Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

If a husband was at war....

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

  • If a husband was at war....

    .... but his wife was pregnant before he left or on leave his wife becomes pregnant, if he was not around when the baby was born could the baby be registered under his name?
    Tessie

  • #2
    I believe a married woman's baby is always considered to be her husbands and registered as such unless the Registrar is told otherwise.

    Jane

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by tessie31082 View Post
      .... but his wife was pregnant before he left or on leave his wife becomes pregnant, if he was not around when the baby was born could the baby be registered under his name?
      Tessie
      I think if she's a married woman she doesn't have to have the man with her to register it in his name. It's accepted the child is his because of the marriage.
      Margaret

      Comment


      • #4
        Thank you!

        Comment


        • #5
          A man only has to be present at his child's registration if he wants to be named if he is not married to the mother.

          Husbands are always assumed to be fathers. In Victorian times, the novelist George Eliot lived in sin with George Lewes. Lewes could not divorce his wife as he was named as father on her children's birth certs even though some of them were fathered by her lover. Lewes would have been assumed to have condoned the situation.
          ~ with love from Little Nell~
          Chowns, Dunt, Emms, Mealing, Purvey & Smoothy

          Comment


          • #6
            My grandmother had a child and there is no name in fathers box, she was married (i've never found a divorce), but i think she was having an affair with my grandfather...the childs surname is the same as the husband she had then...am i right in assuming she told the registra that the baby wasnt her husbands.
            Jacky

            Comment


            • #7
              That seems like the only rational explanation. But someone with technical Registrar knowledge may be able to give a better reply.

              Christine
              Researching: BENNETT (Leics/Birmingham-ish) - incl. Leonard BENNETT in Detroit & Florida ; WARR/WOR, STRATFORD & GARDNER/GARNAR (Oxon); CHRISTMAS, RUSSELL, PAFOOT/PAFFORD (Hants); BIGWOOD, HAYLER/HAILOR (Sussex); LANCASTER (Beds, Berks, Wilts) - plus - COCKS (Spitalfields, Liverpool, Plymouth); RUSE/ROWSE, TREMEER, WADLIN(G)/WADLETON (Devonport, E Cornwall); GOULD (S Devon); CHAPMAN, HALL/HOLE, HORN (N Devon); BARRON, SCANTLEBURY (Mevagissey)...

              Comment


              • #8
                As the child was the offspring of Mrs (Whoever ) he or she would generally be known by the same surname. Only relatively recently have English birth certificates had a section to state actual surname.
                If no father was shown, one would suppose that something must have been said at the registration.

                Comment


                • #9
                  The child of a lover passed off as the husbands was said to have come in the back door

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X