Stigma of illegitimacy

[p.mca]

I thought this a better place than a google search to ask this question, which may help me with a 'brickwall' I have posted on that forum.
What degree of stigma was associated, in a small Scottish village (Stevenston- I hope village is the appropriate description) in the early 1870s for a woman age 17? Depends perhaps on who the father was? In this case the father is named on the birth certificate, along with his occupation and place of residence, but I can't find any other trace of him (the brickwall). The mother is listed on subsequent census' under her maiden name, and unmarried, though said to be married on the birth certificate. Her mother lists her under the fathers name in her (mohters) poor house records, and the child carried his name through life (until he changed it, another story), as did his 3 years younger sister, who is listed as 'illegitimate' on her birth cert.
It just seems like a lot of trouble to 'make up' a father if being illegitimate is not that big a deal?
Your thoughts appreciated.
Phil.

[Peter Goodey]

It's not just stigma is it? There's the question of maintenance. Following the money trail is often good advice.

[p.mca]

Thank you Peter, I'm not sure how to do that... I'll read further through this topic but if you have some suggestions that would be appreciated.
Phil.

[Peter Goodey]

I'm afraid I know next to nothing about Scottish law and procedures. Sorry.

[Hollytree]

'make up' a father if being illegitimate is not that big a deal?
Phil.

I don't think that the father would be 'made up' poor law unions were always anxious to find out who the father was to ensure that the child didn't cost them anything.

This link gives reading about illegitimacy in Scotland. I too don't know much about the law in Scotland, but I do think that at this time to have a child and not be married was a 'big deal'. The church for example would not approve, and society in general at this time was very concerned about morality.

www.
scotlandspeople.gov.uk/content/help/index.aspx?578

Anne

[hepzibah]

i think whether the man was married or not would have a bearing on the case, too. there seems to have been a huge amount of double standards then- young men sowed thier oats, 'nice' young women were virtuous. if you were mairried man, you just shouldn't get caught. so if the man was married, i bet it was kept quieter, and off record, rather than if he was single

[benny1982]

I agree with that. Like Peter I also know next to nothing about Scottish laws.

If a mother and baby moved away after the birth then that does indicate there was a scandal. It happened in my family. The girls dad was a village businessman. In cities it was much easier to cover up base born births.

[Tinker]

Perhaps it depended on the village, the minister and the circumstances? I have a Scottish ancestress who blithely produced 5 or so illegitimate children one after the other in the same area, and didn't appear to be particularly bothered. They all seemed to be by different fathers too!!

[margarita]

As your question relates to Scotland, you may get some advice on the TalkingScot Forum

talkingscot.com/forum/ (put www. in front)

Another Forum with very knowledgeable members and just as friendly as BG.

Regards,

Maggie

[p.mca]

Thanks to all members for their helpful comments. I will check out the talkingscots website but as the birth was registered in Ireland and happened in Wales I will have to see if they can help. I have looked at the info on this site ; home.clara.net/dixons/Certificates/births (google it for the full site name). Based on this I conclude-
1) The father is named. The above link suggests that post 1850 (this was 1871) this means the parents were married. Neither parent has signed the certificate, which was signed by the informant, the mother's mother. This does not change the above conclusion. The son being registered with the father's name (which he was indeed known by from that time forth) also supports the marriage supposition.
2) The mother is named by her (supposedly) married name, with 'formerly'- maiden name, more evidence.

Unfortunately I have no evidence of the marriage in the form of a marriage record in a reasonable time frame. I can send by private email a copy of the certificate if that is both allowed and helpful.

I have always presumed that the fathers details are made up and the son is really illegitimate though as late as 20 years later the grandmother is still referred to her daughter (the mother on the certificate) by the married name and calling her married (poor house records 1898).

Confused? I am!

Phil.

[benny1982]

Yes it probably did depend on the village and the circumstances of the family, ie money or power in the village.

My one left the quaint Sussex village life for the grime and dirt of London in 1864 after having a base child. Born in a tranquil remote village in 1839 in Sussex and died in an inner city London tenement in late 1886.

[Tinker]

Phil,
In Scotland, you didn't necessarily have to have a formal marriage record or a ceremony involving a minister: I'm no expert, but as far as I know, a couple in Scotland could declare in front of two witnesses that they were married, and that was considered legally binding. Google 'Gretna Green'

[Barmouth]

I understand that if a girl wasn't married, then the father actually had to be present for the child to be given his name on the birth cert, that was the case in England and I guess Wales too although I am not sure when that changed. If the mum was recieving alms from the Parish where she resided, she would be put under great pressure to name the father who would then be chased with Bastardy papers for him to 'fess up! :)
regards
Linda

[DorothySandra]

In Scotland, a woman might be known by her maiden name even if she was married. She might even be referred to as Robert Cruickshank's wife, Helen Donald.

The baptismal records that I've seen all said the child was 'natural' or 'lawful'

Having an illegitimate child was one thing - not good but not actually evil, more unfortunate - but have a completely fatherless child suggested that you didn't know which man was the father, or that the father had denied being responsible.

[Jeuel]

I am confused! How could a birth in Wales be registered in Ireland? I'd also say that in England and Wales (and I presume Ireland at that period) fathers who weren't married to the mother HAD to be present at the register office to have their name on the certificate. But if the mother said she was married and gave her name and her "husband's" name as though she was there would have been no checks to prove they were married. It was assumed that a husband was the father of a woman's child.

[DorothySandra]

The mother may have been married: in Scotland it wasn't unusual to use her maiden name on official documents, so the child may well be legitimate. Might he have abandoned his pregnant wife, if she was in the poor house and he wasn't? This evasion of his responsibility might be the reason for his change of name. Of course, subsequent children might well have been illegitimate, as she might not have been free to marry again.

The stigma was always there: how unkind people were would depend on their natures and on the particular circumstances. The biggest problem for single mothers was always the difficulty in earning a living while caring for a child by herself. As indeed, it is in the 21st Century.

[p.mca]

Thanks again to all repliers. I have had a timely reminder to not take things for granted and to constantly review old info without presumptions. When I was first sent the birth cert of my ancestor I was told the story about Welsh birth. However an elderly Scots lady recently pointed out to me that there is a tiny place very close to Coleraine (where the birth was registered) called Barmouth. So there you go. Still leaves questions but makes much more sense.

[Ladkyis]

A lot of the residents of Stevenston, Ayrshire were of Irish origin. I know this from my own lot. It is possible that when her pregnancy became known to her family they packed her off back to Ireland for the birth. There she could give the name of her "husband" as the father of the child. She wouldn't be asked to prove her marriage.
I am now dreadfully curious about the name of this person simply because I have ancestors from Stevenston and would love to find a connection!

[p.mca]

Thanks for your interest. My Stevenston ancestors are Davidsons and Cowans principally. The mother is the case is Mary Davidson, b 1853 (ish) In Stevenston, her parents John Davidson b 1820 and Janet Cowan b 1812 Stevenston. The child mentioned in the post is Thomas Archibald Johnston b 23 Mar 1871. Would love to hear if you have any connection to the above lot.

[p.mca]

Incidently the father of John Davidson was Hugh Davidson, b 1791 in Ireland, perhaps adding weight to your supposition.

[Ladkyis]

My lot are McDade, Bone, Gordon, Cameron. They lived in one of the really poverty stricken areas - Ardeer Square - which consisted of rows of dwellings of one room, some of them having the luxury of a window.
Family Tree Magazine printed an article some time ago about the conditions in such dwellings and they had a picture of Ardeer Square. It was just fantastic to see where they lived and at the same time horrifying to try and imagine what it was like.

[DorothySandra]

A further point: the stigma of illegitimacy was a legal matter: an illegitimate child had no claim on a parent's estate unless named specifically in a will; you couldn't be an officer in some army regiments (no matter how rich and high ranking your parents were); illegitimate sons could not inherit titles or entailed estates - even if the child was "legitimated" by the marriage of the parents after the birth, or adopted, or acknowledged as a son by his father. (The last one might still be true, it still applied in the 20th Century)

There were quite few legal disadvantages, it wasn't just a matter of moral or social attitudes.

Because of these legal disadvantages, the higher up the social and economic scale you were, the more it mattered, but illegitimate children were usually taken care of by rich families, even if they were never told who their parents were. In poor families it was more difficult.

[benny1982]

It was from 1875 onwards that a father of a illegitimate child had to be present for his name to appear on the register. Before then the mother could name a man as a father if he wished but most of the time the fathers name and occupation was left blank, even if she knew who he was.

[welshtyke]

I have only been doing this genealogy thing since Christmas 2011, but its opening up for me an whole new world of social science.

It looks like I have an illegitimate grandfather however my great grandparents did marry about a year later after his birth. This whole stigma around children born outside of wedlock around 1900 is what I am not sure about. Reading around things reveals it was certainly not uncommon, but to what extent would it be covered up.

I suspect that my grandfathers birth out of wedlock may have been covered up by saying he was born in Sligo, Ireland, rather than in Sheffield as per recorded evidence (his mothers maiden appears to be on his birth index). Could this be plausible.

[welshtyke]

If you've only seen the entry in the GRO index I assume you don't have the certificate which would show his birth place. Because a birth could only be registered in the District in which the birth took place it is likely that Sheffield was where he was born if that was where he was registered.

If you give us his details and year of birth we could take a look and get a better idea of what you mean.

His details James Albert B Cooper, index 9c 393 and his mothers name should be Alice Amelia. If I can get a match with his mothers name I know I have him

[Mona]

The only way you would be sure is to order the certificate. But this info may help: On the Sheffield Council website they have the local birth indexes. The James Albert B COOPER registered in Ecclesall B district on GRO, is listed in full as James Albert Bray COOPER (subdistrict Hallam). Alice Amelia COOPER married Albert BRAY in Dec 1901, Sheffield reg. disgtict.

[welshtyke]

The only way you would be sure is to order the certificate. But this info may help: On the Sheffield Council website they have the local birth indexes. The James Albert B COOPER registered in Ecclesall B district on GRO, is listed in full as James Albert Bray COOPER (subdistrict Hallam). Alice Amelia COOPER married Albert BRAY in Dec 1901, Sheffield reg. disgtict.

Thats the one. Please could you post the link. Many thanks

[Mona]

Not sure what link you want? Graham has given you the link to order from the GRO, and the reference.

The link for the local register office is HERE (http://libplugins.sheffield.gov.uk/bmd/SearchMain.aspx). Put in search for BIRTH, surname COOPER, and year 1900, then follow instructions.

The GRO reference for the marriage of Alice Amelia COOPER is Dec 1901, Sheffield, 9c, 1142; Albert BRAY on same page.

[welshtyke]

Once again many thanks

[Mallyjam]

I understand that if a girl wasn't married, then the father actually had to be present for the child to be given his name on the birth cert, that was the case in England and I guess Wales too although I am not sure when that changed.


Helpful to know - thanks!