Father on marriage cert.

[CllrP]

I have four illegitimate births in my family in England and Wales. None of these have a father on the birth certificate, as was usual for the time.

In one case when the chap in question got married his mother was listed on the marriage certificate in place of the father. In another the grandfather was listed as a father.

But in two cases the father was listed as someone the mother of the illegitimate child subsequently married within a year of the child’s birth.

Is it too much of a leap to assume that the father listed on the marriage cert is the actual father of the child?

[Geoffers]

I have four illegitimate births in my family.....in two cases the father was listed as someone the mother of the illegitimate child subsequently married within a year of the child’s birth.

Is it too much of a leap to assume that the father listed on the marriage cert is the actual father of the child?

He certainly could have been the father.............but then again he might not.

If this is in a period when census returns are available, what is the relationship between the mother's husband and the children?

[benny1982]

Hi CllrP

The sooner the mother marries after the actual birth, then the more likely he is to be the father.

If the baby was baptised after the mother wed as the child of the husband then you are very likely dealing with the father.

If the mother married within a year, then it is best to check to see if he is a widower or find out what he was doing, where he was at the time the mother became pregnant.

Ben

[Peter Goodey]

I don't think you can be too quick to draw conclusions. I've seen plenty of certificates where a stepfather is shown as the father.

[benny1982]

Hi

Yes, if you do find a name of a father on a marriage cert of an illegitimate person, the best thing to do is follow my suggestions to help you further in tyring to find if he was the actual father or not. Sometimes you may draw a blank but other times you may be lucky.

It is a case of searching further, ie suspected fathers previous marriage status, where he was when the mother fell pregnant etc.

Some illegitimacies where I have found the father like the Roberts story, others I havent been so lucky.

Ben

[CllrP]

In both these cases subsequent census returns show the mothers husband as the father, and the children in question had changed thier surnames to match.

I one case the potential father was a widower and married the mother within 3 months of the birth. In the other case both were single and married 11 months later.

From my point of view I just need to know if I should trace these potential fathers ancestry. I only trace direct ancestors in my tree, not subsequent partners of ancestors.

[Geoffers]

From my point of view I just need to know if I should trace these potential fathers ancestry.

That's a decision only you may take. Just on the information provided, it is not possible to say with certainty that the person named is the father - you may never know for certain.

You might reach a conclusion reached on the balance of probability based (as mentioned by Benny) on the mother marrying, relationships in census returns, etc - though these are not conclusive. The sorts of things you could also try are; looking to see if there is any information held locally - did the mother claim relief and if she did is there any detail recorded about her? When the man who married the mother died, did he leave a will and if so what is recorded? Did the mother's dad leave a will and mention his grandchildren?

In my own family a singlewoman gave birth to a son; she married a matter of months later and moved to another village - in that case the son was brought up by his grandmother and named his grandfather as his dad, when he later married - so I have concluded it unlikely that the man whom his mother married was in fact his father.

[janbooth]

Have you checked the actual parish register entries. You might just strike lucky with extra information given on their baptismal records - I have seen some gems recorded in the actual parish registers such as "..... claimed to be the father but is actually rumoured to be ....."

Good luck

Janet

[benny1982]

Hi

Yes, a baptism entry is probably the most significant clue in looking for a potential father. I think by using just merely census records and when the mother married is not too conclusive as Geoffers said but looking for a baptism will help build up those balance of probabilities.

When was the man widowed? This may help.

My gggran was nearly 7 months old when her mum married her father. He was still married 7 months into the mums pregnancy. His previous wife had died after a long illness. Once he married her, she was baptised with both parents names. The baptism alone is the most significant piece of evidence. From that I can safely conclude that he was the father and was seeing the mum while his wife was dying.

As said, you may be lucky to find a poor order but if he admitted paternity then no order may have been made.

Ben

Ben

[CanadianCousin]

From my point of view I just need to know if I should trace these potential fathers ancestry. I only trace direct ancestors in my tree, not subsequent partners of ancestors.

I think this is a matter of personal preference, but if the mother's husband was around since the child was a baby, he would be the only father the child had ever known, and the child would have considered him to be her/his 'real' father (especially if they used the same surname). IMO, that's as good a reason as any to consider someone an ancestor, especially if you don't have any other candidates. There is so much more to fatherhood than just supplying 'genetic material' after all - why not include them in your tree?

Just my two cents worth -

Tim