21 May 2024

A Tale of Two Social Security Numbers

Image by Arek Socha from Pixabay
It is extremely rare for someone to have two Social Security numbers. More often than not, if one delves down far enough, we'll find there's something different between two records appearing to be for the same person. People can have the same name, the same birth date, and even the same location of birth....but be two completely different people. There are a limited number of reasons someone might be issued two different numbers, and it isn't common. I'm well aware of this, and generally, I try to prove one correct and disprove another. 

I've encountered times when someone has the same given and surname, but the middle initial may stand for a different middle name. Or two people with the same name, and different birth dates. Or same name and birth date, but different locations (one being completely different than any other records). It's generally pretty simple to disprove one of the potential indexed Social Security numbers as "wrong" for a person in my tree. I'll say hints are generally pretty good, and I don't run into it often, but when I do - it's not usually a big deal.

And then there's James Miles LeRoy. born February 23, 1892 (in Varner, Ripley, Missouri) and died Jan 2, 1986 (in Stevenson, Jackson, Alabama). Before I start this story, I'd like to point out, the subject of this post also lived in Tennessee as of the 1900 census, and Bridgeport, Jackson, Alabama (only about 6 miles from the Tennessee state line) for many years before his death.  This last residence complicates evaluating the records because my ancestors routinely travelled from Georgia and Alabama to Tennessee for important events like marriages, and draft registrations. For the purposes of this post, I'm going to leave out a few digits in the SSN, just because it feels strange to include the whole number, even though it is readily available in records.

The first record I encountered was in the Social Security Claims Index. It was listed under Jim LeRoy. The name didn't bother me, Jim is certainly short for James. The date of birth, Feb 23, 1892 was correct, as was the birth place of Varnor [Varner], Missouri. Now, to be fair, the parents names are spelled wrong. His father was Benjamin Franklin LeRoy, and in this record it's shown as Bengemon F Leroy,  but a simple misspelling here doesn't seem to be really "wrong". His mother is listed as Nancey Patterson (although it's usually spelled Nancy), otherwise, her maiden is correct. The SSN# on this record is 421-##-##11. It shows his name as Jim LeRoy as of July 1937.

The US Veteran's Administration Master Index shows James Leroy, date of birth Feb 23, 1892. His residence is shown as Bridgeport, Alabama. Military service is listed as January 14, 1919. We know he died in the same county and lived many years in Bridgeport, so....so far so good right? Here's where it starts to get odd.

The Social Security Death Index lists a James LeRoy, Social Security Number 411-##-##32 (very different from the other number, clearly not just a typo). His birth is listed as Feb 23, 1892 (same date), and the Social Security number was issued before 1951 in Tennessee. This fits with what I know about this person. In the 1950's he was living just a few miles from the Tennessee border. It's not a stretch to think anything "official" and important would be done there. The last residence is listed as Stevenson, Jackson, Alabama, the location other records show as his place of death. There is no day listed, but the month and year are correct with January 1986. See where it's getting a little murky now?

The Department of Veteran's Affairs BIRLS Death File lists James Leroy, date of birth February 23, 1892, date of death January 2,1986, with Social Security Number 411-##-##32. Date of military service is August 7, 1918 to January 14, 1919. At this point I'm starting to scratch my head. 

I looked for a SSDI entry for 421-##-##11 (the entry in the claims index) and nothing at all comes up. So I looked for claims for 411-##-##32 (the SSDI entry), and guess what? Nothing comes up. So each of the two numbers seems to play a part in this, as does the corroborating information from the VA and what I know of his parents. I can't satisfactorily "disprove" either of them! Given he lived to 1986, I can't imagine why there's no claim for the 411 number. And if 421 were the correct number, why is there no death information? 

The reasons for two Social Security numbers are generally:

  • Sequential numbers are assigned to members of the same family
  • More than one person is using the same number
  • The person has religious or cultural objections to certain numbers or digits in the original number
  • The person is a victim of identity theft
  • There is a situation of harassment, abuse, or life endangerment

Sure, one of the first two reasons "could" be the issue. But I'd have expected a note in the Claims Index showing issuance of a new number. Given how often notes show a change of name for women when they marry, I'd expect correcting a nickname to given name would be pretty simple. Identity theft wasn't really something we heard about until more recently (though I'm sure it did exist, it wasn't as commonplace back then as it is today).

This is a conundrum and I'd be most interested to hear what you think. Is this truly a case where the Social Security Administration made an error and issued two cards? Did someone just type a completely wrong number in the claims index? Did he register twice? Once under Jim and once under James? Did he lose his card and just went in and applied for another and never said he had one previously? Was he trying to take on a new identity (of sorts) by securing a new number? Nothing else I'm finding about his life would give this indication. Or am I completely missing something here? Let me know your thoughts.

Image by Arek Socha from Pixabay

2 comments:

  1. You'll probably never know for sure, but I'd say the simplest explanation might be the most likely - he lost his card, went in to get a new one and never mentioned that he had already registered in the past.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think you may be right! If he was a direct ancestor(or a total brick wall), I'd spring for the SS records. But for now, I think I'm just going to record both numbers and make myself some notes.

      Delete

Your comments are appreciated! To reduce spam, all comments are moderated. Your comment will appear after review.