"A report of the 1888 London press of Kelly being a mother has led a minority of Ripperologists to suggest the birth of a younger Davies between 1879 and 1882. The story, however, contains several factual errors, including the claim that she supposedly lived on the second floor. It is likely that news reports initially identifying Lizzie Fisher (or Fraser) as the victim are the source for the rumour. Fisher did live on the second floor and did have a 12-year-old son." QUOTE Encyclopedia

Why would people in the neighbourhood confuse a single woman living alone with a woman with a child?

Could Kelly and Fisher have been confused because they both HAD a child.

Here's the statement in the newspaper of her ex-boyfriend reported the next day. http://forum.casebook.org/archive/index.php/t-4466.html

JOE BARNETT'S STATEMENT.
"To our reporter Barnett said ... Kelly had a little boy, aged about six or seven years, living with her." Nov 10 Star

The Times said the same thing on that day-after when they had plenty of time to check out the info.:

"Kelly had a little boy, aged about 6 or 7 years living with her, and latterly she had been in narrow straits, so much so that she is reported to have stated to a companion that she would make away with herself, as she could not bear to see her boy starving." Nov 10 Times

The earliest reports from the same day obviously got the woman with the 6 year old (Mary Kelly) mixed up with the woman living in the same building with the 12 year old (Fisher).

"The victim is a woman who went by the name of Mary Jane and she lived in the room in which she has been murdered, with a man and her little son - about 10 or 11 years old." Nov 9 Star

Barnett never mentioned the child at the inquest but, then again, he was never asked about it. Makes you wonder why.