• Do you love Genealogy? Why not write for us? we're looking for volunteers to write articles for Family history. Please contact us for further information.

Father not named on birth certificate

Posts
14
Likes
0
Location
Carlisle
#1
Hi there,

I'm new to all this so sorry if it's a stupid question .....

I'm researching the Allcocks in South Staffordshire. John Allcock's birth certificate of 1869 does not include a father's name, only his mother's (Sarah Allcock formerly Ball). John Allcock's marriage certificate gives his father as William Allcock (deceased) - Police Constable.

William Allcock's marriage to Sarah Ball (in 1863) lists him as a Police Officer so I'm fairly sure I have the right people here.

William and Sarah's first(?) child, Alice, was born in 1867 and her birth certificate does show William Allcock (now a 'Husbandman') as the father.

Is John Allcock illegitmate or would the father's name have been omitted if he was deceased? Could there be another reason for him not being named on the birth certificate?

Thanks in advance for any help you can offer.

Regards,
Biggless99
 

duckweed

Loyal Member
Posts
3,087
Likes
6
Location
Sheffield
#2
Usually if father's name is not mentioned the child is illegitimate. Father's who died before the child was born are usually there but marked deceased.
 

Ellie

Loyal Member
Posts
1,461
Likes
0
Location
Staffordshire
#3
Hi Biggles99, Duckweed is quite right. I have an illegitimate ancestor and on his birth cert there is just a line meaning father unknown.Have you tried looking for a baptismal record to see if there is a father's name on that?
 

duckweed

Loyal Member
Posts
3,087
Likes
6
Location
Sheffield
#4
Are you sure you have right birth certificate? There are quite a lot of John Allcocks about same age. When and where did he marry? Have you got him on any census records? I can't find any family members when I was searching for family through census records in 1871
 
Posts
14
Likes
0
Location
Carlisle
#5
Thanks for the help on this.

I'm fairly sure I have the right certificates.

In the 1871 census, Sarah, John and Alice are all back with Sarah's parents (Ball) although the Allcock has acquired an 'H' at the front - becoming Hallcock.

In the 1881 census John (H)Allcock is still there but Sarah and Alice have moved. Incidentally, at the age of 12 in 1881, he is living next door to his future wife, Clara Stanway.

Anecdotal evidence (family gossip!) always led us to suspect that John was illegitimate; a great-aunt said he would never speak of his father. We always assumed that the father had "done a runner" and I can't find any trace of William Allcock after the birth of his daughter Alice.

All very puzzling but then it would be no fun if it was too easy :)
 

p.risboy

Loyal Member
Staff member
Moderator
Posts
18,077
Likes
426
Location
In Ireland, but born Bucks.
#6
Hi Biggles,
I had the same probs.
My paternal Gt.Gt.Grandmother had 3 children, no fathers named on birth certs or their marriage certs.
No father named at the baptisms. And that leaves a huge hole in my tree.
Unless some one can come up with another idea where to look.

So a total dead end for me, but hopefully you may find a baptism.:)

Steve.:)
 

duckweed

Loyal Member
Posts
3,087
Likes
6
Location
Sheffield
#8
I have often seen father named in baptismal records when the child was illegitimate and always the child is listed as illegitimate. I suppose the church could afford to put the fathers name without there being any legal implications.
 

Ellie

Loyal Member
Posts
1,461
Likes
0
Location
Staffordshire
#9
Why would the name be on the baptismal record and not the birth certificate? Was the church not as strict about naming fathers as the state?

Biggless99
Sometimes it would be permitted to put the fathers name on a baptismal record, if he was present at the baptism. You're quite right in saying that the church was strict about not naming fathers on the certs of children born out of wedlock. Have you considered speaking to the register office regarding bastardy orders? This is a court order in which the father of the child pays maintenance money for the upkeep of his child, it is paid by a bastardy bond.:)
 
Posts
386
Likes
0
Location
Perth
#12
Why would the name be on the baptismal record and not the birth certificate? Was the church not as strict about naming fathers as the state?

Biggless99
Hi Biggles
Don't lose hope - my GG grandad had no father named on his birth cert either and I found his father's name in the Church christening record!
Cheers
Karen
 
Posts
672
Likes
0
Location
hartlepool
#13
reading these posts has led me to query my own baptism, my mother was not married when she had me and it was a line through father on the birth certificate, but i was baptised as i have all the photographs,how would that have come about, im puzzled now readint the other posts im 50 by the way if that makes any diffrence.suex
 

Ellie

Loyal Member
Posts
1,461
Likes
0
Location
Staffordshire
#14
reading these posts has led me to query my own baptism, my mother was not married when she had me and it was a line through father on the birth certificate, but i was baptised as i have all the photographs,how would that have come about, im puzzled now readint the other posts im 50 by the way if that makes any diffrence.suex
My understanding is that even though the parents of a child may have been unmarried at the the time of the child's birth the father can still be named. In addition, being born out of wedlock does not prevent the child from being baptised. Father's did 'turn up' for baptisms hence why their name would in some cases appear on the baptismal record.
 

p.risboy

Loyal Member
Staff member
Moderator
Posts
18,077
Likes
426
Location
In Ireland, but born Bucks.
#15
Baptism is a church ceremony, and not a legal requirement. Whereas registering a childs birth was after 1837.

I wasn't baptised, but I still got married in church.

Just because a child is born out of wedlock, does not prevent a baptism, but could possibly be refused by a cleric.
Depends on the 'times' I suppose.

Steve.:)
 
Last edited:
Top