Sensitive Issues in Genealogy:
Humane Examples
I get e-mail messages asking questions which help illustrate some issues
of genealogy. Following are examples ...
Question
|
My cousin is being raised by my aunt, but it's a different aunt than the one who
truly gave birth to him. He doesn't realize that the woman he thinks is his aunt
actually is his mother, and vice versa.
How do I handle sensitive issues like that in my genealogy project?
Shouldn't I just go ahead and write down the true facts?
|
Answer
|
Whoa .... slow down!
Different genealogists have different answers to this difficult question.
Most important, I believe that genealogy should never be cruel.
In a case like yours,
I would write the relationships just as your cousin, and most everyone else, believes
them to be. The fact is, by accepting the family's definitions of their own relationships,
you will be writing down exactly what you will find
if you use as sources your cousin's (now altered) birth certificate, school records,
marriage records, military records, church records, etc.
Besides, since you've already observed that your family is capable of telling more than
one story about a birth -- the story you have been told may not be true, either.
Even within very honest families, distortions happen, for a variety of reasons.
In a separate, and very private file, I would keep records that clarify
the most accurate facts, and your sources, for future generations to consider
after the possibility of hurting a living person is no longer relevant.
Be sure that your Will clarifies that the trusted heir who receives that file can
only pass it on to the next generation after a set number of years.
If the story were about a long-gone great-great-great-aunt, instead of about living
relatives, then I would put the actual facts right into the database.
Some other genealogists take a more stringent approach ... refusing to include
contemporary people in their databases, or including only names without any identifying
dates or data.
Now if you tell me that this will add an inaccuracy to your research, I will remind
you that you have no way of prooving fatherhood for the vast majority of the people
in your family tree. We'll never know which of our ancestors let their husbands
proudly believe that they were the father of a baby that actually resulted from a
one-time indiscretion. Like all sciences, genealogical research is based on
probability. We are always "more or less" certain of our facts, because we can't
go back in a time machine to be sure that a record wasn't wrong. Anyone doing genealogy
for very long finds that their ancestors used whatever names they wanted to call
themselves at any given time, and some of our ancestors gave different birth dates
in family Bibles versus marriage licenses versus what they told the Census workers.
One of my great-grandmothers was a Church of the Brethren Minister, but she didn't
get married until shortly after the birth of her second child. Now, we could jump to
conclusions about her wild behavior, or we could look in the context of history and
realize that pioneers like her entered wilderness areas before the circuit preachers
did, and in that culture, you were married if you said you were married. When a
circuit preacher was available in the area, she got legally married, and she stayed with my
great-grandfather until his death.
Just as my great-grandmother had to make decisions
based on the possibilities and limits in her wilderness world,
there are often important reasons in
our current sensitive family situations that cause people to make the decisions that
they make. We may be unaware of those special circumstances because, frankly, they're
often none of our business.
And don't forget that the most important mother relationship your cousin has is with
the woman he has known as mother, and the woman whom society has recognized as his mother.
This is no different than if your cousin had been adopted from outside of the family.
His legal and nurturing mother is precisely who he believes it to be. If genetics are different
from legality in this case, you are not the person who has the right to confront that
discrepancy.
Perhaps your cousin's parents should tell him the story of his birth, before someone else
does. If you know the details, I presume others know, too.
But that responsibility to tell would definitely not belong to you. You have no idea what
a chain of painful events you might unleash if you interfere in your cousin's
family relationships.
My main point is, you have no right to cause hurt to people under the guise of honoring
their families.
And, if you should ever be so insensitive as to cause such pain to your relatives,
no relatives will tell you anymore stories, anyway.
|
Question
|
Should adopted children be excluded from databases since genealogy is about
genetic relationships?
|
Answer
|
Who said genealogy is only about genetic relationships?
I presume that you include both of your parents in the same database, and I presume
that they are not genetically related to each other.
Genealogy is about relationships -- genetic, legal and self-defined relationships.
Adoption, like marriage, is a legal relationship, and is important information
for the genealogist.
Adopted children of an individual are listed as children of that individual,
because they are -- both legally and (hopefully) by loving choice.
Now, how you handle the fact of the adoption in your records should consider issues
presented in the previous question and answer -- Are we talking about living
people? Are all effected parties aware of the adoption? In the case of living
relatives, only the parties of the
adoption have the right to decide whether the fact of the adoption is public information.
|
Question
|
I'm adopted. Should I study my birth family tree or my adopted family tree?
|
Answer
|
If you have access to information on both families, both family trees will probably
be of interest to you.
Your birth family tree may help you know why you have black hair, why you prefer
colder climates, and how you are predisposed to certain medical conditions.
Your adopted family tree will help you understand much about your traditions,
relationships, habits, beliefs, attitudes, sense of humor, culture, interests and personality.
Your facial features may come from your birth great-grandmother, while your smile
may match the smile of your adopted mother, who smiles like her own mother.
Your quick temper may be related to your birth family, but your ability to control
that temper with good coping strategies may come from your adopted family.
Your athletic abilities and strong muscles may come from your birth family, while your
love of animals may be traced back to your adopted great-grandmother who had a soft
spot for furry friends, with that interest being passed down from generation to
generation, regardless of whether the relationships were genetic or by adoption.
Just as the answer to the question of whether "Nature" or "Nurture" is more important
in child development is that both are important,
you are a product of both family trees, which is actually quite fascinating.
Genealogically, I would be interested both in the family that gave you life, and in
the family that chose to spend life with you.
And, as genealogy is, after all, a
study of history and relationships, the adopted family is the one with which you have made your own
personal
history and relationships, so the adopted family history is critically
important in understanding who you are.
If you force me to choose, I would say that the adopted family tree is the most important,
because that is the family line that will best explain your social and cultural heritage,
in everything from beliefs to opportunities. It was the adopted family that passed on
family traditions to you. Your learning, relationships, and history in life occurred within the heritage
of the adopted family, and you are a vital part of that family.
What could be more genealogically significant than your real personal history and
relationships?
|
Question
|
So, are you saying that only genetic and legal relationships are important in
genealogy? Does that mean that step-relationships and non-married relationships
are not relevant?
|
Answer
|
Absolutely not! Who my ancestors loved is the most personal and important thing
that I can know about them as people. How could we search the Census to find our
ancestor's literacy status and occupation, and not care about something as important
as the relationships that he or she chose in life?
|
Question
|
You said that some genealogists chose not to publish any information about living
relatives. Why do you include names of living people on your
Web site?
|
Answer
|
Because I decided that the limited information that I include about living individuals
is available on the Internet, from other sources, anyway.
I do, however,
take the precaution of not including specific things like addresses and telephone numbers,
unless the relative says they want to be contacted by other researchers.
I don't include specifics such as birthdates of living people on my Web site, in order to
protect relatives from identity theft.
But, I do include such specific information in my computer database, for the benefit of
future generations.
|
|
