Genealogy Chat

Top tip - using the Genes Reunited community

Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!

  • The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
  • You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
  • And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
  • The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.

Quick Search

Single word search

Genes Extras

Genes Reunited subscription bonuses

As a way of saying thank you to our subscribers, we have launched Genes Extras. You'll find exclusive competitions and discounts on family history magazines, days out and much more.

Take me to Genes Extras


  • New posts
  • No new posts
  • Thread closed
  • Stickied, new posts
  • Stickied, no new posts

Adoption certificate vs birth reg

Page 0 + 1 of 2

  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. »
ProfilePosted byOptionsPost Date

۞ Cherilyn ۞

۞ Cherilyn ۞ Report 19 May 2013 09:16

Hi all

Hoping someone can please help with this question.

I have found a birth reg for someone on FreeBMD (1941) who I had been told was adopted. But the parents names (surname and mother's maiden name) are those of his family as known to us ie who we thought were his adoptive parents. Also his given names are the same. an adopted child's birth 're-registered' with his adoptive details? And does this replace his original birth certificate? If so would the certificate have any detail of the adoption on it?

Or have we been told porkies? :-)


Reggie Report 19 May 2013 09:40

No, an adopted child is not re-registered.

He/she would be provided with an adoption cert, and a short 'birth' cert recording the new name and original DOB

A child can only be born once......................


Janet Report 19 May 2013 09:41

see this thread for a similar query



Jonesey Report 19 May 2013 09:47

An adoptive child's birth is NOT re-registered replacing the original after adoption. The normal procedure is to make a notation on the index of the original such as "A see xxxx" , this then indicates that at sometime another "Short" birth certificate has been issued. The short certificate will show the child's names which may or may not have been changed but no birth parents details are indicated. If adoption was the cause of events then the adoptive parents details will I believe be shown. This short certificate then replaces the individuals original birth certificate for legal purposes.

One possibility for the circumstances is if the child's birth parents divorced and its mother perhaps then remarried. The child might then have been adopted by the mother's new husband. Under such circumstances the child's name may well not have been changed from its original one. That could depend upon the age of the child when the adoption occurred.

۞ Cherilyn ۞

۞ Cherilyn ۞ Report 19 May 2013 09:55

Well that is curious!

The parents married here in Australia in 1928, had 3 daughters here and then went to the UK where I found 2 sons born. The first one died aged 5 in 1941 and then this son I refer to in my original post was born in the same quarter of that year with same details for mother's maiden name (ROSS). The mother was 18 when she married so was 41 when he was born. The family then returned to Australia in 1948.

The thing is, my mother had a child with him (they were not married so sadly it became a forced adoption, as was the custom in Australia at the time, against her will). Mum says she was told by his mother that he (the child's dad, b. 1941) was adopted in England as a baby!

At first I thought maybe the child was born to one of the daughters and it was a cover story - but their eldest daughter was born 1929 so seems too young to have had a child in 1941! (not impossible I guess!) And then I found the birth reg with mother as ROSS...

It is really very odd. I will ask my mum about it and see what she thinks...if my half-brother is interested (we are in touch) I might get the UK birth certificate.

Thanks everyone :-)


Janet Report 19 May 2013 10:09

a sister with the same maiden name maybe ?

The certificate will be what holds the answer anything else is just speculation



CupCakes Report 19 May 2013 15:51

This post has surprised me and I have to disagree with you.

All adopted people have a replacement cert issued with the date in the records as the date of reregistration.
The local registation offices do have all the markings in their records but very often this info was not transferred to the national registers. So there is no evidence of any adoption

My self and siblings were all reregistered 1960 the DOB are correct but address on the certs is where we were living then. (Parents married)

I used my experience and checked various records and found my original and my sisters issued in the 1950's . Now have them both.

My long term business friend born 1951 has as similar cert isssued 1954 and asked me if I could find his original. Found it. (Adopted by stepfather)

Another distant cousin was adopted out my her mother 1944. She had found her sibling who was kept by the mother and with that name I found her original birth cert dated 1941. (adopted by a stranger)

All these are when the first name remains the same. When I applied for the certs nobody mentioned adoption.

Now I know some adoptions are closed and records more difficult to find.

:-D :-D


jax Report 19 May 2013 16:03

You were not adopted though were you NS?


CupCakes Report 19 May 2013 16:11

Yes father had to adopt us - says so on the 1960's issued birth certs.


KempinaPartyhat Report 19 May 2013 16:28

Many months ago a program based on truth showed children who could not be adopted here in england being transported to Oz for adoption ....terrible carry on as now these children want to know who their parents where ....

Many be a line to think on or look into


JMW Report 19 May 2013 18:03

Just to clarify a point in NS response.
The entry made in the local registers at local register offices are made on the direct instruction of GRO and no one else. Often the local register office is unaware of a potential adoption until that instruction is received from GRO


Porkie_Pie Report 19 May 2013 18:07

NS, Your example is not one where a child was adopted and has "adoptive parents" but one when the child was adopted by a partner of one of the biological parents, I have seen examples where a biological father had go through the adoption proses to adopt his own child. (often due to him not being named on the original birth cert)

Edit, your claim quote, All adopted people have a replacement cert issued with the date in the records as the date of re registration, un quote

That statement is not correct, Adopted people don't have re registered entries in local registry officers or on the GRO index (FACT)

When an adoption has been granted by a court in England and Wales, the
court issues an order which is the authority for an entry to be made in
the Adopted Children Register held at the General Register Office.
Adoption certificates are then produced from this register under the
child's new details. The adoption certificate replaces the original birth
certificate for legal and administrative purposes.

The original birth record is not removed following an adoption, however,
the entry in the birth register is annotated with the word "adopted" in
the margin and all subsequent copies of the entry will show the

The information contained on an adoption certificate is as follows -

* The name of the adopted person, the date and location of their
birth and the sex of the child
* The name, address and occupation of the adopter(s)
* The date of the adoption order plus description of the court who
made the order
* Signature of the officer at GRO deputed by the Registrar General to
attest the entry

source; date October 2009
Austin Hayes
GRO Adoptions Manager
Room C202a

T:0151 471 4393

I also have a friend who was adopted at birth in 1960 he was told that he was adopted by his adoptive parent so it was never a secret and they even helped him apply for his adoption file, His original birth cert is in his birth name but their is no sign of a birth registration in his adoptive name.

As you say local registration offices do have all the markings in their records where their has been a change? but these changes where adoption is concerned are only available at the GRO but a re registered birth is available and can be purchased from the GRO or a local office in the same way as an original birth cert but when you apply they will only release the re-registered cert regardless of which one you apply for

I have also re registered 2 of my children and they have references on the GRO index,


Good point JMW my friend born and registered in Cumbria but adopted to a family in Yorkshire, Local officers all have their own system of referencing and would not know if a child born in one place was adopted in another unless they where informed by the GRO.


CupCakes Report 19 May 2013 21:37

I've gave 3 examples of 3 types of adoptions involving 6 people.
Just rechecked my own the 1960 entry is clear in the records makes it look like I was born in that year.

What I have just noticed is that the births were in complete different parts of the country to where the adoptions and reregistations took place. My cuz and friend had never seen the original certs I obtained.

One thing I do accept is before the freedom of information act came into place in UK when my sisters and I requested a cert it was only the 1960 entry we received. My friend said he used his adopted one to obtain his passport.


Porkie_Pie Report 19 May 2013 22:04

NS, When a birth is listed on the index and the page number is crossed out and the words See M60 in its place then that indicates that the birth has been re registered in March 1960 so that the GRO no not to issue the original birth cert and they will then only issue the re registered "amended" birth certificate choose which one you order wherever it be the original 1950 entry or the 1960 entry they will only issue the latter

see M60 or S46 means just that

Their are a couple of reasons allowed for a reregistration and Adoption is not one of them, The main reason is under the The Legitimacy Act 1926 where by a couple who were not married and had children together but then got married at a latter date could legitimise the child by re registering the child's birth

The Legitimacy Act 1926 has had several amendments over the years and act was modified by the Legitimacy Act 1959, which extended it to children whose parent(s) had been married to somebody else when they were born


Edit See M60,J60,S60 or D60 could also refer to a birth that is a late entry

NS, quote my own the 1960 entry is clear in the records makes it look like I was born in that year.

The birth index is not a record of when a birth took place, Its a record of when that event was registered


Amanda, Report 19 May 2013 22:17

I think the point being made is that most adopted children have their original names changed and there is no way of tracing them after that once they have gone to new parents.
It is totally different to a parent adopting their own child or changing the name of one parent.
Kind regards


Porkie_Pie Report 19 May 2013 22:25

I will just Add that if a child is born out of wedlock or not to each other, but the father accepts responsibility then the child is registered in both names and the index will have two entries, One in the mothers name and one in the fathers name but their will only be one certificate


Births Mar 1956
Smith John jones Hertford 4b 170

Births Mar 1956
Jones John Jones Hertford 4b 170

(names are not actual)


In that example if the parents went on to get married to each other they could re register the birth and the new entry would be in the year and quarter it was re registered and the page number 170 of the original entry would be crossed out and replaced with See then the quarter and year, of the reregistration

۞ Cherilyn ۞

۞ Cherilyn ۞ Report 20 May 2013 02:18

Wow, now I am confused...I think I understand what has been said, in that births can be re-registered if the original parent(s) marries....this is actually the case with my husband and sister-in-law, whose parents married some years after they were born (in Australia) - their 'new' birth certficates were registered the same year, even though their birthdates are 12 years apart! We were told that even they cannot access their 'original' record so can only accept what the new record states.

So it does seem likely in this instance that my chap was not adopted but was in fact born to the same parents. The surname is very unusual so the notion of sisters being involved to explain the same mn is VERY unlikely, also considering the whole Australia-UK-Australia migration of parents and children. At least I don't have to worry about never finding out who his real parents were I guess!

Might still get the cert, will have a chat to my mum.

Thanks again :-)

۞ Cherilyn ۞

۞ Cherilyn ۞ Report 20 May 2013 05:47

Ok just asked my mum and she says she was told by his mother that it was a private arrangement made with the baby's unwed mother (this is the 1941 birth)...not exactly sure what this means but if it was not a formal/legal adoption, then I assume the birth certificate would not be helpful.

Is this even possible - wouldn't there usually have to be a wtiness to the birth i.e. midwife or doctor?



Porkie_Pie Report 20 May 2013 07:50

Cherilyn, Anything is possible, even when I registered my children I was not asked for evidence

Description of informant. The current list of eligible informants reads, in order of preference

(1) In all cases - mother

(2) Father - if he is married to mother

(3) Father and mother jointly where they are not married to one another

(4) A person present at the birth

(5) The owner or occupier of the house or institution

(6) The person in charge of the child

see for info on BMD certs


you may also find this link useful, their are also other links on the page to "Historic Hansard"

۞ Cherilyn ۞

۞ Cherilyn ۞ Report 20 May 2013 10:29

Thanks, Roy :)