Vital Records (BMD, name changes, etc.) - Family History & Genealogy Message Board

Certificate

mullholland21 — 2013-06-14 18:46:58Z

Anyone know how far back can you get certificate for birth, death and marriage? as I would like to get some of my gggrandmother's and father's in 1800. Thanks

Re: "Certificate of No Record"

mi2early — 2013-06-06 13:38:59Z

A search on the web seems to indicate that it just means a certificate could not be found given the information provided. Perhaps the birth occurred in a different county.

Re: B/M/D Certificates

xblueeyesx10101 — 2013-06-05 17:39:21Z

Hi K,

that's a good idea actually. Thanks.

Re: B/M/D Certificates

iamabookie2 — 2013-06-05 16:57:16Z

When I ordered my G Grandmother's death certificate, there was another certificate attached. I looked up the individual and found a few family trees on Ancestry. I then contacted them to see if they wanted me to email it to them. They were thrilled! Paying it forward!

birth Certificate

debbiedecker1 — 2013-06-05 12:13:09Z

hi there
im thinking of ordering a birth cert of my great grandmother born in 1875 to see what her mothers maiden name was, as i was told she (her mother) from poland would i get that information at all or would it show her married name only .....

"Certificate of No Record"

diggler94 — 2013-06-05 00:10:28Z

When researching a birth certificate here in California, I received a response from the County saying records could not be released, in essence "Certificate of no record". I know the birth in question took place. Why would the county send me this response?

Does anyone know what "Certificate of No Record" might mean?

Re: California vital statistics.

DENREY — 2013-06-04 21:49:45Z

Hi
Those are the wrong dates for me.
Thanks
Dennis

Re: California vital statistics.

thomasker2 — 2013-06-04 14:42:21Z

I’m not related to any member of this family.

1940 is the last available census at this time.

California Death Index 1940 – 1997 = FREE SITE
Mother’s maiden name is sometimes listed

http://vitals.rootsweb.com/ca/death/search.cgi

Re: California vital statistics.

ELLinSpain — 2013-06-04 09:46:00Z

on Anc.

available

California, Marriage Index, 1960-1985
California, Divorce Index, 1966-1984
California Birth Index, 1905-1995

if these fall into your query - post a few details & I'll have a peek

Re: California vital statistics.

genie_seeker — 2013-06-03 21:47:41Z

Hey Dennis,
I'm trying to find a free site as well.
If you find an answer outside of this site, please post your results here. I'll do the same.
The only thing I've found so far that is semi-decent is:
www.familysearch.org (but sadly it didn't have the info I was seeking).
Good luck

Re: birth Certificate

debbiedecker1 — 2013-06-01 22:49:07Z

Carol
thank you so much, that has answered my question and quick response too, i will definitely invest in one now lol many thank

Re: birth Certificate

CarolColeman8353 — 2013-06-01 22:19:00Z

This is what an English or Welsh birth cert will show you.

http://home.clara.net/dixons/Certificates/births.htm

Order it for £9-25 from the official GRO website.

http://www.gro.gov.uk/gro/content/certificates/

Re: California vital statistics.

CadiListMom — 2013-06-01 05:26:25Z

I have a membership to Vital Search....if you don't find what you're looking for as a guest,
http://www.vitalsearch-ca.com/
email me
cadi-list-mom@sbcglobal.net

Colleen

California vital statistics.

DENREY — 2013-05-31 19:48:41Z

Hello,
Is there a site for free California vital statistics?

Thanks

Dennis

Re: Certificate

mullholland21 — 2013-05-27 17:13:20Z

Thanks that where I get all mine

Re: Certificate

carobradford — 2013-05-27 11:10:54Z

Make sure you buy your certificates direct from the GRO (www.gro.gov.uk) where they will cost £9.25 including worldwide postage. Many organisations will attempt to charge you a lot more for a poorer service.

Re: Certificate

mullholland21 — 2013-05-27 09:15:57Z

thanks for that, I can get two certificate I wanted. chris

Re: Certificate

carobradford — 2013-05-27 08:52:45Z

The system of civil registration of births, marriages and deaths began in England and Wales on 1 July 1837 (a couple of decades later in Scotland and Ireland).

Prior to that, you will need to search parish registers for records of baptisms, marriages and burials. These do not, in the vast majority of cases, provide anything like the same amount of personal detail as civil registration certificates so, unless you are dealing with extremely uncommon names, ensuring the accuracy of your research will depend on using other sources to corroborate your conclusions.

Hope this helps

Caroline

Re: Discrepancy on birth certifcate

rickinork — 2013-05-16 11:38:36Z

I thought you might be interested in a bit of up dating on the Thomas saga. Another Thomas seeker after history has got the death certificate for 1853 for Harriet Thomas and it's not her. The birth certificates for two of the children at the 1849 baptism (Charles and Augusta) both show Sarah Cooper as the mother so we have to go forward on the basis that she was the actual mother of at least the last 4 children of Daniel Thomas. In trying to think about the marriage of Daniel and Sarah, there was clearly no inhibition about telling the government he and she were married on the birth certificates so the only conclusion I can reach is that Harriet Thomas was alive until the back of 1855 because she was the just impediment to the marriage. Now whether she had done a runner or was confined to an asylum I can't find any evidence for either although instinct says the latter.

What confuses the matter further is that a Harriet Thomas who gave birth to a Harriet Thomas in 1826, died in the workhouse in 1829. There are also 2 baptisms of a Charles Joseph Thomas, one illegitimate in 1824.; one to the child of the same name born of Harriet and Daniel Thomas in 1825 - same church same minister.

The final confusion is that the Thomas family, whoever was the mother, are completely absent from the 1841 census. Sarah Cooper/ Thomas is similarly not in the 1851 census that I can find.

There's the makings of a victorian novel here of dual identities. As you said it's a mystery.

Marriage License

JuliWoodward — 2013-05-11 20:37:14Z

Does anyone know why I wouldn't be able to find a marriage license for a specific person?
My father was married 3 times and I can't find a record of ANY of them!
Any tips or suggestions would be greatly appreciated!
Thanks!!

Juli

Re: Marriage License

eGENEee — 2013-05-11 20:34:15Z

This doesn't mention all his wives, but here's more info on Roy Lee Arnold:

http://files.usgwarchives.net/la/sabine/vitals/deaths/a65400...

I've also seen his mother's last name spelled Thurman, elsewhere.

Re: Marriage License

eGENEee — 2013-05-11 20:31:48Z

Do you know the women's names? Do you know the dates or years? Locations?

Re: Marriage License

eGENEee — 2013-05-11 20:07:48Z

Most "current" marriage licenses are not public record, and most of those that ARE, aren't available for free.

You don't say where you have looked, either -- online? through counties or states records? published indexes? church records?

Re: Marriage License

thomasker2 — 2013-05-11 11:36:20Z

I’m not related to any member of this family.

You have not stated his full name.

You have not stated a time period.

You have not stated where he had lived.

Try Vital Records – Birth, Marriage, & Death, Social Security Info., Census Records – FREE ALL STATES

http://search.labs.familysearch.org/

Re: B/M/D Certificates

xblueeyesx10101 — 2013-05-06 09:02:07Z

Ok, thanks.

Re: B/M/D Certificates

barbdale_1 — 2013-05-06 01:01:29Z

I would also post a message on the appropriate surname board, or the county/district where the event happened.

Re: Surname Changes

genafan201 — 2013-05-05 02:45:57Z

Thanks Tim...That's sort of the way I was leaning, but I wanted to get a second opinion. I have some family members using the "Beirs" name (as did I - it was my maiden), and some family members using the "Bujarski" name. When doing research, it's just a given to look up both in whatever I'm searching :)

Thank you again for the response.

Re: B/M/D Certificates

xblueeyesx10101 — 2013-05-04 14:45:49Z

Thanks Jacki :)

Re: B/M/D Certificates

Jacki_Donovan — 2013-05-04 14:38:28Z

Hi Heather,
If you search for "unwanted certificates genealogy" you`ll get some good suggestions.
Hope this helps
Jacki

B/M/D Certificates

xblueeyesx10101 — 2013-05-04 12:06:34Z

is there anywhere where we can pass on "wrong" certificates that we have ordered from the general records office to help others in their ancestry search? I have a couple of certificates I have ordered and they are the wrong person/wrong family and so they are now no good to me at all. And GRO doesn't give money back once you have ordered the certificate. it seems a shame to waste them when someone else who might be connected to that family could use the birth/marriage/death certificate for their search.

Re: Discrepancy on birth certifcate

Lindacalvert11 — 2013-05-02 16:34:44Z

Hi Richard,

I think the 1853 death record for Harriet is probably the right one.

If Harriet had died earlier there would've been nothing to stop Sarah & Daniel marrying before Edmund's birth, but if Harriet & Daniel had separated some time after William's birth in 1843 and maybe weren't in touch after then it could be that Daniel didn't find out about her death immediately, giving a plausible reason for the delay in marrying Sarah.

It would be interesting to know who the informant was on Harriet's death certificate, maybe there could be clues there. I love a mystery!
Regards
Linda

Re: Discrepancy on birth certifcate

Lindacalvert11 — 2013-05-02 14:18:18Z

Hi Richard,
I can’t offer any concrete facts but the available records certainly give room for theories!

I noticed that on the 1851 census Daniel THOMAS is shown as a visitor but there’s no sign of his children so I did some hunting and found this census record:

Middlesex>St Giles in The Fields>St Giles South>District 6>52
Address: 10 Little Wild Street (the same as given on the children’s baptism entries)
L THOMAS Head 50 b.1801 Berkshire
Amelia THOMAS Dau 12 1839 Clerkenwell
Albert THOMAS Son 6 1845 Smithfield
William THOMAS son 9 1842 Smithfield
Edmund THOMAS son 2 1849 Smithfield

I think the L has been mistranscribed and should be an S. If this form was filled in by Sarah Cooper (who I can find no trace of on the 1851 census) it would explain the slightly out dates/birth places. The occupation of the head appears to read ‘Broken man’ – no, I kid you not, although it could read ‘Broker man’ but that has no connection to his real occupation.

If this is the right family where is Daniel’s wife, Harriet? I saw that you have her death in 1853 St George, Hanover Square, so I went hunting again and found a Harriet THOMAS mar 54 b.1797 Sevenoaks Kent as a visitor at the home of James J CHALK (barrister not in practice), at 80 Warwick Street, St George Hanover Square. I know the date & place of birth don’t match but I can’t find this woman either on the previous or next census. Might be interesting to see whether the address given on your Harriet’s death certificate matches this one.

I’d make a guess that Edmund’s real mother was Sarah COOPER as recorded on his birth certificate. As for the different name on the baptism record, I’d put that down to the fact that all the children were baptised together and the older ones would have certainly known the name of their real mother, so rather than having to confess to the vicar that the youngest one was born out of wedlock it would have been simpler just to put the same name on Edmund’s baptism record.

Food for thought, but it’s just my theory, of course.
Regards
Linda

Re: Discrepancy on birth certifcate

rickinork — 2013-05-02 13:41:09Z

Linda many thanks. Your reasoning is pretty convincing and I was coming to the same conclusion on balance. I suspect I need to look earlier for Harriet Thomas' death - maybe in the mid 1830s. The logic means that Sarah Cooper had to pretend in church she was Harriet Thomas but if they fudged marital status on a birth certificate then fine. The other thing is that the older children and Adelaide in particular must have been in on it too.

In the 1851 census which is bewildering, I took the occupation of L Thomas to have been Brokers Man - a bailiff in other words a la Cinderella the pantomime characters. However the Berkshire fits and I am going to have a trawl around Berkshire to see if Sarah Cooper might have had male family.

But again thanks.

Richard

Re: Birth Registered Twice?

rickinork — 2013-05-02 08:43:15Z

Thanks for the very helpful thoughts. It is unlikely that there is a coincidence as both were in the same parish/ward of London (St Giles in the Fields) and the child's first names, Edmund George Cooper, are not particularly common - had they been Albert or the like then it could be different. The adoption is a possibility - although as far as I can trace the natural mother died in 1853. I had assumed that until I found the baptism record that mother's name and status on the birth certificate was as you said fudged. All I can guess is that the woman to whom he was married and he lived apart but for reasons of respectability he prevailed upon her to be at the baptism as the child's mother. But even this is at the boundaries of speculation.

Re: Surname Changes

timtracker — 2013-05-02 00:36:11Z

I think most people put the name at the time of birth and then record changes after that. This is how most women are recorded, not with their married name.

I would tend to assume that wives and minors living with a father also automatically change name.

But what matters is that you actually know these two names were used. So, you will know to look for both, just in case your assumptions are wrong.

Re: Birth Registered Twice?

timtracker — 2013-05-01 22:00:14Z

It all sounds very odd from the little detail given.

As the mis-registering of details on the birth certificate would be criminal, the mother's details are nearly always correct, though the marital status might be fudged to show her as married when she was not. So she might be shown as Mrs Brown (ie, married to Mr Brown, the father), when in fact she was Miss White (ie, her maiden name).

But to have a completely different name, if that is what you are saying, registered at the baptism a mere 3 days later is odd. I had expected you to say the baptism was years later, which is not un-common. Why would the religious authorities allow a completely different woman to be shown in such circumstances ?

The possible solutions, and I admit to speculation here, that come to mind are :

1) Could this be an example of an informal adoption ? Formalised adoption does not come until much later.

2)Conicidence, so that there is a birth and baptism in close proximity with similar names involved. I have been confused by such events where cousins with the same first name were involved.

Re: Birth Registered Twice?

rickinork — 2013-05-01 11:11:22Z

Thanks for the reply. I'm becoming more clear that there was some unmarried relationship there but I remain bewildered as to why 3 days after registering the birth with one name, the boy was baptised with another named mother. Doubtless this will have to remain a mystery although I would still like to know which was my great great grandmother.

Re: Birth Registered Twice?

halpark — 2013-05-01 10:05:23Z

I think we have to remember that what happened and what "should" have happened can be very different things and many people (including our ancestors) told as many lies and fantasies as happens nowadays. I came across records for four children of a first cousin of my grandfather. The first (all girls) died a few days after birth but all of them were registered by the father with the Mother being Jessie B., formerly B... However there seemed to be a problem with the marriage - no trace thereof, until it occurred to me to look later and lo and behold, Harry B., had married Jessie B., SPINSTER, in 1895, 15 years after he registered the birth of the first child, 1880, and five years after the fourth, 1890. Were these birth entries "legal" - it clearly indicates the mother was married to the father which she obviously was not. Why were they not married? Not a clue. His father had made a lot of money and risen from being a "warehouseman" to being a "gentleman" and was very busy presenting his eldest daughter's children at courts and "drawing rooms" and hooking the daughter of an earl for her son - and his son was publicly "living in sin" but lying about it! Sometimes we just have to accept the actions will never be explained logically - although I am still open to "logical" suggestions. Good luck with further searches.

Re: Birth Registered Twice?

rickinork — 2013-05-01 09:34:10Z

Thanks for the helpful clarification. It was always my understanding that only the natural parents could register a birth and that the baptism record has no legal standing. The difficulty in clearing my mind is that the baptism took place 3 days after the birth was registered and the presumed (by me) natural mother was the name given at the church. The birth certificate shows another woman altogether as 'Sarah Thomas formerly Cooper' but she and my great great grandfather did not marry for another 7 years (1856). What seems to be emerging is that my great great grandfather had an irregular household with a complaisant wife and in registering the birth in question he misrepresented the mother's status. What bewilders me is that he misrepresented Sarah Cooper's status when it would have been more logical to assign the child to his legal wife which he did at this baptism.

Legal age in 1865

susanandleslie — 2013-04-30 17:54:01Z

What was considered a minor for a female in 1865. I assume it was below 21. I have someone who should be 23 but is marked as a minor. Thanks.

Re: Birth Registered Twice?

timtracker — 2013-04-30 17:16:19Z

Only the natural parents can re-register a birth after marriage. This is a formal, legal procedure.

A baptism record is NOT the same as re-registering the birth. It records a baptism, that is all. A re-registered birth appears on the legal birth register. A baptism will not. So, if you searched the birth record for your Great grandfather I suspect that he only appears once on that.

The original birth record should ALWAYS show the natural birth mother. It would be very difficult to get this wrong. Sometimes the wrong father could be registered, for a variety of reasons. A re-registered birth also can only legally show the natural mother.

However, what may have happened here is that the natural mother died at or after the birth, but before the baptism. Or perhaps the natural parents separated. Then the father entered another relationship, and it is this that is shown on the baptism record. The baptism record is made by a church and has no legal weight. The church may not have been aware that the 'mother' was, in effect, adoptive, or may have known and not worried about it as they recognised the relationship. This could be down to whoever was in charge at the church at the time.

To repeat, ONLY natural parents can formally re-register a birth after marriage.

Re: Discrepancy on birth certifcate

mi2early — 2013-04-30 12:51:02Z

Without some details it will be difficult for someone to help other than to speculate.

Re: Death registration in Poona India in 1865 also registered in UK?

halpark — 2013-04-30 10:17:02Z

I have a feeling that 1965 is a typo?! It is not clear if you have had contact with either the India Office Library, which has a Family History section or the Families in British India Society (FIBIS) but both of those are very helpful with anything to do with India - which can be a real tangle. The great British Empire has left a nightmare for family researchers. Many people do not realise that if one was born in India as 2nd generation one never had British citizenship - I met an Australian once who had been born in India, family left in 1947 when she was a child, and it was only when she applied for an Australian passport she discovered that she was Indian, not British because both her father and grandfather had been born in India. The same goes for Kenya. I have a friend whose son was born in Kenya as was his father and grandfather. When he wanted a British passport, which his father had, he discovered he was actually Kenyan and the oddest case was someone who wanted to join the army in WW2 - only to discover he was a "foreigner", i.e. Irish. His father had been in the British Army stationed in Ireland before it became Eire, c. 1921, and this had resulted in him being Irish not British. I suppose it makes life interesting but certainly confusing for those who do not know a bit about the history. Anyway, I wish you luck with your further searching.

Re: Death registration in Poona India in 1865 also registered in UK?

BelleRinger — 2013-04-30 10:04:30Z

Hi Michele,

Just to let you know that I can't find an entry for your John Dixon in the GRO overseas indexes, and in any case, I doubt that a death certificate from the GRO would tell you the details you're after unfortunately.

Christine

Re: Birth Registered Twice?

rickinork — 2013-04-30 09:53:19Z

I have posted a thankyou on the board for shedding light on a similar question of mine.

Re: Birth Registered Twice?

rickinork — 2013-04-30 09:51:39Z

I happened on this be chance as it seems to point to a question of mine. My great grandfather is shown on the birth certificate as having a different mother from the one on his baptism. The former is someone whom his father married after his true mother's death so reading the exchanges here it looks probable that the birth was re-registered although the new mother was unlikely to have my great grandfather's biological mother.

I'll dig a little further but my appreciation for the light shed to all on this line.

Re: Discrepancy on birth certifcate

rickinork — 2013-04-30 09:41:45Z

Sorry for being so slow in responding. If you look at my reply to a previous comment it seems difficult to avoid a conclusion that there was something odd which may amount to fraud but I can't see a motive for a fraud where it was transparent - if something criminal was going on I assume one or other of the names would be used but not both.

The names were

Father - Daniel Cooper Thomas
Birth certificate - mother Sarah Thomas formerly Cooper whom he married in 1856.
Baptism mother - Harriet Thomas who he married in 1825.

Date of birth - 12 Jan 1849
Registered - 22 February 1849
Baptised - 25 February 1849

Bigamy seems to be ruled out; if he was co-habiting I suppose it's arguable that he would have been more careful of the church than the law.

As a matter of record 5 children were baptised at the same time with birth dates ranging from 1831 to 1849 - the first I assume because she was getting married and needed to be baptised for a church wedding.

If this helps with your thoughts, I'd greatly appreciate it.

Richard (Thomas)

Re: Discrepancy on birth certifcate

rickinork — 2013-04-30 09:26:58Z

Thanks for the thought but the discrepancy is between the birth certificate and the baptism/christening record. It's plausible that a mistake was made or a familiar name was used; either may be the explanation but the difficulty is that the name on the birth certificate is someone whom my great great grandfather subsequently married and the name at the baptism is that of someone whom he married in 1825.

Re: Death registration in Poona India in 1865 also registered in UK?

justmumgreene — 2013-04-30 07:16:21Z

Thankyou for your help
.We have done a lot of research on India and the roll Britain played.As my John Dixon never recieved an army pension it is very difficult to obtain records
We have what is available.I am trying to estabilish his death registration in the hope it will establish what area in Leeds Yorkshire he was from and confirm his fathers name .We also have his marriage certificate but have our doughts about this.He died on the 22.5.1965 in Poona India
Cheers Michele

Re: Death registration in Poona India in 1865 also registered in UK?

halpark — 2013-04-30 06:34:32Z

The important thing to remember is the date at which things happened and whether it was the British Raj (in India), the rest of the Empire or a foreign country. There were no such things as High Commissions until fairly recently with the creation of the Commonwealth. India was unique with a Viceroy standing in for the Queen and actually issuing its own passports (British Indian), with all its business being done through the India Office, but with the Princely States having differences in administration. Dominions (South Africa, Canada, Australia and New Zealand) were fully independent from varying dates, Colonies, Crown Colonies, Protectorates, Self-Governing Colonies were administered through the Colonial Office and Mandates through the Foreign Office. Consulates existed as branch offices in foreign countries which were important enough to have a full Embassy and in foreign countries which were not important enough to have an Embassy at all - but there would be no point looking for either a High Commission in India in 1865 for the simple reason no such thing existed - or a consulate as it was not a foreign country.