Same Sex Marriages

Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper

Svar
TD Wilson

Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av TD Wilson » 05 sep 2004 04:30:28

How should this be handled? I just came across some info that indicates a
distant relative in Mass. married her girlfriend. Should I enter them in my
database as wife and wife, husband and wife or husband and husband? Or
should I just leave it alone? This one has me stumped!

Herman van der Woude

Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av Herman van der Woude » 05 sep 2004 09:56:27

In news:8Tu_c.15975$pu7.9607@newssvr29.news.prodigy.com, schreef
TD Wilson <wilykyote@sbcglobal.net>:
| How should this be handled? I just came across some info that
| indicates a distant relative in Mass. married her girlfriend. Should
| I enter them in my database as wife and wife, husband and wife or
| husband and husband? Or should I just leave it alone? This one has me
| stumped!

If they are officially married, they now are each others wifes. It is
that simple.

--
Herman van der Woude
hvdwoude @ zonnet.nl
(spaties toegevoegd om SPAM te vermijden / spaces added to avoid SPAM)

MisNomer

Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av MisNomer » 05 sep 2004 14:12:52

Any way you want. It only becomes a problem when there are children.

take care
Liz




On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 02:30:28 GMT, "TD Wilson" <wilykyote@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

How should this be handled? I just came across some info that indicates a
distant relative in Mass. married her girlfriend. Should I enter them in my
database as wife and wife, husband and wife or husband and husband? Or
should I just leave it alone? This one has me stumped!

0_Qed

.Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av 0_Qed » 05 sep 2004 15:24:56

MisNomer wrote:
Any way you want. It only becomes a problem when there are children.

<VBG>

And THEN 'what' ???

This 'issue' seems programatically similar to the manner in which
a genalogical package ?mite? 'handle' children born "outside"
a traditional "2_corner_m/f" marriage ...
yes?

??
Do any of the current 'packages' handle this situation ???
From an 'internal' DB point-of-view(pov), this seems quite
feasible/possible
to 'handle' from a "programming" 'pov'.

Anyone ??

take care
Liz

<VVBG>
I "thimk' I 'take' your meaning.

I 'do', and have 'done' ... to the best of my knowlege.

:-)
Qed.

singhals

Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av singhals » 05 sep 2004 16:18:47

TD Wilson wrote:

How should this be handled? I just came across some info that indicates a
distant relative in Mass. married her girlfriend. Should I enter them in my
database as wife and wife, husband and wife or husband and husband? Or
should I just leave it alone? This one has me stumped!



Until Mass. set precedents by slapping the word "marriage" onto the
situation, you could simply select "partners" in a lot of software. Now
that it is officially a "marriage", "partners" seems as unrealistic as
"marriage" was before...if you see what I mean? (g)

Pragmatically, since the software was *all* written before that action
in Mass., handle it anyway the software allows you to handle it that
seems to make you less uneasy. If one of the pair needs a sex-change
on-screen to force-feed the program, do that.


Cheryl

MisNomer

Re: .Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av MisNomer » 05 sep 2004 17:10:12

I suppose one could add an event - adoption / artificial insemination ? or a
note about the marraige.

The children born of conventional relationships are genetic relations. I guess
it all depends on what you want your family tree to look like, and wether you
are related to the one who has the child.

Personnally, I don't include families where the mother has nothing to do with
the making of the children, ie, a marraige into a ready made family that ends in
divorce with no offspring resulting from the said marraige. But I do include
the children from a liason which has ended, with or without the benifit of
marraige. I also include the children that were officially adopted, and their
children.

I still haven't added my own "second" relationship into my tree, (there wont be
any children from this one), but, his grandkids will be put into his tree.

Childless couples are just that - childless couples, that branch of the tree
stops there.

take care
Liz







On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 09:24:56 -0400, 0_Qed <nano.bot@shaysnet.com> wrote:

VBG

And THEN 'what' ???

This 'issue' seems programatically similar to the manner in which
a genalogical package ?mite? 'handle' children born "outside"
a traditional "2_corner_m/f" marriage ...
yes?

??
Do any of the current 'packages' handle this situation ???
From an 'internal' DB point-of-view(pov), this seems quite
feasible/possible
to 'handle' from a "programming" 'pov'.

Anyone ??

Lesley Robertson

Re: .Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av Lesley Robertson » 05 sep 2004 18:14:46

"MisNomer" <misnomer@shaw.ca> schreef in bericht
news:jk7mj05jbl99nlt5vttsl45g6od6040ctp@4ax.com...
Childless couples are just that - childless couples, that branch of the
tree
stops there.

I suppose that it depends on whether you're doing genealogy or family

history. That second spouse is often the one who brought the children up (in
Scotland it was very common to remarry after a spouse death, especially if a
man was left with small children), and therefore made a major contribution
to the family history.
I document any changes to the family, whether or not they result in
children.
Lesley Robertson

Lesley Robertson

Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av Lesley Robertson » 05 sep 2004 18:19:59

"singhals" <singhals@erols.com> schreef in bericht
news:413b2046$0$19725$61fed72c@news.rcn.com...
Until Mass. set precedents by slapping the word "marriage" onto the
situation, you could simply select "partners" in a lot of software. Now
that it is officially a "marriage", "partners" seems as unrealistic as
"marriage" was before...if you see what I mean? (g)

Pragmatically, since the software was *all* written before that action
in Mass., handle it anyway the software allows you to handle it that
seems to make you less uneasy. If one of the pair needs a sex-change
on-screen to force-feed the program, do that.

Shows how out of date the software folk are, we've had same-sex marriages

over here for ages!
If necessary, list them as partners and add a noe showing the date of the
wedding.
Lesley Robertson

0_Qed

.Re: Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av 0_Qed » 05 sep 2004 21:26:00

Lesley Robertson wrote:

I suppose that it depends on whether you're doing genealogy or family
history.

Being a 'newbie' to genalogical research methods ,
whats the difference twixt the format/style
of a) genealogy, & b) family, "history" ???

Can 'both' styles be concomitant ... inter_mixed ,
if thats a fair <?> ???

On a different 'tack' ...
it almost seems 'now',
that "union" events (now) gotta be ID'd as being
a) mixed-sex , b) same-sex
and further ...
that both "a)" & "b)" be ID'd as a) lawful , b) 'other' .

Above should yield
.. mixed-sex and lawful ... traditional unions
.. " 'other' ... liasons
.. same-sex and lawful ... USA State of "MA" covered
.. " and 'other' ... 'else' as applicable
..
to "cover" all the logical 'union' possibilities.

"This" still leaves the issue of 'covering' the "Issue of Unions"
as being either the result of a) in_union , or b) ex_union.

Please 'consider' that my logical "development" is
driven =upwards=, from a DB_programatic 'pov' ,
as opposed to that of the human genalogical researcher needs.

If the 'human' researcher doesnt need "it" , neither does the DB engine.

Anyone ???

Qed.

MisNomer

Re: .Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av MisNomer » 05 sep 2004 21:33:16

In our family so far - those that married a previously married spouse usually
had children together - and all the children would be entered (with their own
parents.)

I do make note of the second spouse if no children where born from the marraige,
but not his or her family, mainly because of lack of research. Perhaps someday
- enough problems just researching my lines.

Do you research the step parents lineage along with lineage of the person who
died young? What about divorces and remarraiges?

take care
Liz





On Sun, 5 Sep 2004 18:14:46 +0200, "Lesley Robertson"
<l.a.robertson@tnw.tudelft.nl> wrote:

"MisNomer" <misnomer@shaw.ca> schreef in bericht
news:jk7mj05jbl99nlt5vttsl45g6od6040ctp@4ax.com...

Childless couples are just that - childless couples, that branch of the
tree
stops there.

I suppose that it depends on whether you're doing genealogy or family
history. That second spouse is often the one who brought the children up (in
Scotland it was very common to remarry after a spouse death, especially if a
man was left with small children), and therefore made a major contribution
to the family history.
I document any changes to the family, whether or not they result in
children.
Lesley Robertson


Lesley Robertson

Re: Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av Lesley Robertson » 05 sep 2004 21:41:29

"0_Qed" <nano.bot@shaysnet.com> schreef in bericht
news:413B6848.2F6D@shaysnet.com...
Lesley Robertson wrote:

I suppose that it depends on whether you're doing genealogy or family
history.

Being a 'newbie' to genalogical research methods ,
whats the difference twixt the format/style
of a) genealogy, & b) family, "history" ???

It's a subject of muc discussion. In my (personal) view, genealogy is
bloodlines, family history the genealogy plus the lives of the people - what
they did, who they knew, how they lived. Great Aunt Maude might not have had
any children of her own, but if the family visited her regularly, stories of
the visits, the cakes or the cats, etc, are important.
Can 'both' styles be concomitant ... inter_mixed ,
if thats a fair <?> ???

Of course - the only real rules in this game are be accurate and record your
sources. Outwith that, design your own project.
On a different 'tack' ...
it almost seems 'now',
that "union" events (now) gotta be ID'd as being
a) mixed-sex , b) same-sex
and further ...
that both "a)" & "b)" be ID'd as a) lawful , b) 'other' .

Depends what your software allows, and what you want.
"This" still leaves the issue of 'covering' the "Issue of Unions"
as being either the result of a) in_union , or b) ex_union.

You can't get away from biology - sometimes the other bioparent is known,
other times it isn't. The obvious way is to show the bioparents as
unmarried, and the spouse as an adoptive parent - that often being the legal
situation. It's usually a good idea to ask parent sin such a situation how
they'd want things recorded, second bioparent shown by name, simply as
ünknown" or what.

NEVER to shared info on living people without their permission. It's up to
them what they tell their kids, and not for someone else to let the gossips
in. Any database should be set up with a way to easily remove any personal
information before being passed to another person.

Lesley Robertson

0_Qed

Good Grief! was: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av 0_Qed » 05 sep 2004 22:26:40

0_Qed wrote:

....snip...

Good Grief!!!

I thot all you 'filk'(Leslie/Liz/et_al) could lead me by the hand ...
make all "this" simple.
<joking>

Sheesh!
You 'forget' ... I said I was a =noobie= in this area.

:-)
Qed.

Otto Jørgensen

Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av Otto Jørgensen » 05 sep 2004 23:47:56

On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 02:30:28 GMT, in alt.genealogy "TD Wilson"
<wilykyote@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

How should this be handled? I just came across some info that indicates a
distant relative in Mass. married her girlfriend. Should I enter them in my
database as wife and wife, husband and wife or husband and husband? Or
should I just leave it alone? This one has me stumped!

It is no problem at all

You enter the information as it is and let the program handle all
reports.

At present none of the same sex make children together and if they
have children by their own before the samesex marriage it is only to
enter the information as it is.
You do alway enter the correct information, whatever it is.
SO simple and if the program does not handle it, it is time to change
program

--
Otto Jørgensen
http://home.online.no/~otjoerge/bk/
All email is checked by NORTON

MisNomer

Re: .Re: Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av MisNomer » 06 sep 2004 01:22:39

So are you building a new program? Forget about same sex relationships, they
are not the majority - showing all a womans children on one sheet / page
regardless of the father is more important.

Mixed and extended families are more relavent. Everyone knows / has in their
family someone who has had more than one spouse (legally - or not) with or
without children from said union. Morality issues aside, the only way you are
related to your kids other parent is by said kid.


take care
Liz



On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 15:26:00 -0400, 0_Qed <nano.bot@shaysnet.com> wrote:

Lesley Robertson wrote:

I suppose that it depends on whether you're doing genealogy or family
history.

Being a 'newbie' to genalogical research methods ,
whats the difference twixt the format/style
of a) genealogy, & b) family, "history" ???

Can 'both' styles be concomitant ... inter_mixed ,
if thats a fair <?> ???

On a different 'tack' ...
it almost seems 'now',
that "union" events (now) gotta be ID'd as being
a) mixed-sex , b) same-sex
and further ...
that both "a)" & "b)" be ID'd as a) lawful , b) 'other' .

Above should yield
. mixed-sex and lawful ... traditional unions
. " 'other' ... liasons
. same-sex and lawful ... USA State of "MA" covered
. " and 'other' ... 'else' as applicable
.
to "cover" all the logical 'union' possibilities.

"This" still leaves the issue of 'covering' the "Issue of Unions"
as being either the result of a) in_union , or b) ex_union.

Please 'consider' that my logical "development" is
driven =upwards=, from a DB_programatic 'pov' ,
as opposed to that of the human genalogical researcher needs.

If the 'human' researcher doesnt need "it" , neither does the DB engine.

Anyone ???

Qed.

MisNomer

Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av MisNomer » 06 sep 2004 01:55:52

On Sun, 5 Sep 2004 21:41:29 +0200, "Lesley Robertson"
<l.a.robertson@tnw.tudelft.nl> wrote:

It's a subject of muc discussion. In my (personal) view, genealogy is
bloodlines, family history the genealogy plus the lives of the people - what
they did, who they knew, how they lived. Great Aunt Maude might not have had
any children of her own, but if the family visited her regularly, stories of
the visits, the cakes or the cats, etc, are important.

Does your family do this on a regular basis? hmmm... The only written
rememberances made by people in my family are little oral histories that someone
has written for publishing of books on towns etc. This maybe a lost art.


NEVER to shared info on living people without their permission. It's up to
them what they tell their kids, and not for someone else to let the gossips
in. Any database should be set up with a way to easily remove any personal
information before being passed to another person.

Lesley Robertson

Wise council in this day and age.

take care
Liz

0_Qed

Re: .Re: Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av 0_Qed » 06 sep 2004 03:48:54

MisNomer wrote:

So are you building a new program?

:-)
=Far= from it ,
I'm just few 'scant days away from learning theres
an 'a' in word 'genealogy'.


Forget about same sex relationships, they
are not the majority - showing all a womans children on one sheet / page
regardless of the father is more important.

At 'this' point , that notion requires too much of a noobie,
I'm not in a position to venture much of an 'opine'.


Mixed and extended families are more relavent. Everyone knows / has in their
family someone who has had more than one spouse (legally - or not) with or
without children from said union. Morality issues aside, the only way you are
related to your kids other parent is by said kid.

Yet another 'pov' for me to add to a growing collection ... 'extended'.

I'm still 'muddling', trying to find firm ground to stand upon,
wrt genealogical research & the 'capture' of it's varied styles &
subtile 'twists' .

Qed.

MisNomer

Re: .Re: Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av MisNomer » 06 sep 2004 05:47:25

On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 21:48:54 -0400, 0_Qed <nano.bot@shaysnet.com> wrote:

=Far= from it ,
I'm just few 'scant days away from learning theres
an 'a' in word 'genealogy'.

lol...



Yet another 'pov' for me to add to a growing collection ... 'extended'.

I'm still 'muddling', trying to find firm ground to stand upon,
wrt genealogical research & the 'capture' of it's varied styles &
subtile 'twists' .

It is your tree.... start from yourself and work backwards, find all the
information you can about your parents and grandparents. Thats 8 people. if
you want to add your siblings and their family's information in, thats ok,
and your parents siblings / family thats fine too. If your grandparents are
alive - you are lucky - they may have information for you about your great
grands!

Some people just use family group sheets (ie pen and paper ) some people find a
software program that they enjoy using. Its your choice. Just remember that
genealogy without documentation is fiction, and that is about the only rule, and
the only firm ground you need.

My genealogy is about the dead people, others are about the living.

take care
Liz

singhals

Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av singhals » 06 sep 2004 15:18:29

Lesley Robertson wrote:
"singhals" <singhals@erols.com> schreef in bericht
news:413b2046$0$19725$61fed72c@news.rcn.com...

Until Mass. set precedents by slapping the word "marriage" onto the
situation, you could simply select "partners" in a lot of software. Now
that it is officially a "marriage", "partners" seems as unrealistic as
"marriage" was before...if you see what I mean? (g)

Pragmatically, since the software was *all* written before that action
in Mass., handle it anyway the software allows you to handle it that
seems to make you less uneasy. If one of the pair needs a sex-change
on-screen to force-feed the program, do that.


Shows how out of date the software folk are, we've had same-sex marriages
over here for ages!
If necessary, list them as partners and add a noe showing the date of the
wedding.
Lesley Robertson





Good point! For maximum clarity, the sentence should have read:
"Pragmatically, since the software _used or written in the US_ was *all*
written before that action ..."

I don't know what software used and/or written otherwhere might do for
you. But, then, any software written in (f'instance) Finnish does me no
good at all because I don't read it and couldn't appreciate any embedded
advantages. (g)

Cheryl
in Mass.,

Lesley Robertson

Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av Lesley Robertson » 06 sep 2004 15:55:58

"singhals" <singhals@erols.com> wrote in message
news:413c63a5$0$19719$61fed72c@news.rcn.com...
Lesley Robertson wrote:
Good point! For maximum clarity, the sentence should have read:
"Pragmatically, since the software _used or written in the US_ was *all*
written before that action ..."

Ah, but I'm fairly sure that most software written in the US is also used to
record events outwith the US - I have the distinct impression that you
Left-Ponders have the odd relative or two over here......
;)
And they're pushing FTM2005 already!
Lesley Robertson

Fridrik Skulason

Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av Fridrik Skulason » 06 sep 2004 17:27:05

"Lesley Robertson" <l.a.robertson@tnw.tudelft.nl> wrote in message news:<S0H_c.221$ax4.5@fe61.usenetserver.com>...

Shows how out of date the software folk are, we've had same-sex marriages
over here for ages!

I maintain a pretty large online genealogy database (around 700.000
individuals, of which nearly 300.000 are alive) and there have been
several "interesting" problems that have arisen in recent years,
forcing software changes.

Same-sex unions/marriages: are one problem - they are legal here in
Iceland, and legally we have to treat them the same way as the
"traditional" type ... although the software pops up with a "are you
sure" window.

Gender-change operations: Here the issue arises of which gender to
show (online) for (usually living) individuals - their biological
gender, or their "legal" gender, after the operation.

Adoptions by same-sex couples: The law allows one parther in a
same-sex relationship to legally adopt children the other partner may
have - perhaps from a previous heterosexual relationship. This
brought up the issue of how to display the adoptive parent - we ended
up showing "Mother" and "Mother" instead of "Father" and "Mother"

Of course, some program shortcomings were not due to recent problems.
There was one kind of marital status which the original program did
not support. The Icelandic term is "fylgikona", which is the mistress
of a Catholic priests.

There was a period of around 400 years when priests here were not
allowed to marry, but mistresses were tolerated - in fact, the
*entire* current population is descended from the last Catholic bishop
of Iceland and his mistress, so narurally the program had to be
changed to allow entries of this type.

-fridrik

Fridrik Skulason

Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av Fridrik Skulason » 06 sep 2004 17:38:05

"Lesley Robertson" <l.a.robertson@tnw.tudelft.nl> wrote in message news:<NZJ_c.525$5t4.201@fe39.usenetserver.com>...
NEVER to shared info on living people without their permission. It's up to
them what they tell their kids, and not for someone else to let the gossips
in. Any database should be set up with a way to easily remove any personal
information before being passed to another person.

This may be your way of doing things - but others may have different

views. I distinguish between public and private information in this
respect. Public information includes things like names, parents
(unless adoption is involved), dates and locations of birth and death
and children (for the most part). Private information includes things
like biographical details, current address and children given away for
adoption.

I have no problems with putting the *public* details on the web for
anyone in my database, but I would not include any of the *private*
details without explicit permission of the individual in question.

This approach works fine over here, but opinions on what is private or
public may differ between countries.

-fridrik

Lesley Robertson

Re: Good Grief! was: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av Lesley Robertson » 06 sep 2004 18:49:18

"0_Qed" <nano.bot@shaysnet.com> schreef in bericht
news:413B7680.C1A@shaysnet.com...
I thot all you 'filk'(Leslie/Liz/et_al) could lead me by the hand ...
make all "this" simple.
joking

Sheesh!
You 'forget' ... I said I was a =noobie= in this area.

Well since you're a newbie, I'll forgive you this once, but do note that I

use the FEMALE version of my forename. Trust me, I'm a biologist, I
understand these things....
Lesley Robertson

Lesley Robertson

Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av Lesley Robertson » 06 sep 2004 18:55:53

"MisNomer" <misnomer@shaw.ca> schreef in bericht
news:t99nj0d6vkalt65hklcqdnivnqvd3nlo5a@4ax.com...
Does your family do this on a regular basis? hmmm... The only written
rememberances made by people in my family are little oral histories that
someone
has written for publishing of books on towns etc. This maybe a lost art.

That was a fictional example (although I do have a little shoe box of odd

notes I'm still trying to read), but if you want a real one, the mother of
one of my Aunts-by-marriage died when my Aunt was 6 and she was brought up
by an otherwise childless step-mother. As far as I can see, the step-mother
had at least as much influence on my Aunt's development as her blood mother,
and it seems very hard to not include her in any family tree (especially as
I have the step-mother's wedding china) simply because she left no blood
descendants.
Anyway, since I'm childless, I'm planning to become an eccentric Aunt
myslef, and make sure I figure in all the family stories!
Lesley Robertson

Lesley Robertson

Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av Lesley Robertson » 06 sep 2004 18:59:06

"Fridrik Skulason" <frisk@complex.is> schreef in bericht
news:fcd2fc13.0409060727.7d946e16@posting.google.com...
Of course, some program shortcomings were not due to recent problems.
There was one kind of marital status which the original program did
not support. The Icelandic term is "fylgikona", which is the mistress
of a Catholic priests.

But surely that's covered by the "unmarried relationship" tag in most modern

software?

There was a period of around 400 years when priests here were not
allowed to marry, but mistresses were tolerated - in fact, the
*entire* current population is descended from the last Catholic bishop
of Iceland and his mistress, so narurally the program had to be
changed to allow entries of this type.

Wonderful!

Lesley Robertson

Carole Allen

Re: .Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av Carole Allen » 06 sep 2004 20:19:48

Depending on the time frame and ethnicity, this can lead to more
information about your own lines. My maternal ggm died at 29, leaving
3 children under 5; my ggf remarried 3 months later. They lived in a
small community, primarily Croatian quarry workers, many of the women
running boardinghouses. Because I have been unsuccessful in tracing
my ggf's village (or even my ggm's maiden name)I am working through
the stepmother, on the assumption she and/or her family may have come
from their village (or one close by) initially. (The stepmohter had
not been in this country long before the marriage.) This fits within
the pattern - my ggf came here, worked 4 years, my ggm arrived, and
they married upon her arrival. I assume this is classic chain
migration - he sent for her. I am hoping that the stepmother's family
will lead me to my ggf's village.

Certainly, this is consistent with my paternal grandparents, similarly
living in a [different] close knit Croatian community in which the
families had emigrated over time in the classic chain migration
pattern. Though these grandparents emigrated at different times, and
in fact met here, their home villages were no more than a few miles
apart, so they and their families here shared regional customs from
home.


On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 19:33:16 GMT, MisNomer <misnomer@shaw.ca> wrote:

Do you research the step parents lineage along with lineage of the person who
died young? What about divorces and remarraiges?

Otto Jørgensen

Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av Otto Jørgensen » 06 sep 2004 20:27:44

On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 18:55:53 +0200, in alt.genealogy "Lesley Robertson"
<l.a.robertson@tnw.tudelft.nl> wrote:

"MisNomer" <misnomer@shaw.ca> schreef in bericht
news:t99nj0d6vkalt65hklcqdnivnqvd3nlo5a@4ax.com...

Does your family do this on a regular basis? hmmm... The only written
rememberances made by people in my family are little oral histories that
someone
has written for publishing of books on towns etc. This maybe a lost art.

That was a fictional example (although I do have a little shoe box of odd
notes I'm still trying to read), but if you want a real one, the mother of
one of my Aunts-by-marriage died when my Aunt was 6 and she was brought up
by an otherwise childless step-mother. As far as I can see, the step-mother
had at least as much influence on my Aunt's development as her blood mother,
and it seems very hard to not include her in any family tree (especially as
I have the step-mother's wedding china) simply because she left no blood
descendants.
Anyway, since I'm childless, I'm planning to become an eccentric Aunt
myslef, and make sure I figure in all the family stories!
Lesley Robertson

I do enter all information to the database, as for me it is also

family history and if we look around we will find that most of us
might be related in some way.
I also include aunts and uncles that do not have children (only cats)
;=)

I'm related to my wife but we have to go back to about 1500. To have a
complete story we have to include all the persons we can find. And it
is then we do find the real story concerning our ancestors during
those 500 years. If we had not looked at those person as well, we
might have a boring hobby

--
Otto Jørgensen
http://home.online.no/~otjoerge/bk/
All email is checked by NORTON

MisNomer

Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av MisNomer » 06 sep 2004 20:43:47

Of course one would have to include such a relationship in the tree! You were
obviously in turn influenced and loved by the step mom as well, if not directly
then certainly by the Aunt.

Thank you for sharing this.

take care
Liz
thinking that the collecting of information is perhaps not the only thing
involved in building and researching family trees.



On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 18:55:53 +0200, "Lesley Robertson"
<l.a.robertson@tnw.tudelft.nl> wrote:

That was a fictional example (although I do have a little shoe box of odd
notes I'm still trying to read), but if you want a real one, the mother of
one of my Aunts-by-marriage died when my Aunt was 6 and she was brought up
by an otherwise childless step-mother. As far as I can see, the step-mother
had at least as much influence on my Aunt's development as her blood mother,
and it seems very hard to not include her in any family tree (especially as
I have the step-mother's wedding china) simply because she left no blood
descendants.
Anyway, since I'm childless, I'm planning to become an eccentric Aunt
myslef, and make sure I figure in all the family stories!
Lesley Robertson


0_Qed

Oops! was: Good Grief! was: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av 0_Qed » 06 sep 2004 22:03:31

Lesley Robertson wrote:
Well since you're a newbie, I'll forgive you this once, but do note that I
use the FEMALE version of my forename. Trust me, I'm a biologist, I
understand these things....
Lesley Robertson

Opps! Sorry `bout that.

My claim to 'fame' =definately= aint speling .

Qed.

Steve Hayes

Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av Steve Hayes » 07 sep 2004 05:07:38

On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 18:59:06 +0200, "Lesley Robertson"
<l.a.robertson@tnw.tudelft.nl> wrote:

"Fridrik Skulason" <frisk@complex.is> schreef in bericht
news:fcd2fc13.0409060727.7d946e16@posting.google.com...

Of course, some program shortcomings were not due to recent problems.
There was one kind of marital status which the original program did
not support. The Icelandic term is "fylgikona", which is the mistress
of a Catholic priests.

But surely that's covered by the "unmarried relationship" tag in most modern
software?

The first genealogy program I ever used, and which I still use for first
entry, adopted a different approach to most -- Family History System (FHS).

Most have followed PAF in making a "family" the basic unit. But FHS is a
genealogy program rather than a family history one. It makes the basic
relationship the parent-child one.

Each child has two parents. One who produced the sperm, called the "father",
and the other who produced the egg, called the "mother".

That's it.

To make the link you put the RIN of the sperm producer in the father RIN, and
the RIN of the mother in the mother RIN. It is entirely unnecesary to enter or
presuppose any relationship between the father and the mother, though you can
enter if they were married. Anything else goes in notes.


--
Steve Hayes
E-mail: hayesmstw@hotmail.com
Web: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7783/

MisNomer

Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av MisNomer » 07 sep 2004 07:14:30

lol...




On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 03:07:38 GMT, hayesmstw@hotmail.com (Steve Hayes) wrote:

The first genealogy program I ever used, and which I still use for first
entry, adopted a different approach to most -- Family History System (FHS).

Most have followed PAF in making a "family" the basic unit. But FHS is a
genealogy program rather than a family history one. It makes the basic
relationship the parent-child one.

Each child has two parents. One who produced the sperm, called the "father",
and the other who produced the egg, called the "mother".

That's it.

To make the link you put the RIN of the sperm producer in the father RIN, and
the RIN of the mother in the mother RIN. It is entirely unnecesary to enter or
presuppose any relationship between the father and the mother, though you can
enter if they were married. Anything else goes in notes.

Fridrik Skulason

Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av Fridrik Skulason » 07 sep 2004 12:12:03

"Lesley Robertson" <l.a.robertson@tnw.tudelft.nl> wrote in message news:<yH0%c.589$ax4.489@fe61.usenetserver.com>...
"Fridrik Skulason" <frisk@complex.is> schreef in bericht
news:fcd2fc13.0409060727.7d946e16@posting.google.com...
But surely that's covered by the "unmarried relationship" tag in most modern
software?

Icelandic genealogy books distinguish between several different types
of "unmarried relationships" - not surprising, given that a very high
percentage of children are born to parents that are not married.

We have:

1) Barnsfaðir/Barnsmóðir - the case where a couple had a child, but
they never lived together (a typical short-term relationship or a
one-night stand)

2) Sambýlisfólk - A co-habiting couple. This can either be registered
or unregistered.

3) Staðfest sambúð - A same-sex couple which has been through a
ceremony which is almost (but not quite) equivalent to marriage.

4) Bústýra - a woman running the household and more. In the past it
would be common for widowers with young children to get a "bústýra" -
they might end up marrying later and she might or might not have
children with the farmer.

5) Unnusta/Unnusti - an engaged couple, not living to gether. Pretty
rare.

6) Fylgikona - Typically the mistress of a catholic priest or bishop.

-fridrik

singhals

Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av singhals » 07 sep 2004 14:39:44

Lesley Robertson wrote:

"singhals" <singhals@erols.com> wrote in message
news:413c63a5$0$19719$61fed72c@news.rcn.com...

Lesley Robertson wrote:
Good point! For maximum clarity, the sentence should have read:
"Pragmatically, since the software _used or written in the US_ was *all*
written before that action ..."


Ah, but I'm fairly sure that most software written in the US is also used to
record events outwith the US - I have the distinct impression that you
Left-Ponders have the odd relative or two over here......
;)
And they're pushing FTM2005 already!
Lesley Robertson




Amazing how many newbies don't make the connection between "immigrant"
and "foreign country.", innit? (g)

Cheryl (NOT BTW in Mass. as a careless editing suggested a message or
so back.)

Otto Jørgensen

Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av Otto Jørgensen » 07 sep 2004 16:22:44

On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 15:55:58 +0200, in alt.genealogy "Lesley Robertson"
<l.a.robertson@tnw.tudelft.nl> wrote:

"singhals" <singhals@erols.com> wrote in message
news:413c63a5$0$19719$61fed72c@news.rcn.com...
Lesley Robertson wrote:
Good point! For maximum clarity, the sentence should have read:
"Pragmatically, since the software _used or written in the US_ was *all*
written before that action ..."

Ah, but I'm fairly sure that most software written in the US is also used to
record events outwith the US - I have the distinct impression that you
Left-Ponders have the odd relative or two over here......
;)
And they're pushing FTM2005 already!

or some other good program either made in the specific country or with
a proper and good translation to the language in the specific country

--
Otto Jørgensen
http://home.online.no/~otjoerge/bk/
All email is checked by NORTON

Steve W. Jackson

Re: .Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av Steve W. Jackson » 07 sep 2004 20:53:07

In article <413B13A8.696F@shaysnet.com>, 0_Qed <nano.bot@shaysnet.com>
wrote:

:> MisNomer wrote:
:> > Any way you want. It only becomes a problem when there are children.
:>
:> <VBG>
:>
:> And THEN 'what' ???
:>
:> This 'issue' seems programatically similar to the manner in which
:> a genalogical package ?mite? 'handle' children born "outside"
:> a traditional "2_corner_m/f" marriage ...
:> yes?
:>
:> ??
:> Do any of the current 'packages' handle this situation ???
:> From an 'internal' DB point-of-view(pov), this seems quite
:> feasible/possible
:> to 'handle' from a "programming" 'pov'.
:>
:> Anyone ??
:>
:> > take care
:> > Liz
:>
:> <VVBG>
:> I "thimk' I 'take' your meaning.
:>
:> I 'do', and have 'done' ... to the best of my knowlege.
:>
:> :-)
:> Qed.

Some of this will likely depend on the perceptions of the person
gathering the data. That is, there's the old question about whether
your "genealogy" data reflects "family history" or "biology". I follow
the latter belief, in which case there can't be any children unless one
of the two individuals adopts the child. Regardless of your view on the
entire topic, biology still prevents conception by two individuals of
the same sex.

As to handling of the marriage, I use Reunion on my Macintosh and can
stay positively that it doesn't have any restrictions. I simply put two
individuals side by side on what's called a "family card". The sex (or
gender, if you prefer) matters not. The program allows me to enter any
person as male, female or "unknown sex". I could, in theory, identify
two individuals in my records without any certainty as to the sex of
either and still note that they married. :-)

= Steve =
--
Steve W. Jackson
Montgomery, Alabama

D. Stussy

Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av D. Stussy » 13 sep 2004 08:01:22

Why would that be a problem? Unless there's something really advanced in the
biological sciences going on here, only ONE of them can be a natural parent;
the other is adoptive at best.

On Sun, 5 Sep 2004, MisNomer wrote:
Any way you want. It only becomes a problem when there are children.

take care
Liz




On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 02:30:28 GMT, "TD Wilson" <wilykyote@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

How should this be handled? I just came across some info that indicates a
distant relative in Mass. married her girlfriend. Should I enter them in my
database as wife and wife, husband and wife or husband and husband? Or
should I just leave it alone? This one has me stumped!



D. Stussy

Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av D. Stussy » 13 sep 2004 08:06:48

On Sun, 5 Sep 2004, Lesley Robertson wrote:
"singhals" <singhals@erols.com> schreef in bericht
news:413b2046$0$19725$61fed72c@news.rcn.com...

Until Mass. set precedents by slapping the word "marriage" onto the
situation, you could simply select "partners" in a lot of software. Now
that it is officially a "marriage", "partners" seems as unrealistic as
"marriage" was before...if you see what I mean? (g)

Pragmatically, since the software was *all* written before that action
in Mass., handle it anyway the software allows you to handle it that
seems to make you less uneasy. If one of the pair needs a sex-change
on-screen to force-feed the program, do that.

Shows how out of date the software folk are, we've had same-sex marriages
over here for ages!
If necessary, list them as partners and add a noe showing the date of the
wedding.
Lesley Robertson

I think it shows that the software really cares about HISTORY more so than
modern times....

D. Stussy

Privacy - was Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av D. Stussy » 13 sep 2004 08:13:34

On Sun, 5 Sep 2004, Lesley Robertson wrote:
...
NEVER to shared info on living people without their permission. It's up to
them what they tell their kids, and not for someone else to let the gossips
in. Any database should be set up with a way to easily remove any personal
information before being passed to another person.

In some cases or implementations, this may mean restricting information on a
deceased person who still has a living parent, spouse, sibling, or child.
Until financial institutions learn NOT to ask for a mother's maiden name as a
"security word" (yes, some still do - as proven by two random credit card
application offers I got via "snail mail" a month ago), I consider such a
necessity.

D. Stussy

Changing gender - was Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av D. Stussy » 13 sep 2004 08:24:16

On Mon, 6 Sep 2004, Fridrik Skulason wrote:
...
Gender-change operations: Here the issue arises of which gender to
show (online) for (usually living) individuals - their biological
gender, or their "legal" gender, after the operation.

Why isn't this obvious? One would be listed by their biological gender at
birth as their "sex," and among their life "events" would be the sex change,
complete with a DATE and perhaps the place that the operation took place. If
one were not to list both genders somewhere (or somehow), I don't see how one
could "do justice to the truth" for that person. (I.e. just simply define an
event called "gender reassignment" and use it.)

Otto Jørgensen

Re: Privacy - was Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av Otto Jørgensen » 13 sep 2004 18:32:01

On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 06:13:34 GMT, in alt.genealogy "D. Stussy"
<kd6lvw@bde-arc.ampr.org> wrote:

On Sun, 5 Sep 2004, Lesley Robertson wrote:
...
NEVER to shared info on living people without their permission. It's up to
them what they tell their kids, and not for someone else to let the gossips
in. Any database should be set up with a way to easily remove any personal
information before being passed to another person.

In some cases or implementations, this may mean restricting information on a
deceased person who still has a living parent, spouse, sibling, or child.
Until financial institutions learn NOT to ask for a mother's maiden name as a
"security word" (yes, some still do - as proven by two random credit card
application offers I got via "snail mail" a month ago), I consider such a
necessity.

that is a local problem

--
Otto Jørgensen
http://home.online.no/~otjoerge/bk/
All email is checked by NORTON

Otto Jørgensen

Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av Otto Jørgensen » 13 sep 2004 18:36:10

On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 06:06:48 GMT, in alt.genealogy "D. Stussy"
<kd6lvw@bde-arc.ampr.org> wrote:

On Sun, 5 Sep 2004, Lesley Robertson wrote:
"singhals" <singhals@erols.com> schreef in bericht
news:413b2046$0$19725$61fed72c@news.rcn.com...

Until Mass. set precedents by slapping the word "marriage" onto the
situation, you could simply select "partners" in a lot of software. Now
that it is officially a "marriage", "partners" seems as unrealistic as
"marriage" was before...if you see what I mean? (g)

Pragmatically, since the software was *all* written before that action
in Mass., handle it anyway the software allows you to handle it that
seems to make you less uneasy. If one of the pair needs a sex-change
on-screen to force-feed the program, do that.

Shows how out of date the software folk are, we've had same-sex marriages
over here for ages!
If necessary, list them as partners and add a noe showing the date of the
wedding.
Lesley Robertson

I think it shows that the software really cares about HISTORY more so than
modern times....

many program do handle samesex-relation.
It is not a problem for the programs to handle this. Is is more a
problem for some people around

--
Otto Jørgensen
http://home.online.no/~otjoerge/bk/
All email is checked by NORTON

Fridrik Skulason

Re: Changing gender - was Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av Fridrik Skulason » 13 sep 2004 19:41:11

"D. Stussy" <kd6lvw@bde-arc.ampr.org> wrote in message news:<Pine.LNX.4.60.0409130618380.72@kd6lvw.ampr.org>...

Why isn't this obvious? One would be listed by their biological gender at
birth as their "sex," and among their life "events" would be the sex change,
complete with a DATE and perhaps the place that the operation took place.

Ah, I'm afraid it is not quite that simple, because publically
publishing information on a gender change would be a violation of our
privacy laws.

Keep in mind that the information published on the web page is there
without explicit consent (and possibly without knowledge) of the
individual in question. For that reason, certain types of information
cannot be according to the laws, and that includes anything that can
be considered "medical" information. This would certainly include a
sex-change operation. As the sex-change typicallyinvolves a name
change too, the name change must be hidden too - I can only legally
show the current name, which would obviously conflict with the
biological gender.

That is the problem.

MisNomer

Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av MisNomer » 14 sep 2004 01:47:11

Which brings up the question - How does your software handle / or how do you
handle families such as - mother remairies and new father adopts and changes the
last names of the kids? or the kids take on the new fathers last name?



take care
Liz




On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 06:01:22 GMT, "D. Stussy" <kd6lvw@bde-arc.ampr.org> wrote:

Why would that be a problem? Unless there's something really advanced in the
biological sciences going on here, only ONE of them can be a natural parent;
the other is adoptive at best.

Kristen L. Renneker

Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av Kristen L. Renneker » 14 sep 2004 03:56:23

oohh...I have this problem...my husband's father was adopted by his
stepfather, and even his birth certificate was changed! I use Legacy, and
haven't really looked to see how it handles adoptions. I do most of my work
on paper and only input the facts into Legacy for neatness sake and to make
sure the info is all in one place. In the pedigree chart I have him listed
with his adopted last name, but have his biological father as his father.
I'm not going to research the step-father's family, so I guess all that's
necessary is to note in the family group sheet that the name change was due
to an adoption. It's probably not the correct way to do it, but it's working
at the moment.

kristen :)


"MisNomer" <misnomer@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:nvbck0l7ei51fbkfrvvjims6f4637tpe3t@4ax.com...
Which brings up the question - How does your software handle / or how do
you
handle families such as - mother remairies and new father adopts and
changes the
last names of the kids? or the kids take on the new fathers last name?



take care
Liz




On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 06:01:22 GMT, "D. Stussy" <kd6lvw@bde-arc.ampr.org
wrote:

Why would that be a problem? Unless there's something really advanced in
the
biological sciences going on here, only ONE of them can be a natural
parent;
the other is adoptive at best.

Sherry

Re: Privacy - was Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av Sherry » 14 sep 2004 16:22:31

"D. Stussy" <kd6lvw@bde-arc.ampr.org> wrote in
news:Pine.LNX.4.60.0409130609280.72@kd6lvw.ampr.org:

<snip> Until financial institutions learn NOT to
ask for a mother's maiden name as a "security word" (yes, some still
do - as proven by two random credit card application offers I got
via "snail mail" a month ago), I consider such a necessity.

Of course, you can give them *any* name you want. "Mother's maiden
name" is just an easy one to remember. They don't check up on it.

Sherry

LRESA500

Re: Changing gender - was Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av LRESA500 » 15 sep 2004 07:04:53

Gender reassignments, homosexual marriages, multiple divorces, surrogate
mothers..... genealogists 100 years from now will be challenged !!!

Lesley Robertson

Re: Privacy - was Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av Lesley Robertson » 15 sep 2004 10:19:43

"Sherry" <sherdh@excite.com> wrote in message
news:Xns95644B1009E26TansyRagwortNetscape@130.133.1.4...
"D. Stussy" <kd6lvw@bde-arc.ampr.org> wrote in
news:Pine.LNX.4.60.0409130609280.72@kd6lvw.ampr.org:

snip> Until financial institutions learn NOT to
ask for a mother's maiden name as a "security word" (yes, some still
do - as proven by two random credit card application offers I got
via "snail mail" a month ago), I consider such a necessity.

Of course, you can give them *any* name you want. "Mother's maiden
name" is just an easy one to remember. They don't check up on it.

I did - I gave them the name of one of my g.grandmothers. The trouble is,

which one? The guy had hysterics when I explained that it was one of the
following 4 names, but I couldn't remember which one I'd given them.......
Lesley Robertson

Phyllis

Re: Changing gender - was Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av Phyllis » 15 sep 2004 12:30:06

Medical confidentiality is abrogated when James becomes Joan as
James/Joan has made it public knowledge. HIPAA laws only require that
covered entities maintain confidentiality, not families.

Fridrik Skulason wrote:

Ah, I'm afraid it is not quite that simple, because publically
publishing information on a gender change would be a violation of our
privacy laws.

Keep in mind that the information published on the web page is there
without explicit consent (and possibly without knowledge) of the
individual in question. For that reason, certain types of information
cannot be according to the laws, and that includes anything that can
be considered "medical" information. This would certainly include a
sex-change operation. As the sex-change typicallyinvolves a name
change too, the name change must be hidden too - I can only legally
show the current name, which would obviously conflict with the
biological gender.

That is the problem.

D. Stussy

Re: Changing gender - was Re: Same Sex Marriages

Legg inn av D. Stussy » 27 sep 2004 08:57:55

On Mon, 13 Sep 2004, Fridrik Skulason wrote:
"D. Stussy" <kd6lvw@bde-arc.ampr.org> wrote in message news:<Pine.LNX.4.60.0409130618380.72@kd6lvw.ampr.org>...
Why isn't this obvious? One would be listed by their biological gender at
birth as their "sex," and among their life "events" would be the sex change,
complete with a DATE and perhaps the place that the operation took place.

Ah, I'm afraid it is not quite that simple, because publically
publishing information on a gender change would be a violation of our
privacy laws.

Keep in mind that the information published on the web page is there
without explicit consent (and possibly without knowledge) of the
individual in question. For that reason, certain types of information
cannot be according to the laws, and that includes anything that can
be considered "medical" information. This would certainly include a
sex-change operation. As the sex-change typicallyinvolves a name
change too, the name change must be hidden too - I can only legally
show the current name, which would obviously conflict with the
biological gender.

That is the problem.

Granted that Iceland may do things differently, but here in the U.S.A. (and
probably in many other places), the name change component is PUBLIC RECORD
because it is handled by the courts.

Regardless, how exactly is this "private?" Anyone who knew Mr. X beforehand
will know that Mr. X is now Miss X - unless there's really something screwy
with your law where "they" are treated as different people.

I think that your law might need adjustment.... However, from the database
point of view, doesn't my proposed solution sound like the best?

Svar

Gå tilbake til «alt.genealogy»