Genealogy Chat

Unmarried mothers 1n the 1930's was a cardinal sin,with the baby taken away for adoption.Question trying to find out if the child could have been registered and raised by the parents of the unmarried mother as a unexpected birth

More likely would be an adoption as legal adoption started in1929

Don't know about the thirties but in forties and fifties the hospital ,or midwife if it was a home birth ,had to do paperwork and send to the register office before they would register a birth

When our daughter was born hubby went to register her birth and was told to come back in a week as they hadn't had the paperwork from the hospital

The midwife of doctor would sign that they had delivered the child with date etc

Yes many were kept with the family and many children have grown up with a*** sister ***who was infact their birth mother,,,even an aunt could have been a birth mother.

That's true Kay but I think the birth would be reg with the birth mums name even though the child may be brought up by the grandparents and think her mum was her sister

my nan was born in yorkshire and in the 1911 census she was in Berkshire in a home for "fallen" women. They did not have their babies with them. I have searched for a birth but nothing comes up. Perhaps the baby died or was given up. Quite a sad situation really

Was the baby registered though Maddie

Could she have been working there rather than being an inmate

no she was an inmate. Whether the baby was registered i really don't know
madddie

You can check on the GRO site using her surname

Maybe she was still pregnant and hadn't yet given birth at census time

i checked the gro and nothing.
maybe a family member took the child in and registered it under their names
The home she went to did not allow babies and it was not a home where you could go to give birth. My cousin has been in contact with them and the records can cast no further light.

It is a shame, an aunt or uncle we will never know about

maddie

I read it that she was in a home for unmarried mothers

Maybe as a "fallen woman " it was because of another misdemeanour.

Sadly you will never know

NOTE ................

I understand it was a "cardinal sin" only to Catholics or other very religious groups.

For most others, it was a sin and wrong, but not "cardinal".


Note also that 100 years and more before that date (1930s), a woman who was pregnant or who had 1 or more children out of wedlock would be welcomed into the family of many country folk ......... it proved she was fecund and would produce children to take care of the old folk.

Maddie ..............

it could be even sadder, and not what you want to hear, but homes for fallen women were more usually for women and girls who had been found (or suspected!!) of having sexual experiences before marriage, and thought to be in danger of "walking the streets", or maybe had fallen that far .......... they were rescued and rehabilitated.

They did not have to be pregnant, just rescued .... so there might not have been any baby at all.