Originally Posted by
GUWonder
That's very representative of the state of affairs. It also ought to help to prompt questions about what drove the change that is the premise of this thread and some other things related to that.
I assumed it was just more of the 'suspicious midwife' thing-- not accepting at face value births not recorded within a year-- but then there's the requirement of parentage. Maybe they want to make sure that one "parent" didn't record births for a bunch of unrelated children? What do
you think they want this information for?