. The image was correct with the later married surname noted but she appeared in the index only with her married surname. So I tried that for the other one as well and Hey Presto, there she was.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by GallowayLass View Post
                          This cross referencing of names thing is wonderfully inconsistent too. I thought that the index should give the female's maiden surname with any later changes shown in brackets. I had given up on finding two different people but by accident I found one in a relative's house. The image was correct with the later married surname noted but she appeared in the index only with her married surname. So I tried that for the other one as well and Hey Presto, there she was.
                          I know what you mean GL I have had the same problem - I still have a couple to find.
                          Just to be clear in case those who have not used this index yet get the wrong idea, the female's name is that which she had at the time the register was prepared be it her married/changed name or her maiden name.
                          Kat

                          My avatar is my mother 1921 - 2012

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I agree with Guy for once does it really matter ? in fact it could be helpful, wish some of mine were open, and it does not give any important info anyway.
                            I'd like to know how do they tally the deaths with the right birth person ??? as my fathers death cert states the wrong birth for him, so how would they know it the right one ?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Val

                              But there is a principle at stake here. They say that people aged less than 100, assumed to be living, will not be shown. If they didn't say that, then no, it wouldn't matter. Or at least people would be prepared

                              OC

                              Comment


                              • #16
                                OC they make all sorts of mistakes from what I have seen, so am not surprised by this one, I would think unless you have something to hide,its not important, or maybe that's just me ?
                                I would like to know how they tie deaths up with the right people? as so many must have the wrong birth year on the death cert.

                                Comment


                                • #17
                                  Originally posted by Val wish Id never started View Post
                                  I agree with Guy for once does it really matter ? in fact it could be helpful, wish some of mine were open, and it does not give any important info anyway.
                                  I'd like to know how do they tally the deaths with the right birth person ??? as my fathers death cert states the wrong birth for him, so how would they know it the right one ?

                                  The bulk of the deaths have been noted on the right hand page of the register (this page was not scanned as it contains mainly medical (NHS) information)
                                  These notifications of death were forwarded to FMP with the obvious chances of errors.

                                  Then there are the entries opened because the birth was above 100 years ago, again opportunities for error such as mistranscription and slippage of columns.

                                  There is also I believe a team collating the deaths from the deaths registers with the births, this is perhaps the most arduous process and open to all sorts of errors.

                                  All the processes used have been audited and passed as fit for purpose by the NHS/National Archives who are happy that the results are within the specified margin of error allowed for the process to proceed.

                                  Cheers
                                  Guy
                                  Guy passed away October 2022

                                  Comment


                                  • #18
                                    Originally posted by Olde Crone Holden View Post
                                    Val

                                    But there is a principle at stake here. They say that people aged less than 100, assumed to be living, will not be shown. If they didn't say that, then no, it wouldn't matter. Or at least people would be prepared

                                    OC
                                    OC you mention there is a principle at stake here, was there no principle at stake when it was repeated claimed in House of Commons debates national registration has been completely abandoned.

                                    Here is one such debate found in Hansard at https://tinyurl.com/ygqblls

                                    National Registration Numbers

                                    HC Deb 21 May 1953 vol 515 cc2233-4 2233
                                    § 11. Lieut.-Colonel Lipton
                                    asked the Minister of Health for what purposes national registration numbers are still required; and when the use of these numbers will be abandoned.
                                    § Mr. Iain Macleod
                                    National registration has been wholly abandoned. Some numbering system, however, is necessary for purposes of the National Health Service and, for reasons of economy, this is based upon the old numbers.
                                    § Lieut.-Colonel Lipton
                                    How is it possible for the Minister to say that national registration has been completely abandoned when people are required to keep, remember and make use of their national registration numbers? Is he not, in effect, still attempting to hoax the public into believing that national registration has been abandoned, whereas unless the individual remembers his national registration number he can find himself in all kinds of difficulties?
                                    2234
                                    § Mr. Macleod
                                    Oh, no. Any large scheme—for example, the National Health Insurance scheme before the Health Service was introduced—is bound to be based upon a system of numbers. We have used the same system of numbers, but national registration, happily, does not exist any more, and as a consequence a lot of staff and a great deal of money have been saved.
                                    § Lieut.-Colonel Lipton
                                    We have to have a number?


                                    Cheers
                                    Guy

                                    PS If it did not exist in 1953 how did it exist for me to have it opened to the public and for FMP to scan it?
                                    Last edited by Guy; 25-02-17, 20:02. Reason: PS
                                    Guy passed away October 2022

                                    Comment


                                    • #19
                                      There was something on an earlier thread about some records being incorrectly opened, sometime late last year. I found the thread when I was searching for what to do about an open record for my aunt who is very much alive. I filled in the form to tell FMP that the record shouldn't be open according to their policy, and came to the part where they wanted a file attaching as proof. I found something saved on my computer which I Attached and the request was accepted by them and the record is now closed.
                                      Janet

                                      please visit my blog http://2pdesignsfh.blogspot.co.uk/ ;)

                                      Comment


                                      • #20
                                        Guy

                                        Not the same thing at all! One was a promise, the other was a lie.

                                        All kinds of bodies hold all kinds of information about us as individuals. I don't much care. But I would rather it was all kept private while I'm alive at least, otherwise where do you draw the line? Everyone's current medical records online? If not, why not?

                                        OC

                                        Comment

                                        Working...
                                        X