General Chat

I have been searching free BMD for information on my fathers family and came across something interesting, my grandmother had 3 children to her husband and later had 5 more children with another man.

The interesting part is that the 5 later children's birth were registered in both her married name Allen and her defactos name of Cooper. Now my question, was it common practice in those days to register births under both names or is this a rare thing, I have spoken to a few people about this and non have heard of this happening before.

Thanks Jeff

I HAVE A MARRIAGE IN 1947
STATES FATER TERRY OR CHANDLER

Yes, I've come across something similar.
It's usually because the father is willing to have his name on the birth cert, rather than leave 'father's name' a blank on the cert, as can be the case.
So, because the parents weren't married (to each other), but have both gone to register the birth, there is a registration under both their surnames. Not unusual.
In my case, I found the birth to have been re-registered 2 years later when the parents did eventually marry. Consequently I have found a this child's birth registered 3 times over a span of 2 years!!

This family tree lark is an education in itself isn't it!!!!

K
PS. Thinking about it - you are talking about your grandparents generaton, so divorces were less common then I believe because of the cost and because it wasn't easy for a woman to divorce a man. Consequently your grandmother may have been happily living with the new man, as a married couple, and she may have even called herself Mrs 'new man's name...another fairly common thing. Neighbours were none the wiser.

Nothing unusual about this. The father is perfectly entitled to have the children registered with his name. There is a similar situation in my grandson's mum's family. The entries are also cross referenced on the GRO index.