Genealogy Chat

If it’s only an address then it’s likely the workhouse hospital

They would be used for medical treatment,child birth etc but folks didn’t like the inference of it being workhouse when the patient wasn’t in the workhouse but in the hospital only m so the address was used on birth and death certificates .

It was to take away the stigma of being in the workhouse

Would think it unlikely a baby could be taken from the hospital by a relative and not the mum

I've sent you a PM in reply to yours, in case you don't want to post further details on this public thread.

Thank you for your replies, ì will watch the long lost family episode the workhouse
Is now a local hospital and on the certificate it does not say workhouse but the address of the hospital I am a bit sceptical because her sister was only 17 herself at the time I have not checked the records because I am not sure where to look (I don't think her sister was married at the time

Seems next weeks Long Lost Family has two Irish men with falsified birth certificates.

We don’t know when this birth was but at times the Workhouse was the only ‘hospital’.

Have you checked to see if there are workhouse records ?

Usually too babies born in the workhouse are baptised and registered in the workhouse soon after birth

Welcome to the boards, Linda.

Yes, it's possible, if the sister lied to the registrar about being his mother.


Prior to 1926 (in England), 1928 (Ireland) and 1930 (Scotland), adoptions were informal arrangements, so children were often brought up by other relatives as their own, without any legal paperwork being involved.
Perhaps that was the case here, and the sister gave her name because she was his adoptive mother.

what was the babies name

Hi all, I need a bit of information my grandmother was said to be 16 when she gave birth to a little boy in the workhouse it was said her sister took him out of the workhouse and bought him up as her own and her name is on the certificate as his mother, would this be possible Thank you