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


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

Birth Certificate Informant Query

ProfilePosted byOptionsPost Date


Kense Report 19 Sep 2019 14:36

From the Gov website

Other people who can register a birth

If the parents cannot register the birth (for example, for medical reasons), certain other people can do it:

someone who was present at the birth
someone who is responsible for the child
a member of the administrative staff at the hospital where the child was born


Flip Report 16 Sep 2019 23:13

OK, another suggestion. If a woman was married, her husband would be named as the "father" whether he was or not - unless she told the registrar otherwise. To be named as the actual father (if not married) would need his presence or a written statement I believe.

WW2 ended in Europe in Sept 1945, but many serving troops were not demobbed till later, and in Asia it was even longer to repatriate. Did the father either serve in WW2 or maybe he was re-located due to his job? (My grandfather was a builder and during the war and had to work at many locations building munitions factories - had to go where sent).

Also, my mother did not register my birth (in a mother/baby unit), and she was adamant my given name was Julia, but my original birth cert states Mary Julia - and that she (my mother) registered it. She stated not, and I don't believe she did, she would never have used the name Mary, it was her step mother's name (who she & her brother hated). I believe one of the nuns or possibly a doctor actually registered my birth.

I think there were a lot of shenanigans going along back then.

Maybe check out the alleged father, see if he could have been around at the time of conception?


Slartibartfast Report 16 Sep 2019 14:18

Just found this;
'Between 1837 and 1875, a mother could name a father without any checks on the reliability of the claim. After this date the consent of the father was required for his name to appear, together with his attendance when the birth was registered.'

Apparently the law changed in 1954.


Shirley~I,m getting the hang of it

Shirley~I,m getting the hang of it Report 16 Sep 2019 12:25

Maybe the hospital had a different way of doing things and didn’t allow registrars into the wards but would do the paperwork at the hospital with the patients notes

In 1946 sometimes it was only one visitor at set times and usually the father only

This was the case in 1957 too when I gave birth to our daughter

Sometimes I didn’t have a visitor as hubby was shift work .


Slartibartfast Report 16 Sep 2019 12:02

That's a good point.
The birth was registered 17 days after the event.
The parents were married.


SuffolkVera Report 16 Sep 2019 11:53

I am a bit puzzled as I don’t understand why the informant isn’t the mother. My daughter was registered in hospital on the day she was born but I was the informant. The only thing I can think is that the mother was too ill to do it and so the doctor delivering the baby did it

Shirley~I,m getting the hang of it

Shirley~I,m getting the hang of it Report 16 Sep 2019 11:34

If they were married the father doesn’t have to be present at the registration

Depending on the area the registrar at that time would go to hospitals to register the births there

Even if they weren’t married at the time the lady may not have given those details

Or another scenario may be the father was visiting at the time the registrar visited and registered the birth
The hospital had to issue paperwork giving details of all the births that took place
Sometimes they did this on a weekly basis


Slartibartfast Report 16 Sep 2019 11:29

This is a scenario I have never come across before. I wonder if anyone has any suggestions;

My friend has recently been told by her older sister that their parents had a child in the 1940's that was given up for adoption.
Today I received the birth certificate from the GRO and sure enough the child was born in 1946 showing the correct mother and father details. A note on the right hand side says 'Adopted' and the name of the registrar making the note,
However, the name of the informant in column 7 is an unknown male, present at the birth followed by the name of the hospital.
I can't work out why, if the father was present at the registration (which he would have to be in order to have his name on the certificate), why was he not also the informant.
Are things done differently when the child is adopted?
I'd be interested to hear your thoughts.