General Chat

Top tip - using the Genes Reunited community

Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!

  • The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
  • You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
  • And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
  • The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.

Quick Search

Single word search

Icons

  • New posts
  • No new posts
  • Thread closed
  • Stickied, new posts
  • Stickied, no new posts

Pregnant Brides

ProfilePosted byOptionsPost Date

Wildgoose

Wildgoose Report 29 Sep 2009 13:06

What a mix up, Kate. I had to read that twice!

Kate

Kate Report 29 Sep 2009 12:58

That just reminded me of the mysterious "fifteen year gap" in my great-great grandma's family.

Her mum and dad married in 1862, aged 21 and 23 and produced babies in 1863, 1864, 1866, 1867, 1870 and 1875. Father was in prison in 1875 and 1881, but . . .

In 1891, there is a serious mix-up of names in this family. The only married daughter (Ada) was noted down as Edith, mum Ursula came up as Ada, the daughter Ursula was away from home working as a barmaid, daughters Polly and the real Edith (aged 16) are living at home but unmarried Laura (who had a ten day old baby, apparently) is missing (so is the baby), as is Edward her father and they have a "visitor" called Clara, who has become a "daughter" by 1901.

What this lot were up to I shudder to think, but I think there is some deliberate misrecording of names going on - I'd almost say it had been organised! All I do know is that Edith never married and we've got a group picture from about 1919 with Edith and Ada on it, as well as Ada's daughter (my great-grandma) and her children, and another unidentified woman who looks old enough (or young enough) to be Clara and is very like Edith! (Who was either born in Liverpool, Melling or "at sea", depending on the census you look at.)

Wildgoose

Wildgoose Report 29 Sep 2009 12:13

My husband's granddad was born when his mum was 46. She'd been having babies for 30 years. Now if it turned out his great grandma was his great aunt.....no, I shall only give meself a headache.

Berona

Berona Report 29 Sep 2009 12:04

I have heard many stories about mothers having babies every year or two for about 25 years - so nobody noticed who actually had the last few!
Many a grown daughter's baby was passed off as her brother or sister.

Kate

Kate Report 29 Sep 2009 09:37

My mum once told me that, on a visit to her aunty, aunty remarked that my grandma had been one to . . . shall we say, "enjoy life" in her youth, which Mum promptly repeated to Grandma - Grandma's retort about my great-aint was, "Well, at least I didn't have to get married".

No. The first time Grandma got married, she didn't "have to". When my mum was on the way, her parents got married six weeks before she arrived - and Grandma always claimed that Mum was two weeks overdue! No wonder Grandma claimed she couldn't remember her wedding anniversary or how long she'd been married!

On my dad's side, I have found a family where three out of four generations of direct ancestors were pregnant at marriage. (Respectively, 6 months, 6 months again and 2 months! But my 3xgreats on that line waited respectably until about ten months after the wedding before their first was born.)

Wildgoose

Wildgoose Report 29 Sep 2009 09:19

These poor old Nans! I bet they wish the granddaughter's hadn't started unearthing all this stuff!

karen in the new forest

karen in the new forest Report 29 Sep 2009 09:11

my nans very straight laced but i found her marriage 1938 in november and my uncle was born 1st jan 1939 and even my mum didnt now that and nan said they lost there wedding pictures when they moved i bet she never had any lol
karen

Julie

Julie Report 29 Sep 2009 08:14

After knowing what my Nan was like i was shocked to find that her parents married 14 years after she was born & she was the youngest.

Then Shock number 2 came.....My nan was 5 months pregnant when she married

Could there be more i wondered...so shock number 3 was finding out my Mum was pregnant when she married at 17
And to think what my Mum called me when i went on the pill at...22 & i didn't have my 1st child till is was 35 but i am an unmarried mother lololol

maggiewinchester

maggiewinchester Report 28 Sep 2009 22:41

My g grandparents married in 1921 - just before the birth of their 9th child (my g grandmother's 10th child - her first was left with her parents in Suffolk) they had one other legitimate child who died aged 4.
On their wedding certificate she is a spinster (true) - he is a bachelor (false - he was a widower. They waited until wife No. 1 died).
My gran's first child was born 9 months after her marriage - but from letters between her and my grandfather, she had at least 3 'scares' during the year they were courting!
Mum was married at 17 and had her first child when she was 19.
I wore a 'big' dress when I married. My sister wore a smock top!!! LOL

As for my dad's side - both he and his younger sister's births were registered under my gran's maiden name. I haven't got dad's full cerificate yet (he never had a full one- just used the short one) as I've only just found his original registration - 16 years after his birth!

Fiona aka Ruby

Fiona aka Ruby Report 28 Sep 2009 22:09

Marrying just before or just after the birth of a child, particularly in rural areas, was not as much of an issue as it would become towards the end of the 19th century.

Wildgoose

Wildgoose Report 28 Sep 2009 22:07

Mum didn't like me taking my niece out in her pushchair because she had red hair like me! I was 17 when she was born. When I took her to see the girls at work they didn't believe she wasn't mine (there were a few sly smiles and nudges) and this was in the 1970's!

LittleWhiteDove2022351

LittleWhiteDove2022351 Report 28 Sep 2009 22:06

Hi Birdie,
I was once told they got pregnant before they married just to make sure they were fertile!

My Mum was shocked when I told her all I found out..

My Mum was like yours I was born 1 year and 1 mth after they married..
me and hubby we were married 1yr and 1mth after the birth of our first!! Like to be different..

SueMaid

SueMaid Report 28 Sep 2009 22:00

Birds, my OH's grandmother was apparently a very strict, upright lady who wouldn't even let her grandchildren play in the street 'cos it was "common". She married 3 years after OH's dad was born.

Sue xx

SueMaid

SueMaid Report 28 Sep 2009 21:58

My lot too. That includes a couple of "housekeepers" who suddenly became wives and produced a child not long after.

Sue xx

Wildgoose

Wildgoose Report 28 Sep 2009 21:57

LOL - Secret Red Squirrel - I hadn't thought of that.

My grandmother was a real Victorian (1883-1977) and I was so amazed to discover she only married 5 months before the birth of her first! How naive was I!

Uggers

Uggers Report 28 Sep 2009 21:51

Me too:) In my tree, if they weren't pregnant, they'd often already had children lol

~~~Secret Red ^^ Squirrel~~~  **007 1/2**

~~~Secret Red ^^ Squirrel~~~ **007 1/2** Report 28 Sep 2009 21:47

If they could look forward, maybe they would have been surprised at her too :)

Wildgoose

Wildgoose Report 28 Sep 2009 21:42

My mother was the first in her line to marry and NOT be pregnant on her wedding day for at least 200 years. Mum was rather disapproving of sex before marriage (that's putting it mildly) so I think she would be surprised at what I've discovered!

I think I've found more couples having children less than 9 months after the Happy Day, than not.