Naming of unmarried/absent fathers on birth certificates for geneology reasons.

I was recently unable to name a father on my childs birth certificate when registering his birth, as the father is both not married to me, and absent from the childs life. At present, if a father's name is to be entered on the birth certificate, current law requires either; the father to be married to the mother, be present at the time of registration or provide the registrar with documentation to express his wish to be included on the certificate in his absence. As a result many children who's biological father is absent are being left with the indignity of having a blank space on their birth certificate where the father's name should be. This law is creating future generations of children who will effectively be eliminated from geneological, anthropological and historical records to a greater or lesser extent.

At present parents stated on birth certificates are directly linked to parental responsibility and as a result the law is in place to protect men from having all the implications of this linked to them if the child is not biologically theirs. However if the system was altered in a way that eliminated this problem, whilst still giving children the right to have a father named at their birth, both sides would be better served. For example a birth certificate as well as a 'parental responsibility certificate': the former for the purpose of geneology ect and the latter being linked to the current laws for birth certificates.

As parents have to provide no identificaton upon registering a birth under the current laws the process is already open the a level of abuse. For example, in my case I registered my child's birth with my partner (who is not the biological parent of my child) present. I was asked if I was the mother and then my partner was asked if he was the father. We explained that my partner was not here to register his name, being honest people. Yet it would have been very easy for him to have just replied 'yes' and the registrar would have been non the wiser. With research suggesting upward of 20 percent of UK residents having incorect parentage registered on their birth certificates surely this system is ready for a review?   

Why is this idea important?

I was recently unable to name a father on my childs birth certificate when registering his birth, as the father is both not married to me, and absent from the childs life. At present, if a father's name is to be entered on the birth certificate, current law requires either; the father to be married to the mother, be present at the time of registration or provide the registrar with documentation to express his wish to be included on the certificate in his absence. As a result many children who's biological father is absent are being left with the indignity of having a blank space on their birth certificate where the father's name should be. This law is creating future generations of children who will effectively be eliminated from geneological, anthropological and historical records to a greater or lesser extent.

At present parents stated on birth certificates are directly linked to parental responsibility and as a result the law is in place to protect men from having all the implications of this linked to them if the child is not biologically theirs. However if the system was altered in a way that eliminated this problem, whilst still giving children the right to have a father named at their birth, both sides would be better served. For example a birth certificate as well as a 'parental responsibility certificate': the former for the purpose of geneology ect and the latter being linked to the current laws for birth certificates.

As parents have to provide no identificaton upon registering a birth under the current laws the process is already open the a level of abuse. For example, in my case I registered my child's birth with my partner (who is not the biological parent of my child) present. I was asked if I was the mother and then my partner was asked if he was the father. We explained that my partner was not here to register his name, being honest people. Yet it would have been very easy for him to have just replied 'yes' and the registrar would have been non the wiser. With research suggesting upward of 20 percent of UK residents having incorect parentage registered on their birth certificates surely this system is ready for a review?   

Censuses:the poor’s Debrett’s. Don’t abolish the 2021 Census, release the1921 Census after 95 years to pay for it.

Censuses encourage billions of pounds worth of tourism to UK by overseas family historians, encourage millions to engage in research and self education and to become interested in history for the first time in our lives. Family history research generate           educational endeavour, family pride and community cohesion.

Far better to pay for the 2021 census by making the 1921 census available 5 years early, and by transcribing and keeping access rights to this in UK, instead of selling the rights to this lucrative census to American companies as has happened in the past.

It is absurd for the 1921 Census be subject to a 100 year closure when the 1911 Census was released early.  The choice of 100 years closure is entirely arbitrary. 95 years is perfectly adequate: many other historic documents are released far sooner than this.

UK could make billions from early  release of the 1921 Census

Why is this idea important?

Censuses encourage billions of pounds worth of tourism to UK by overseas family historians, encourage millions to engage in research and self education and to become interested in history for the first time in our lives. Family history research generate           educational endeavour, family pride and community cohesion.

Far better to pay for the 2021 census by making the 1921 census available 5 years early, and by transcribing and keeping access rights to this in UK, instead of selling the rights to this lucrative census to American companies as has happened in the past.

It is absurd for the 1921 Census be subject to a 100 year closure when the 1911 Census was released early.  The choice of 100 years closure is entirely arbitrary. 95 years is perfectly adequate: many other historic documents are released far sooner than this.

UK could make billions from early  release of the 1921 Census

Open Historic Registers Now

A review, chaired by Paul Darce of the 30 year rule, recommended that it be reduced to 15 years in its report January 2009.

In his submission to the review Anthony Camp, M.B.E. suggested that all historic records of Birth, Marriage and Death be made open to the Public.

It is high time these records were openly accessible there is absolutely no good reason for them to remain regulated and only accessible by purchasing certified copies.

The records used to be open to public inspection. From the start of civil registration the public could carry out searches in the registers of Birth, Marriage and Death. In 1898 the then Registrar General took it upon himself to close the records held at the GRO even though there was no change in the law to allow for such unilateral action.

Similarly in 1974 many local Registrars closed the registers they held to public searches even though a public search of the registers was written in to the various applicable Acts of Parliament.

I therefore suggest that the coalition government release all historic registers of Birth, Marriage and Death to allow private enterprise to digitise and make those records available online.

Such a move would create employment in the private sector, reduce costs and pressure on the General Register Office. This would allow staff to concentrate on their core activities and increase productivity.

In addition the sale of digitised copies of historic Birth, Marriage and Death certificates would create useful revenue in these times of need.

Why is this idea important?

A review, chaired by Paul Darce of the 30 year rule, recommended that it be reduced to 15 years in its report January 2009.

In his submission to the review Anthony Camp, M.B.E. suggested that all historic records of Birth, Marriage and Death be made open to the Public.

It is high time these records were openly accessible there is absolutely no good reason for them to remain regulated and only accessible by purchasing certified copies.

The records used to be open to public inspection. From the start of civil registration the public could carry out searches in the registers of Birth, Marriage and Death. In 1898 the then Registrar General took it upon himself to close the records held at the GRO even though there was no change in the law to allow for such unilateral action.

Similarly in 1974 many local Registrars closed the registers they held to public searches even though a public search of the registers was written in to the various applicable Acts of Parliament.

I therefore suggest that the coalition government release all historic registers of Birth, Marriage and Death to allow private enterprise to digitise and make those records available online.

Such a move would create employment in the private sector, reduce costs and pressure on the General Register Office. This would allow staff to concentrate on their core activities and increase productivity.

In addition the sale of digitised copies of historic Birth, Marriage and Death certificates would create useful revenue in these times of need.

Civil registration: access to historical birth, marriage and death certificates.

Removal of the law prohibiting access to civil birth, marriage and death records in England and Wales from 1837 until, say, 100 years ago, other than on payment of £9.25 for a certified copy from the General Register Office.

Changes to the access of these has been requested by family historians for many years and was included in a review of the whole of civil registration a few years ago but no law was never enacted.  (Summary at http://www.parliament.uk/briefingpapers/commons/lib/research/briefings/snha-02722.pdf.)

It would not be practical to allow access to these records to anyone and everyone, but at the very least the law should be changed to allow a family history organisation access to the original documents so that they could be scanned and made available free of charge online.

Why is this idea important?

Removal of the law prohibiting access to civil birth, marriage and death records in England and Wales from 1837 until, say, 100 years ago, other than on payment of £9.25 for a certified copy from the General Register Office.

Changes to the access of these has been requested by family historians for many years and was included in a review of the whole of civil registration a few years ago but no law was never enacted.  (Summary at http://www.parliament.uk/briefingpapers/commons/lib/research/briefings/snha-02722.pdf.)

It would not be practical to allow access to these records to anyone and everyone, but at the very least the law should be changed to allow a family history organisation access to the original documents so that they could be scanned and made available free of charge online.

Allow Access to the 1921 Census Now

In times of economic stress such as these the government might be open to any idea that could generate useful revenue and the 1921 census is one such project.

A way to generate income, provide jobs and boost the economy all at the same time without making cuts.
Such a policy must be popular with the electorate.

The National Audit Office report on the release of the 1901 census stated that the internet access to the 1901 generated revenues of £4.5 million by October 2003, less than one year.
In five years that amounts to a conservative sum of £22.5 million and useful figure for even a government to play with.

A group of MPs suggested the 1911 census could develop revenue of 40 million pounds per annum

There were no sensitive questions on the schedule-
Name & Surname, Relationship to Head, Age, Sex, Married or Orphaned, Birthplace, Nationality, School, Occupation, Employment, Place of work, Total Children Under 15, Ages of Children. – so there is no need to redact columns.

In addition releasing the census would purge misconceptions raised by a previous Registrar General, Len Cook when he pledge on the 1981, 1991 census that the schedules would remain closed for 100 years. A pledge he later admitted in a letter to parliament he had no authority to give.

This would not cost goverment or taxpayers one penny as private companies would be queuing up to digitise, transcribe and host the 1921 Census

Why is this idea important?

In times of economic stress such as these the government might be open to any idea that could generate useful revenue and the 1921 census is one such project.

A way to generate income, provide jobs and boost the economy all at the same time without making cuts.
Such a policy must be popular with the electorate.

The National Audit Office report on the release of the 1901 census stated that the internet access to the 1901 generated revenues of £4.5 million by October 2003, less than one year.
In five years that amounts to a conservative sum of £22.5 million and useful figure for even a government to play with.

A group of MPs suggested the 1911 census could develop revenue of 40 million pounds per annum

There were no sensitive questions on the schedule-
Name & Surname, Relationship to Head, Age, Sex, Married or Orphaned, Birthplace, Nationality, School, Occupation, Employment, Place of work, Total Children Under 15, Ages of Children. – so there is no need to redact columns.

In addition releasing the census would purge misconceptions raised by a previous Registrar General, Len Cook when he pledge on the 1981, 1991 census that the schedules would remain closed for 100 years. A pledge he later admitted in a letter to parliament he had no authority to give.

This would not cost goverment or taxpayers one penny as private companies would be queuing up to digitise, transcribe and host the 1921 Census