I wonder if the birth record for that child was recorded BECAUSE s/he only lived for a day? Recording deaths was taken much more seriously than births for some time, and if you're already filling out certificates, maybe you just do both because of the opportunity? Or perhaps this was the time period when births were supposed to be recorded but weren't always, and the parents would have had to file a birth certificate when filing the death certificate to avoid a citation or fine? I have no idea what if any enforcement measures were in place at the time - they don't seem to have been terribly effective - but since you HAD to file a DC, it eliminated the possibility of flying under the radar with regard to the birth. (This is all pure speculation, but it's where my mind went.) Kathleen On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Frances Brunner via <[email protected] > wrote: > Interesting to note is that I have found a birth record for a child who > seems to have only lived for a day. Why that child, and not the others?

Kathleen: I think you've hit the nail on the head. They had to file a death certificate, and so they filed the birth certificate at the same time. This would explain why I haven't found any birth certificates for her siblings. If you are trolling the New York City death certificates, you will see a lot of certificates where it just lists the surname, and the age of the deceased is 0. Because the parents' names were listed, I was able to identify this baby, and it seemed they had time to name her. I have found this same Christian name among some records that might possibly be the previous generation from the parents, for example, the baby was Rose Ann, and found some records of a family in which there is a sister named Rose Ann and a sister named Margaret, which was the name of the baby's mother. I have put those on the back burner for further consideration in the future, once I have received all my certificates and I can narrow down dates and locations. But for sure, that's why there is a birth certificate for that baby. Thanks!Frances Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2015 09:15:11 -0400 Subject: Re: [NYC-ROOTS] NY Long Form Birth Certs From: [email protected] To: [email protected]; [email protected] I wonder if the birth record for that child was recorded BECAUSE s/he only lived for a day? Recording deaths was taken much more seriously than births for some time, and if you're already filling out certificates, maybe you just do both because of the opportunity? Or perhaps this was the time period when births were supposed to be recorded but weren't always, and the parents would have had to file a birth certificate when filing the death certificate to avoid a citation or fine? I have no idea what if any enforcement measures were in place at the time - they don't seem to have been terribly effective - but since you HAD to file a DC, it eliminated the possibility of flying under the radar with regard to the birth. (This is all pure speculation, but it's where my mind went.) Kathleen On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Frances Brunner via <[email protected]> wrote: Interesting to note is that I have found a birth record for a child who seems to have only lived for a day. Why that child, and not the others?