On Tue, 3 Nov 2015 02:59:43 +1000, Bob Campbell via <genbrit@rootsweb.com> wrote: >Roger, >I was maybe assuming. wrongly it seems, as these 1939 records were used by >the NHS post WW2 perhaps the death record (date) of those on it would be >added shortly afterwards, so that the person no longer received the state >pension, > Not a matter for the NHS, in 1948 it would have been the Ministry of Pensions. Adding a note of the death would make the person a historic entity and e.g. rule them out from being a match to someone of similar identity who for one reason or another missed being issued with a NR/NHS number such as those who might have spent many years abroad or had lived in a household packed with SMITHs. Currently when a death is registered the registrar sends a form to the DWP which advises them of the death so that pension payment can cease. The need to tell the NHS is less urgent unless one of our paranoid government ministers anticipates hordes of foreigners impersonating deceased UK citizens to get free treatment. When my mother died, the message clearly hadn't reached the local hospital via the NHS records as a nurse called six months later to check up on her condition (visiting the hospital had not been a certainty). >WW2 ration books, > Food Office ? >NHS registration etc. > The connection was ITYF more the existence of a convenient list from which the three health services could provide the foundations for their own sets of records. There was otherwise no connection between the various different government departments' lists of people that they dealt with. Even now, attempts to set up a universal set of identification have failed repeatedly. >If these registration records were not regularly updated, then there may be >duplicate set(s), painstakingly copied and based on these from 1939, which >were updated and would be held by whom or where? >For future purposes I guess the reference number at the base of the preview >transcription, may be very important, should further and similar databases >and transcriptions be published?? >This could be very handy when attempting to find the correct death >registration for a very common surname after 1939. >Regarding the other 1939 query, if you read the info on Findmypast.com >whether or not a person is closed or not on the transcription/image is >automatically opened on the 100 year anniversary of their birth, in my case >parents born 1927/1928 won't be seen till 2027/2028, unless I come up with a >copy of their respective death certificates, I doubt if I will be around to >see it! > > > >Cheers from >Bob > >From: Roger Mills >Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2015 12:44 AM >To: genbrit@rootsweb.com >Subject: Re: 1939 survey includes date of death? Alice PIKE at Edmonton > >On 02/11/2015 04:54, Bob Campbell via wrote: >> Do the transcripts for this survey indicate a year of death? >> I do have an Alice Pike who has her birth year missing on the >> transcript, but I already know this to be 1895 and have her listed with >> Adelaide Wiltshire on the electoral roll for the same year, from a >> search going back many years. >> However I have over recent years failed to find Alice's death >> registration. As these records were taken over by the NHS would these >> also indicate a year of death? >> cheers >> Bob > >I wouldn't have thought so. ICBW but my impression is that you'll get >the register entry as it was in 1939 for the people living at the time. >If she died prior to that, she wouldn't be on it. If she died after >that, her date of death wouldn't be known in 1939 unless the person >compiling the record was clairvoyant.