Aibu to think my parents are still biological

[Dontknowwhoiamrightnow]

Last week I urgently needed my birth certificate. I couldn't find it, so ordered a copy.
A few days later the post arrives and there is a letter to say that the information I provided for the birth certificate didn't match, but they checked some other files and the certificate is enclosed.
It's an ADOPTION certificate!!! I have an adoption certificate.
I had no idea I had even been adopted!!
Backstory-: I lived with my "mum and dad". I had my mum's maiden name at birth.
My parents told me that my name was changed to my dad's surname when they got married two years after birth.
I was told this was so that we could all have the same name.
This was In the 1980's.
My mum does look like me and my kids, so I think she is my biological mum.
AIBU to think that my parents are my biological parents and they became my adopters, just to change my name OR is it reasonable to think that my dad is not my real dad.
I know, I'm clutching at straws, it seems more than likely he's not my real dad.... How do I make sense of it all? Is there really any chance they are both my bio parents and the adoption was just to make me legitimate?
I'm in bits right now and don't know what to do xxx

Some people on here are confusing the 1980s with the 1950s and even then adoption wasn't always kept secret. I think the OPs dad is most likely her bio dad but he wasn't put on the original birth certificate fir some reason. They didn't tell the OP because, being the same parents, they didn't see any need.

I was born in the 70s. I know a few people who were adopted in the 70s and they all knew about it from the start. People weren't that old fashioned back then about single mothers and children being born outside marriage.

Yes, I ordered the certificate from the gro website. I was able to order the certificate without the gro reference number. They just charged an extra £3 to do it without the number.
Yes, I was born before my parents married.
My parents are mine, whether biological or not, I have a lovely little family and that will never change.
I will love them both forever :-)

OP I understand your reluctance to speak to your parents at this time, but I'd also be wary of speaking to relatives in that case.

The worst situation is your parents finding out what you know/suspect from someone else.

I appreciate its unfortunate timing but personally I'd email them sooner rather than later. Explain the situation and reassure that whatever the backstory is they are both your parents but you have a right to know the truth.

I'd email rather than visit/call to give them time to process what you have found out.

Many parents are upfront (and rightly so) in such circumstances but being frank the fact you only had your short form birth certificate indicates something being hidden.

If they were both your biological parents there would be nothing to hide.

I think it's quite likely that your mother is your biological parent but your father is not.

That doesn't make him less of a parent though. It makes him a loving, decent man who committed not only to his wife but her child as well.

I'll admit that I have only skimmed the thread, so this may have already been said.

I was registered as the child of my mother and her then husband. She'd been in a relationship with my father, had gone back to husband and then left him again. New birth certificate with parents name on. I mention this only to show that you can be registered more than once. Or at least you could in the olden day.

So that was before the 80s. What I remember from then (probably around 1990) is a friend who had a baby registered to her only. When she wanted to marry the father, she said that because he wasn't on the birth certificate, she would have to give up the baby for adoption, and they'd both have to adopt. I've always remembered this because it seemed so bizarre, but it sounds as if it could be what happened to OP.

I think it sounds like a step parent adoption (so mum is your birth mum but dad isn’t genetic dad) I think single people couldn’t adopt in past so only way around it was for a couple to adopt even though mum was already mum on bc. Hope you manage to get some answers what a shock.

My DH discovered in his mid 50s, completely out of the blue, that he was adopted. He found out in a random phone call after trying to get a copy of his birth certificate. His adoptive parents were both dead by this time. It was a huge shock. We discovered that the person he thought was his sister was actually his mother. It transpired that all of the family, ALL OF THEM, knew, apart from my DH and his (half) sisters, and they had never said a word. I found that quite shocking but he has been more forgiving than me! His mother had married after he was born and had daughters. It has been quite the journey. I would urge you to speak to an adoption charity - there are helplines you can call - to help you deal with this. You may then decide to get your adoption records, and you will be supported through this by a specially trained social worker who will go through it in person with you - you don't just get sent the documents in the post! Or you may decide not to, but the charity will help you decide that. He got his records decided after much soul searching to tell his mother that he knew, and for her it was amazing - she had carried the secret in her heart for all that time and was too scared to tell him, but I think carrying the secret had been very corrosive to her soul and her wellbeing and lifting the burden for her has been life changing. I also spoke to the charity because I didn't know how to react really or what to think and it was incredibly helpful to me too. I really think you would find it helpful to speak to a neutral third party with experience of this sort of situation to help you work your way through it.

It absolutely was!

I disagree. I've only ever had a short birth certificate. It's all my parents got when they registered me. I am absolutely 100% not adopted and my parents have nothing to hide.

I think @Dontknowwhoiamrightnow should ask her/his parents in person, as he/she will then be able to figure out from their reaction and body language what is really going on. I suspect, having read the other comments that it's simply a case of having to do it to change the surname after marriage.

So in this case, I would expect quite a casual matter of fact response from the parents, rather than shock and horror of it being uncovered.

but being frank the fact you only had your short form birth certificate indicates something being hidden.

I disagree on that front. Many many people only had the short certificate due to the cost of the long one.

I disagree on that front. Many many people only had the short certificate due to the cost of the long one.
I did as well. I was born in 1958 and when l was getting married l needed my birth certificate, and the one my parents had was the short version. I imagine cost was the reason then, too.

I only ever had a short one too. I had to order the long one to get my kids passports.

The scenario where a teenager gets pregnant and the grandmother of the baby raises the baby as her own is extremely common and has been until very recently. I remember it was even a story in coronation Street when Sarah Louise got pregnant, that would have been about late 90s? The characters considered it and decided not to.

It sounds bonkers today but it was absolutely thought that it would be harmless and the best thing for the child. Same with not telling children they were adopted. It's only with more modern understanding of mental health issues that we can see keeping something secret is likely to backfire in the long run. They just used to think if you didn't know it couldn't hurt you.

but being frank the fact you only had your short form birth certificate indicates something being hidden.

DS2 only had a short form because DH forgot his wallet when he went to register the birth, and the short form was free/covered by loose change in his pocket, where the long form was more expensive. We had been married nearly 6 years when he was born.

The short form bc in itself doesn't mean much, but coupled with this adoption certificate and almost total lack of baby photos, it does raise suspicions.

At 20 and unmarried I think it's very unlikely your mum would have been approved for adoption. There is the possibility that if, for example, your mum has a younger sister, that it was her that had you, but your mum (being older) adopted you instead.

But really you'll only know once you talk to your parents. If you make it clear that you love them regardless, and are curious rather than angry, then that sets the foundations for a calm and loving chat together, and hopefully you'll find out exactly what happened.

@BertieBotts i agree Grandmother's raising DDs baby as their own was very common.
Its just a slight difference to the Mother and Baby homes where girls went to avoid the village gossip have their baby given up for adoption. And in theory come back pretend nothing had happened and pick up the pieces of their life. "For the best"
Around 1985 our neighbours, had a young Auntie move in. The kids were maybe 9, and 7 Auntie a young teen. I remember the other mums whispering suspicions that Auntie was really the kids half-sister.

My second husband adopted my eldest daughter when she was a toddler - I had to adopt her at the same time. This was early 1990s.
I wonder if that's what has happened...

In the past if a child was born to unmarried parents you were illegitimate. If the parents then married the child would be re- registered to legitimise them.

Dont know if you still have to do that.
Perhaps that was what happened ?

I always thought that adoption records were sealed unless you applied for details ?

I understand why you'd like to know but I think if you have two lovely parents then you are very lucky. You could be opening a can of worms, that may be traumatic for yourself and both of your parents.

Same. I didn't even know there was a long form I never needed it for my own passport.

It may have happened but it wasn't the norm.

A friend of mine had a child whose fathers name wasn’t on his birth certificate ( this was in 1982), when they got married a few years later. They had to adopt their own child. So that the father could legally be his son’s dad. So this could well be the case in your case.

It is very possible that your dad is not on your original birth certificate so he adopted you to make matters legal. Another possibility is he isn’t your biological father but adopted you to be a family - does it really matter? At the end of the day they were the ones who raised you , were there when you needed them etc , etc. I was adopted as a baby and am utterly thankful that my adopted parents , gave me a secure safe and happy childhood, I have no urge to locate my birth parents as except for biological features , hair colour etc they have not shaped my life or influenced the person I have become.
perhaps talk to your mum to clarify things.

What a difficult thing to get your head around OP, if you mother gave birth to you, I would've expected you to have some paperwork of this.

I'm not sure why there would be an adoption certificate including both parents, unless they both adopted you? Very possible to look like an adoptive parent as well and yet not be biologically related.

It's a very odd story that after a hospital photograph (of you by yourself not with DM?) the first 2 years of photographs were "lost".

I don't think anything your DU says can be relied upon because he was a young child and he could be going by his memory simply of a family story that was created.

The best way is to ask, but appreciate the timing may be difficult for DM. Could you ask DF?

I think just explain to your mum that you ordered your bc and this adoption certificate was sent, and ask her about it.