Moderator Control Panel ]

GRO trial uncertified BMDs

Share your thoughts with your fellow family historians – and the Who Do You Think You Are? Magazine team – here

Re: GRO trial uncertified BMDs

Postby junkers » Wed Nov 09, 2016 12:33 pm

The fee may be governed by what Treasury have said on full recovery of costs. However Government is supposed to be going digital so why not do that and make images available on line.
In other words GRO need to join the 21st century.
junkers
 
Posts: 912
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2012 6:59 pm

Re: GRO trial uncertified BMDs

Postby Thos. S. » Wed Nov 09, 2016 4:50 pm

Do the PDF certificates look the same as the postal ones? I'm guessing not as they aren't certified.

I have quite a collection of certificates, I dread to think how many or how much I've spent! It would be nice to keep them all looking consistent.


Sent from my iPhone using WDYTYA Forum
Thos. S.
 
Posts: 41
Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2015 5:40 am

Re: GRO trial uncertified BMDs

Postby Mick Loney » Wed Nov 09, 2016 9:33 pm

AntonyM wrote:
Mick Loney wrote:AntonyM,

An unmarried woman has no maiden name , so the field is correctly shown as a "-".


Sorry to disagree, but every woman has a maiden name, it is the name they were born with!


Sent from my iPad using WDYTYA Forum
Mick Loney
 
Posts: 657
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2011 11:39 am

Re: GRO trial uncertified BMDs

Postby AntonyM » Wed Nov 09, 2016 10:30 pm

Mick Loney wrote:
Sorry to disagree, but every woman has a maiden name, it is the name they were born with!



Until I became a registrar I would have tended to think the same.

The definition of a maiden name used by GRO and in all matters relating to registration is that it is the name "in which a woman first contracted a marriage".

In most cases it will be the same as her birth name, but not necessarily - and for registration purposes a woman who has never married can have no maiden name and that space on a birth or death register entry will be blank.

it is made slightly more complex on historical registers because they have no separate space to show a maiden name, but it should be in column 5 after the word "formerly" if the registrar completed the entry properly

Sometimes it is only by looking at the register entry and seeing how the names are shown and especially who was the informant (which tells you the marital status in many cases) that you can actually decipher the full relationship statuses involved. The indexes (old or new) don't always allow you to do that.
AntonyM
 
Posts: 356
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2014 3:12 pm
Location: Buckinghamshire

Re: GRO trial uncertified BMDs

Postby Guy » Fri Nov 11, 2016 2:46 pm

I have heard of two people who have received at least one of the uncertified copies they ordered today.

One said
"The PDF attachment was quite large (2.21MBytes) and monochrome. Given
the size of the file, perhaps unsurprisingly, it can be zoomed to quite
high magnifications without loss of clarity."

Cheers
Guy
As we have gained from the past, we owe the future a debt, which we pay by sharing today.
Guy
 
Posts: 364
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 3:56 pm

Re: GRO trial uncertified BMDs

Postby junkers » Fri Nov 11, 2016 5:06 pm

AntonyM wrote:
Mick Loney wrote:
Sorry to disagree, but every woman has a maiden name, it is the name they were born with!



Until I became a registrar I would have tended to think the same.

The definition of a maiden name used by GRO and in all matters relating to registration is that it is the name "in which a woman first contracted a marriage".

In most cases it will be the same as her birth name, but not necessarily - and for registration purposes a woman who has never married can have no maiden name and that space on a birth or death register entry will be blank.

it is made slightly more complex on historical registers because they have no separate space to show a maiden name, but it should be in column 5 after the word "formerly" if the registrar completed the entry properly

Sometimes it is only by looking at the register entry and seeing how the names are shown and especially who was the informant (which tells you the marital status in many cases) that you can actually decipher the full relationship statuses involved. The indexes (old or new) don't always allow you to do that.


Of course this only applies to England and Wales only as Scotland had a column for the maiden name.
junkers
 
Posts: 912
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2012 6:59 pm

Re: GRO trial uncertified BMDs

Postby ksouthall » Sat Nov 12, 2016 8:40 am

junkers wrote:Of course this only applies to England and Wales only as Scotland had a column for the maiden name.


Every woman has a surname that they are born with. It only becomes a maiden name when they marry. If they are unmarried, it remains their surname.
ksouthall
 
Posts: 1891
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 7:26 pm
Location: Sussex

Re: GRO trial uncertified BMDs

Postby JaneyH » Sat Nov 12, 2016 2:19 pm

I've finally had a chance to look properly at my ancestor's birth certificate and compared it to what the newly-indexed GRO website indicates.

Column 5, entitled "name, surname and maiden name of mother" reads simply "Harriet Dyson". (Column 4, name and surname of father, has a line struck through.) From this you would assume that Harriet had never married. However ... Dyson was her married name and she was born Harriet Hutchinson. I have her marriage certificate, and Census records all tie up. Now I don't doubt that the child in this case was illegitimate, but Harriet either misinformed the registrar or the register was otherwise completed wrongly.

Having searched for this on the new GRO index the record is shown as "-" for mother's maiden name.


Sent from my iPhone using WDYTYA Forum
User avatar
JaneyH
 
Posts: 556
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2013 5:35 pm

Re: GRO trial uncertified BMDs

Postby AntonyM » Sun Nov 13, 2016 4:24 pm

JaneyH wrote:I've finally had a chance to look properly at my ancestor's birth certificate and compared it to what the newly-indexed GRO website indicates.

Column 5, entitled "name, surname and maiden name of mother" reads simply "Harriet Dyson". (Column 4, name and surname of father, has a line struck through.) From this you would assume that Harriet had never married. However ... Dyson was her married name and she was born Harriet Hutchinson. I have her marriage certificate, and Census records all tie up. Now I don't doubt that the child in this case was illegitimate, but Harriet either misinformed the registrar or the register was otherwise completed wrongly.

Having searched for this on the new GRO index the record is shown as "-" for mother's maiden name.


Was the mother the informant - or was it someone else (who may not have known about her marriage ) ?

If she was the informant (and assuming it is definitely the correct record) then I would agree that she didn't give the full information (or wasn't asked).

As there is no "formerly ..." in column five then there is no maiden name to be shown so the index is correct.



The certificates I ordered have all arrived today (3 days ahead of schedule).
AntonyM
 
Posts: 356
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2014 3:12 pm
Location: Buckinghamshire

Re: GRO trial uncertified BMDs

Postby JaneyH » Sun Nov 13, 2016 4:44 pm

Antony - sorry, I should have noted the informant. It was Harriet, the mother ... so no excuse for someone else not knowing all the details.


Sent from my iPhone using WDYTYA Forum
User avatar
JaneyH
 
Posts: 556
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2013 5:35 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Genealogy chat


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests