Question about including info on Living Persons in Book
Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper
-
S. W. Ohio Bob
Question about including info on Living Persons in Book
I am writing a book on my GGGG-Grandfather and all of his descendants which
I have been able to uncover. There are a total of about 1600 people
altogether mentioned in the book. There are slightly over 200 of these
people for whom I have their dates and places of birth and who I consider
still living (based on anybody born after 1895).
My question is whether or not I should include the birth information for
these 200+ people. I plan to have this book published and it will end up in
a few libraries where I have pockets of cousins of different degrees. I'm
concerned about people being upset that their personal information is
included if they find the book in their library, even though if someone
wanted to find this information from other sources, they could. I've
discussed it with some cousins who know about the book - some say include
it - it's public knowledge.
The majority of the 200+ people I do not know, not do I know how to contact
them and they would not be aware of what I am doing.
I just thought I'd survey the newsgroup and get other people's opinions on
this matter.
Thanks.
I have been able to uncover. There are a total of about 1600 people
altogether mentioned in the book. There are slightly over 200 of these
people for whom I have their dates and places of birth and who I consider
still living (based on anybody born after 1895).
My question is whether or not I should include the birth information for
these 200+ people. I plan to have this book published and it will end up in
a few libraries where I have pockets of cousins of different degrees. I'm
concerned about people being upset that their personal information is
included if they find the book in their library, even though if someone
wanted to find this information from other sources, they could. I've
discussed it with some cousins who know about the book - some say include
it - it's public knowledge.
The majority of the 200+ people I do not know, not do I know how to contact
them and they would not be aware of what I am doing.
I just thought I'd survey the newsgroup and get other people's opinions on
this matter.
Thanks.
-
Charani
Re: Question about including info on Living Persons in Book
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 11:07:47 -0500, S. W. Ohio Bob wrote:
You'll probably get as many different opinions as there are responses
)
My own thoughts are that whilst the information is public knowledge,
people also have a right to privacy and that includes not having their
personal information published in a book by someone who, to all
intents and purposes, is a stranger.
I'd suggest include the dates of birth of those whom you can contact
and who give their consent, but don't publish anything other than the
names of those who decline to give their consent or whom you cannot
contact., making a note that out of respect for those you believe may
still be living you've chosen not to include personal data. That way,
they'll respect your discretion and may well contact you to let you
know one way or t'other whether you can publish any more information
about them in a later edition.
I think you could probably safely bring your cut off date forward to
1900, possibly even to 1905, bearing in mind that we're now in 2005.
I'd also not include any mention of a partner's name beyond mentioning
that the person in the tree is married and definitely not the names or
ages of any children if they are under 16 or 18. People are much more
protective of their children these days with the apparent
proliferation of paedophiles and others of their ilk. They can also
be funny about having information published about them without their
knowledge.
Anyway, good luck with your book.
I am writing a book on my GGGG-Grandfather and all of his descendants which
I have been able to uncover. There are a total of about 1600 people
altogether mentioned in the book. There are slightly over 200 of these
people for whom I have their dates and places of birth and who I consider
still living (based on anybody born after 1895).
My question is whether or not I should include the birth information for
these 200+ people. I plan to have this book published and it will end up in
a few libraries where I have pockets of cousins of different degrees. I'm
concerned about people being upset that their personal information is
included if they find the book in their library, even though if someone
wanted to find this information from other sources, they could. I've
discussed it with some cousins who know about the book - some say include
it - it's public knowledge.
The majority of the 200+ people I do not know, not do I know how to contact
them and they would not be aware of what I am doing.
I just thought I'd survey the newsgroup and get other people's opinions on
this matter.
Thanks.
You'll probably get as many different opinions as there are responses
My own thoughts are that whilst the information is public knowledge,
people also have a right to privacy and that includes not having their
personal information published in a book by someone who, to all
intents and purposes, is a stranger.
I'd suggest include the dates of birth of those whom you can contact
and who give their consent, but don't publish anything other than the
names of those who decline to give their consent or whom you cannot
contact., making a note that out of respect for those you believe may
still be living you've chosen not to include personal data. That way,
they'll respect your discretion and may well contact you to let you
know one way or t'other whether you can publish any more information
about them in a later edition.
I think you could probably safely bring your cut off date forward to
1900, possibly even to 1905, bearing in mind that we're now in 2005.
I'd also not include any mention of a partner's name beyond mentioning
that the person in the tree is married and definitely not the names or
ages of any children if they are under 16 or 18. People are much more
protective of their children these days with the apparent
proliferation of paedophiles and others of their ilk. They can also
be funny about having information published about them without their
knowledge.
Anyway, good luck with your book.
-
Robert Heiling
Re: Question about including info on Living Persons in Book
"S. W. Ohio Bob" wrote:
I believe that you basically answered your own question by not revealing your
own identity in your post above. How would you feel if you found yourself in a
similar book? when you won't even post here with your own real name like many
others do?
Bob
I am writing a book on my GGGG-Grandfather and all of his descendants which
I have been able to uncover. There are a total of about 1600 people
altogether mentioned in the book. There are slightly over 200 of these
people for whom I have their dates and places of birth and who I consider
still living (based on anybody born after 1895).
My question is whether or not I should include the birth information for
these 200+ people. I plan to have this book published and it will end up in
a few libraries where I have pockets of cousins of different degrees. I'm
concerned about people being upset that their personal information is
included if they find the book in their library, even though if someone
wanted to find this information from other sources, they could. I've
discussed it with some cousins who know about the book - some say include
it - it's public knowledge.
The majority of the 200+ people I do not know, not do I know how to contact
them and they would not be aware of what I am doing.
I just thought I'd survey the newsgroup and get other people's opinions on
this matter.
Thanks.
I believe that you basically answered your own question by not revealing your
own identity in your post above. How would you feel if you found yourself in a
similar book? when you won't even post here with your own real name like many
others do?
Bob
-
Doug Chadduck
Re: Question about including info on Living Persons in Book
S. W. Ohio Bob wrote:
grandparents generation is private and there is no real need to publish
it. My grandparents generation is all gone now but many of their kids,
my dad, aunts, and uncles, are still alive. I don't think anyone would
have much interest in lists of the names of their far removed cousins
etc. I would think notes to the effect that Grandpa and Grandma Whoever
raised six kids, maybe a sentence about when and where or conditions (my
parents and their siblings grew up in the Dust Bowl era in the upper
midwest), and at the latest count, that you can verify, they have
provided the world with 4, or however many, generations, totally 142
people.
I like to see and keep track of my cousins and their kids and their kids
but only with as much information as they are comfortable sharing with
me. It is fun to see how far the bush is spreading. But I also don't
share this information on my cousin's family with anyone, though I am
happy to connect inquiring folks with my cousins or any other family
members.
My whole perspective on this came together when a very distant, non
blood, 5 generations back, relative couldn't understand why I wouldn't
share my parents birth, death, wedding dates etc. Not to mention all my
aunts and uncles and cousins info. She bout had a fit and all I could
akin it to was her "counting coup". The people and connections were not
important. Just the number of entries she could add to her data base.
I find the history to be a lot more fun and informative than the head
count. But that's just my two cents worth. Doug
I am writing a book on my GGGG-Grandfather and all of his descendants which
I have been able to uncover. There are a total of about 1600 people
altogether mentioned in the book. There are slightly over 200 of these
people for whom I have their dates and places of birth and who I consider
still living (based on anybody born after 1895).
My question is whether or not I should include the birth information for
these 200+ people. I plan to have this book published and it will end up in
a few libraries where I have pockets of cousins of different degrees. I'm
concerned about people being upset that their personal information is
included if they find the book in their library, even though if someone
wanted to find this information from other sources, they could. I've
discussed it with some cousins who know about the book - some say include
it - it's public knowledge.
The majority of the 200+ people I do not know, not do I know how to contact
them and they would not be aware of what I am doing.
I just thought I'd survey the newsgroup and get other people's opinions on
this matter.
Thanks.
I decided some time back that any information on anyone younger than my
grandparents generation is private and there is no real need to publish
it. My grandparents generation is all gone now but many of their kids,
my dad, aunts, and uncles, are still alive. I don't think anyone would
have much interest in lists of the names of their far removed cousins
etc. I would think notes to the effect that Grandpa and Grandma Whoever
raised six kids, maybe a sentence about when and where or conditions (my
parents and their siblings grew up in the Dust Bowl era in the upper
midwest), and at the latest count, that you can verify, they have
provided the world with 4, or however many, generations, totally 142
people.
I like to see and keep track of my cousins and their kids and their kids
but only with as much information as they are comfortable sharing with
me. It is fun to see how far the bush is spreading. But I also don't
share this information on my cousin's family with anyone, though I am
happy to connect inquiring folks with my cousins or any other family
members.
My whole perspective on this came together when a very distant, non
blood, 5 generations back, relative couldn't understand why I wouldn't
share my parents birth, death, wedding dates etc. Not to mention all my
aunts and uncles and cousins info. She bout had a fit and all I could
akin it to was her "counting coup". The people and connections were not
important. Just the number of entries she could add to her data base.
I find the history to be a lot more fun and informative than the head
count. But that's just my two cents worth. Doug
-
dps
Re: Question about including info on Living Persons in Book
Unless you are willing to invest the time to look for these people and
get their permission, I would not publish everything about them.
However, you want to give future genealogists enough clues for their own
research. After 1900 there are enough public sources for the
genealogists to work with if they have a starting point such as a town
name and a date range. For example you might say that Ole and Sara had 6
children while they were living in North Lake.
However, I would probably make an effort to contact some of these people
given these same clues. They may have more information about children or
cousins that are not included in your list.
How do you contact people whose location is not known? Start with the
last town you know about and see if there is a historical society or a
keeper of old records such as a town clerk or maybe an old documents
committee. Many small towns still have enough old residents that might
remember something about someone 75 years ago.
It will take some more effort, but your book will be improved as a result.
S. W. Ohio Bob wrote:
get their permission, I would not publish everything about them.
However, you want to give future genealogists enough clues for their own
research. After 1900 there are enough public sources for the
genealogists to work with if they have a starting point such as a town
name and a date range. For example you might say that Ole and Sara had 6
children while they were living in North Lake.
However, I would probably make an effort to contact some of these people
given these same clues. They may have more information about children or
cousins that are not included in your list.
How do you contact people whose location is not known? Start with the
last town you know about and see if there is a historical society or a
keeper of old records such as a town clerk or maybe an old documents
committee. Many small towns still have enough old residents that might
remember something about someone 75 years ago.
It will take some more effort, but your book will be improved as a result.
S. W. Ohio Bob wrote:
I am writing a book on my GGGG-Grandfather and all of his descendants which
I have been able to uncover. There are a total of about 1600 people
altogether mentioned in the book. There are slightly over 200 of these
people for whom I have their dates and places of birth and who I consider
still living (based on anybody born after 1895).
My question is whether or not I should include the birth information for
these 200+ people. I plan to have this book published and it will end up in
a few libraries where I have pockets of cousins of different degrees. I'm
concerned about people being upset that their personal information is
included if they find the book in their library, even though if someone
wanted to find this information from other sources, they could. I've
discussed it with some cousins who know about the book - some say include
it - it's public knowledge.
The majority of the 200+ people I do not know, not do I know how to contact
them and they would not be aware of what I am doing.
I just thought I'd survey the newsgroup and get other people's opinions on
this matter.
Thanks.
-
michael kenefick
Re: Question about including info on Living Persons in Book
Hello Bob,
You should publish all known information. If you gathered it from public
sources, it is public information. You will have consolidated the information.
The only thing I might edit out are people under the age of 18. Maybe list them
as Living Male Smith or Female Smith. Also, place a note. State at the time of
publishing these people are under 18. Contact you for additional information.
Remember to update your e-mail when (if) you change it. If the requester has
good cause let them have the information.
Also, in twenty or thirty years those folks are going to starting thinking
about their roots. If you supply incomplete information it will be that much
harder for them. And you may no longer be here to supply the edited information
in twenty or thirty years. Remember just because you publish a name with DOB
and / or location information this does not make them a target for the @#@&^@#'s
who want to steal identities.
Mike
"S. W. Ohio Bob" wrote:
You should publish all known information. If you gathered it from public
sources, it is public information. You will have consolidated the information.
The only thing I might edit out are people under the age of 18. Maybe list them
as Living Male Smith or Female Smith. Also, place a note. State at the time of
publishing these people are under 18. Contact you for additional information.
Remember to update your e-mail when (if) you change it. If the requester has
good cause let them have the information.
Also, in twenty or thirty years those folks are going to starting thinking
about their roots. If you supply incomplete information it will be that much
harder for them. And you may no longer be here to supply the edited information
in twenty or thirty years. Remember just because you publish a name with DOB
and / or location information this does not make them a target for the @#@&^@#'s
who want to steal identities.
Mike
"S. W. Ohio Bob" wrote:
I am writing a book on my GGGG-Grandfather and all of his descendants which I
have been able to uncover. There are a total of about 1600 people
altogether mentioned in the book. There are slightly over 200 of these people
for whom I have their dates and places of birth and who I consider
still living (based on anybody born after 1895).
My question is whether or not I should include the birth information for these
200+ people. I plan to have this book published and it will end up in
a few libraries where I have pockets of cousins of different degrees. I'm
concerned about people being upset that their personal information is
included if they find the book in their library, even though if someone wanted
to find this information from other sources, they could. I've
discussed it with some cousins who know about the book - some say include it -
it's public knowledge.
The majority of the 200+ people I do not know, not do I know how to contact
them and they would not be aware of what I am doing.
I just thought I'd survey the newsgroup and get other people's opinions on
this matter.
Thanks.
-
Bob Melson
Re: Question about including info on Living Persons in Book
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 11:11:18 -0800, Doug Chadduck wrote:
<snip>
Yeah, there are those for whom the body count is more important than the
quality or content of the data, and that includes some of the bigger
"names" out there. Genealogy, IMO, is a unique combination of history
and, for lack of a better word at the moment, genetics. I've learned
things about the Finns I never knew before, am learning of my family
connection to 1066 and all that, to say nothing of the settling of the
American south and southwest, and in the process have learned about some
of the personalities involved and located several cousins I was unaware I
had. _My_ database is small (fewer than 1500 people and 500 families,
but growing), but I like to think more of the people involved than of the
actual count.
As for including the names of living people in a book to be published, I'd
suggest you see a lawyer and draw up a formal release. Send 2 copies to
each person you know or suspect is currently living or to heads of
families with small children that might be included. Ask'em to sign and
have 'em notarized (! <- IMPORTANT <- !), then send one back to you for
registration and filing. This is gonna be the ONLY way you'll keep your
tail out of a sling in the event some disgruntled soul decides after
publication that you "done him wrong". To be absolutely safe, you might
want to include the lines/paragraphs that mention the person and ask that
he review, mark it up to his heart's content and return it with the signed
release. If you exercise due diligence in this manner or similarly, you
should be able to avoid problems in the future.
Bob
--
Robert G. Melson | Nothing is more terrible than
Rio Grande MicroSolutions | ignorance in action.
El Paso, Texas | Goethe
melsonr(at)earthlink(dot)net
<snip>
My whole perspective on this came together when a very distant, non blood,
5 generations back, relative couldn't understand why I wouldn't share my
parents birth, death, wedding dates etc. Not to mention all my aunts and
uncles and cousins info. She bout had a fit and all I could akin it to was
her "counting coup". The people and connections were not important. Just
the number of entries she could add to her data base.
I find the history to be a lot more fun and informative than the head
count. But that's just my two cents worth. Doug
Yeah, there are those for whom the body count is more important than the
quality or content of the data, and that includes some of the bigger
"names" out there. Genealogy, IMO, is a unique combination of history
and, for lack of a better word at the moment, genetics. I've learned
things about the Finns I never knew before, am learning of my family
connection to 1066 and all that, to say nothing of the settling of the
American south and southwest, and in the process have learned about some
of the personalities involved and located several cousins I was unaware I
had. _My_ database is small (fewer than 1500 people and 500 families,
but growing), but I like to think more of the people involved than of the
actual count.
As for including the names of living people in a book to be published, I'd
suggest you see a lawyer and draw up a formal release. Send 2 copies to
each person you know or suspect is currently living or to heads of
families with small children that might be included. Ask'em to sign and
have 'em notarized (! <- IMPORTANT <- !), then send one back to you for
registration and filing. This is gonna be the ONLY way you'll keep your
tail out of a sling in the event some disgruntled soul decides after
publication that you "done him wrong". To be absolutely safe, you might
want to include the lines/paragraphs that mention the person and ask that
he review, mark it up to his heart's content and return it with the signed
release. If you exercise due diligence in this manner or similarly, you
should be able to avoid problems in the future.
Bob
--
Robert G. Melson | Nothing is more terrible than
Rio Grande MicroSolutions | ignorance in action.
El Paso, Texas | Goethe
melsonr(at)earthlink(dot)net
-
William Barfieldsr
Re: Question about including info on Living Persons in Book
I agree completely!!!
--
William Barfieldsr
"michael kenefick" <kenefick@copper.net> wrote in message news:41E86C19.5F554BAF@copper.net...
--
William Barfieldsr
"michael kenefick" <kenefick@copper.net> wrote in message news:41E86C19.5F554BAF@copper.net...
Hello Bob,
You should publish all known information. If you gathered it from public
sources, it is public information. You will have consolidated the information.
The only thing I might edit out are people under the age of 18. Maybe list them
as Living Male Smith or Female Smith. Also, place a note. State at the time of
publishing these people are under 18. Contact you for additional information.
Remember to update your e-mail when (if) you change it. If the requester has
good cause let them have the information.
Also, in twenty or thirty years those folks are going to starting thinking
about their roots. If you supply incomplete information it will be that much
harder for them. And you may no longer be here to supply the edited information
in twenty or thirty years. Remember just because you publish a name with DOB
and / or location information this does not make them a target for the @#@&^@#'s
who want to steal identities.
Mike
"S. W. Ohio Bob" wrote:
I am writing a book on my GGGG-Grandfather and all of his descendants which I
have been able to uncover. There are a total of about 1600 people
altogether mentioned in the book. There are slightly over 200 of these people
for whom I have their dates and places of birth and who I consider
still living (based on anybody born after 1895).
My question is whether or not I should include the birth information for these
200+ people. I plan to have this book published and it will end up in
a few libraries where I have pockets of cousins of different degrees. I'm
concerned about people being upset that their personal information is
included if they find the book in their library, even though if someone wanted
to find this information from other sources, they could. I've
discussed it with some cousins who know about the book - some say include it -
it's public knowledge.
The majority of the 200+ people I do not know, not do I know how to contact
them and they would not be aware of what I am doing.
I just thought I'd survey the newsgroup and get other people's opinions on
this matter.
Thanks.
-
S. W. Ohio Bob
Re: Question about including info on Living Persons in Book
Thanks to everyone for their responses. I've come to the conclusion that
this is important information. The majority of the names, dates, etc. of the
living persons were obtained from cousins I have come across in my research.
They had been researching their part of their trees and I'm trying to tie
everything together.
I'm going to contact the cousins who have given me this information and let
them know that unless anyone in their families has any extreme objections,
I'm going to include their information.
Thanks again.
Bob Morrison
Cincinnati, Ohio
"William Barfieldsr" <wbarfieldsr@grandecom.net> wrote in message
news:10ut3lh32lqkbb5@corp.supernews.com...
I agree completely!!!
--
William Barfieldsr
"michael kenefick" <kenefick@copper.net> wrote in message
news:41E86C19.5F554BAF@copper.net...
this is important information. The majority of the names, dates, etc. of the
living persons were obtained from cousins I have come across in my research.
They had been researching their part of their trees and I'm trying to tie
everything together.
I'm going to contact the cousins who have given me this information and let
them know that unless anyone in their families has any extreme objections,
I'm going to include their information.
Thanks again.
Bob Morrison
Cincinnati, Ohio
"William Barfieldsr" <wbarfieldsr@grandecom.net> wrote in message
news:10ut3lh32lqkbb5@corp.supernews.com...
I agree completely!!!
--
William Barfieldsr
"michael kenefick" <kenefick@copper.net> wrote in message
news:41E86C19.5F554BAF@copper.net...
Hello Bob,
You should publish all known information. If you gathered it from
public
sources, it is public information. You will have consolidated the
information.
The only thing I might edit out are people under the age of 18. Maybe
list them
as Living Male Smith or Female Smith. Also, place a note. State at the
time of
publishing these people are under 18. Contact you for additional
information.
Remember to update your e-mail when (if) you change it. If the requester
has
good cause let them have the information.
Also, in twenty or thirty years those folks are going to starting
thinking
about their roots. If you supply incomplete information it will be that
much
harder for them. And you may no longer be here to supply the edited
information
in twenty or thirty years. Remember just because you publish a name with
DOB
and / or location information this does not make them a target for the
@#@&^@#'s
who want to steal identities.
Mike
"S. W. Ohio Bob" wrote:
I am writing a book on my GGGG-Grandfather and all of his descendants
which I
have been able to uncover. There are a total of about 1600 people
altogether mentioned in the book. There are slightly over 200 of these
people
for whom I have their dates and places of birth and who I consider
still living (based on anybody born after 1895).
My question is whether or not I should include the birth information for
these
200+ people. I plan to have this book published and it will end up in
a few libraries where I have pockets of cousins of different degrees.
I'm
concerned about people being upset that their personal information is
included if they find the book in their library, even though if someone
wanted
to find this information from other sources, they could. I've
discussed it with some cousins who know about the book - some say
include it -
it's public knowledge.
The majority of the 200+ people I do not know, not do I know how to
contact
them and they would not be aware of what I am doing.
I just thought I'd survey the newsgroup and get other people's opinions
on
this matter.
Thanks.
-
Diane R. Reid
Re: Question about including info on Living Persons in Book
Might I suggest that you check federal and state privacy legislation.
Here in Canada, we have privacy law which affect individuals as well as
corporations.
As well, with all the cases of identity theft that are around, I would
think that you might reconsider.
Even if you got the information from public sources, that doesn't mean
that the people want the information published - for instance, the
elderly aunt who has lost her husband might not want the whole world to
know that she is an elderly widow and thus become a target of some
fraudulent scheme that preys on the elderly!
I believe that you should not publish details about a person unless you
have been authorized BY THE PERSON THEMSELVES - no second hand permission.
Diane
S. W. Ohio Bob wrote:
--
"The Universe began not with a bang, but a smile"
See my web page at http://www3.sympatico.ca/dr.reid/
Here in Canada, we have privacy law which affect individuals as well as
corporations.
As well, with all the cases of identity theft that are around, I would
think that you might reconsider.
Even if you got the information from public sources, that doesn't mean
that the people want the information published - for instance, the
elderly aunt who has lost her husband might not want the whole world to
know that she is an elderly widow and thus become a target of some
fraudulent scheme that preys on the elderly!
I believe that you should not publish details about a person unless you
have been authorized BY THE PERSON THEMSELVES - no second hand permission.
Diane
S. W. Ohio Bob wrote:
Thanks to everyone for their responses. I've come to the conclusion that
this is important information. The majority of the names, dates, etc. of the
living persons were obtained from cousins I have come across in my research.
They had been researching their part of their trees and I'm trying to tie
everything together.
I'm going to contact the cousins who have given me this information and let
them know that unless anyone in their families has any extreme objections,
I'm going to include their information.
Thanks again.
Bob Morrison
Cincinnati, Ohio
"William Barfieldsr" <wbarfieldsr@grandecom.net> wrote in message
news:10ut3lh32lqkbb5@corp.supernews.com...
I agree completely!!!
--
"The Universe began not with a bang, but a smile"
See my web page at http://www3.sympatico.ca/dr.reid/
-
f/fgeorge
Re: Question about including info on Living Persons in Book
On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 07:26:29 -0400, "Diane R. Reid"
<dr.reid@sympatico.ca> wrote:
name of the individual. Then somewhere in the in the book put a way
for researchers to contact you, then after you have determined that
they are legitimate, you can release the info.
LOTS of families have info that they would rather have not
released...the person that had a kid BEFORE they had been married
"long enough", the husband that ran off with the flousie, the black
sheep of the family, etc. Some people live in glass houses of their
own making and you would then be throwing rocks at them!
And don't forget the Politician's career, or potential Politician,
that you could be ruining, think Strom Thurmond!!!!
<dr.reid@sympatico.ca> wrote:
Might I suggest that you check federal and state privacy legislation.
Here in Canada, we have privacy law which affect individuals as well as
corporations.
As well, with all the cases of identity theft that are around, I would
think that you might reconsider.
Even if you got the information from public sources, that doesn't mean
that the people want the information published - for instance, the
elderly aunt who has lost her husband might not want the whole world to
know that she is an elderly widow and thus become a target of some
fraudulent scheme that preys on the elderly!
I believe that you should not publish details about a person unless you
have been authorized BY THE PERSON THEMSELVES - no second hand permission.
Diane
AGREED...an alternative might be to say "living" and include ONLY the
name of the individual. Then somewhere in the in the book put a way
for researchers to contact you, then after you have determined that
they are legitimate, you can release the info.
LOTS of families have info that they would rather have not
released...the person that had a kid BEFORE they had been married
"long enough", the husband that ran off with the flousie, the black
sheep of the family, etc. Some people live in glass houses of their
own making and you would then be throwing rocks at them!
And don't forget the Politician's career, or potential Politician,
that you could be ruining, think Strom Thurmond!!!!
S. W. Ohio Bob wrote:
Thanks to everyone for their responses. I've come to the conclusion that
this is important information. The majority of the names, dates, etc. of the
living persons were obtained from cousins I have come across in my research.
They had been researching their part of their trees and I'm trying to tie
everything together.
I'm going to contact the cousins who have given me this information and let
them know that unless anyone in their families has any extreme objections,
I'm going to include their information.
Thanks again.
Bob Morrison
Cincinnati, Ohio
-
Phyllis
Re: Question about including info on Living Persons in Book
But genealogy isn't just names and dates is it? Isn't it also family
history; those things done by our ancestors that make them "real people"
to us? I have run across information on an aunt that has her listed as
living. She died 19 years ago! People write books all the time about
others; books that are "unauthorized" but printed just the same. While
I might not be pleased with my personal information being broadcast on
the six o'clock news, I lived that life and if my family is interested
in it 100 years from now, I'd like them to know the real me, not just
dates and names.
f/fgeorge wrote:
history; those things done by our ancestors that make them "real people"
to us? I have run across information on an aunt that has her listed as
living. She died 19 years ago! People write books all the time about
others; books that are "unauthorized" but printed just the same. While
I might not be pleased with my personal information being broadcast on
the six o'clock news, I lived that life and if my family is interested
in it 100 years from now, I'd like them to know the real me, not just
dates and names.
f/fgeorge wrote:
On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 07:26:29 -0400, "Diane R. Reid"
dr.reid@sympatico.ca> wrote:
Might I suggest that you check federal and state privacy legislation.
Here in Canada, we have privacy law which affect individuals as well as
corporations.
As well, with all the cases of identity theft that are around, I would
think that you might reconsider.
Even if you got the information from public sources, that doesn't mean
that the people want the information published - for instance, the
elderly aunt who has lost her husband might not want the whole world to
know that she is an elderly widow and thus become a target of some
fraudulent scheme that preys on the elderly!
I believe that you should not publish details about a person unless you
have been authorized BY THE PERSON THEMSELVES - no second hand permission.
Diane
AGREED...an alternative might be to say "living" and include ONLY the
name of the individual. Then somewhere in the in the book put a way
for researchers to contact you, then after you have determined that
they are legitimate, you can release the info.
LOTS of families have info that they would rather have not
released...the person that had a kid BEFORE they had been married
"long enough", the husband that ran off with the flousie, the black
sheep of the family, etc. Some people live in glass houses of their
own making and you would then be throwing rocks at them!
And don't forget the Politician's career, or potential Politician,
that you could be ruining, think Strom Thurmond!!!!
S. W. Ohio Bob wrote:
Thanks to everyone for their responses. I've come to the conclusion that
this is important information. The majority of the names, dates, etc. of the
living persons were obtained from cousins I have come across in my research.
They had been researching their part of their trees and I'm trying to tie
everything together.
I'm going to contact the cousins who have given me this information and let
them know that unless anyone in their families has any extreme objections,
I'm going to include their information.
Thanks again.
Bob Morrison
Cincinnati, Ohio