Genealogy Chat

I am just looking at the dates of one of my families, & noticed that my Mary Clemmitt, born about 1825 had her first child Elizabethin 1851, so was aged 25. Now her last child Henry was born in 1872 !!! That makes her 47 !! On the census both oldest & youngest were written as Daughter or son, not grandson. Do you think it is possible???

Karen, I've made note of this when researching families. It seems that most women popped out children until they hit 42 then they just stopped. Have noticed the odd child a bit later than this but not too often. Crista

oh gosh........and she didn't die til she was in her 70's. I am 46 & if I had a baby now I would jump off a bridge !!! LOL

Yes, this is possible, my gran was 45 when my mum was born and we believe she had a miscarriage later still. Mum was the youngest of 10 children. My aunt also had a late baby, she was pregnant at the same time as her son's wife. Heather

The chances of birth abnormalities must have been very high then. What happened to the Down syndrome children in those days?

Ladys remember there was no TV in thouse day. They had to find some form of entertainment on long cold nights

Karen Just thinking about this I have a Harry who is 7months old listed as the son of a 46 year old woman in 1881, but by 1891 he is listed as grandson. As I cannot find his birth on free BMD or 1837 online to check who is down as his parents, I cannont prove my theory but I think he is really the grandson of this lady, I think it was a cover up for an illegitimate birth of one of her unmarried daughters living in the house, there is three of them ranging from 16-23 years. I am hoping his birth was registered at the Local Records office and eventually get his birth cert to prove it. Pat x

Do you think if I ordered the youngest boy's birth cert, it would say the daughter was the mother if that was the case?? Or would they officially put the mother's name on the cert even if she wasn't the real mother?? Does that make sense?!!? The eldest girl in the family was 21 when the boy was born.

hmmmmmmmm...... now I think about it..on the 1871 census, eldest daughter Elizabeth, was living a long way from home as a domestic servant. There were 3 unmarried blokes in the house as well. Then young Henry was born in Sept 1871. I hadn't noticed that before.

Karen My thread was just something to think about. I am convinced if the birth is registered it will have the mother's name, but probably not the father's. Pat x

I have had 44 year old with a newborn, and with quite a long gap (6 years) between her penultimate and last child. She had no daughters living with her so it's quite likely women regularly had babies that old. After all, there was no contraception so if you were still fertile, you just kept popping them out!

Karen, My Great Grandmother had her 10th, last and only legitimate child when she was 47, and my Great Grandad was 63!! Her first child (a boy) died in infancy, she then had 2 girls who were healthy (one was my gran who died last year aged 99), the next was a boy who they all said was 'dropped on his head', but the symptoms point to lack of oxygen. He was a bit 'simple', but had a job as an upholsterer and lived until well in to his 60's. All the other children were born healthy, but the youngest died at 4 of measles. maggie

My great-grandmother had her last child in 1924, at the age of 47 - the same month her eldest daughter (b 1903) had a son. I've another relly who started producing in 1870, at the age of 20 and continued for 24 yrs - 11 children, all but one survived infancy, and again was a grandmother before the birth of her last child. Helen

My 4xgreat gran had her last child aged 51 in 1835, my 3xgreat gran so it is very possible to have kids at such a late age.

Maybe they just dropped dead from exhaustion eventually! Lisa

My great gran x 2 had lied about her age. She shows up 4 years older than great grandad x 2 and now I have her birth details it shows she was 8 years older than him. Which means she had her first at 29 and the last (which died as a baby) when she was 44. Still, Madonna had her last one at 44 didnt she? I dont know how they did it back then though, as someone else said, I thought I was going to collapse from exhaustion when I had one at 30!

Before adequate methods, access and information about contraception, many women just gave birth regularly until they died or they had the menopause. The average gap between babies seems to be about 18 months- 2 years. Of course there would also have been a lot of stillbirths and miscarriages which went unrecorded. The downside of all the fertility was probably a lot of illicit abortions, informal adoptions, and baby farms. In my own family, the women had families of about 10 before 1850, about 8 children between 1850-1910, about 4 children after that, and in my own generation, 2. nell

I was about to say, but several of you beat me to it, that often a "late" baby is really the child of an older daughter. My Auntie told me it was quite common when she was young, for a girl to go away to look after a sick Auntie, and Mother would stuff a cushion up her skirt. Everyone knew what was going on of course, but no-one said anything - especially not if they too had unmarried daughters.

Yes marjorie That's what I was trying to say. Not all these older women were having these babies themselves, they would just pretend to, it was to keep face as in my family. Of course by the next census Grandmother tells the truth the boy was her grandson. I had heard that women protected their families and especially their daughters from the gossip of the area, and this was happening well in to the 1950's. Pat x

wow, thank goodness for contraception !! Our ancestors really had it tough didn't they ! Imagine the housework in those days. And no disposable nappies!!