RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => Topic started by: Graham47 on Saturday 19 May 12 10:38 BST (UK)
-
As a recent convert to family history research now that I am well into retirement there are some issues that are bothering me.
Who in fact 'owns' family information, what discoveries should remain private, and where do we draw the line? The internet has now made it possible to uncover much that has been hidden away under silence. Just one example for purpose here, is finding out that we have half siblings. Should our parents have told us about them and was it nobody's business but theirs and having discovered this information, do we have a responsibly to share it with our own full siblings?
In my own case I have found two that I was not aware of (one of whom it seems 'everybody' knew about except dull muggins here) and now have a real itch to make contact.
Other examples and variations are out there I know and as an area that troubles me somewhat, would others care to comment?
-
There is no hard-and-fast rule about what to do with the info -- you will have to decide on a case-by-case basis
But if you have found the info easily, anyone else can do so too, so it is not really "secret"
I probably would not go round shouting "guess what - Dad had 2 more children" but maybe sound out how interested your siblings are in the family tree in general and any "interesting" info in particular before telling them -- you may well find they already know
-
There is a risk
But curiosity is met
So make contact
Take it from there
Nothing to lose
Perhaps more to gain
-
Thanks for your comments.
As for nothing to lose bramhallbill I take you point, but my concern would be the loss of respect from within the family.
It's akin to being one of those metal detector guys, many would rather you did not go digging around but when you find something of interest, well...... that's different.
As for any arm waving Marmalady again I take the point but gosh, it's difficult when you find out your dear old dad for example was in fact a bit of a bugger who ditched his first family only to have another!
A hard one to be sure, and a lesson in discretion that life has not taught us how to deal with. The only one I ever had I suppose was from my mother who said you could not put the clock back to which my only reply was, but what about putting the clock right?
Rest her soul, she never had an answer for that.
-
As for any arm waving Marmalady again I take the point but gosh, it's difficult when you find out your dear old dad for example was in fact a bit of a bugger who ditched his first family only to have another!
Unless you know the whole story, don't be so quick to blame your father - who knows what lead him to leave the first family?
I've got to agree with Marmalady that you have to look at each case and decide. I've found out some things that I know would upset certain people and have kept those quiet. When the older generation passes, there will be no problem with others knowing. Other information people have found very interesting - with the separation of a generation or two, people usually don't have an emotional reaction to new information.
-
Nothing quick about it Shropshire Lass and I'm not one to blame anybody, all I'm trying to point out the difficulties faced when we enter into family research. As said in my opening post, who actually 'owns' family information and what part of it is none of our business?
We learn for example that the Queens Aunt had been locked away for years but that's OK because it's in the so called public interest but, if we discover Great Uncle Fred was transported to Australia or Auntie Nelly was not really your Aunt but your sister - should that concern us?
Perhaps the best way is to make our own judgments and act (or not) as we see fit.
-
I would say that nobody owns FH data - or rather everybody owns it!
It's all a matter of public record - which these days, due to internet access, is more readily available to all.
-
As said in my opening post, who actually 'owns' family information and what part of it is none of our business?
We learn for example that the Queens Aunt had been locked away for years but that's OK because it's in the so called public interest but, if we discover Great Uncle Fred was transported to Australia or Auntie Nelly was not really your Aunt but your sister - should that concern us?
Perhaps the best way is to make our own judgments and act (or not) as we see fit.
I think that's all you can do - use your judgement at the time. Once you know something, you can't "unknow" it but you can choose whether to pass it on to other people.
-
I totally understand what you are saying here. I discovered the truth !!!!! about my wayward Grandfather, after years of listening to little white lies.
I took on my knowledge and instead of 'facing out' my father with it, just casually dropped it into the conversation, as if I had always known. This worked, because by that time my Poppa was well into his 80's and I suppose, he felt that my mother may have told me etc etc etc. However, I have NOT divulged toooo much of this info to close cousins. Unless they ask me - then I will explain.
As is stated, the truth is out there and anyone with a pc and the wherewithal can get at it.
I dont think any one member of the 'family' should feel they own the information. As it surely belongs to the family.
One online definition of which is:
5. all those persons considered as descendants of a common progenitor.
xin
-
It is even worse when you are researching for someone else!
I was researching for a friend who thought her family was squeaky clean! ;D Not so - and I had to divulge the truth!! And it wasn't just her grandparents, but great grandparents too!
-
I'm afraid the responsibility get's to me at times.
For instance, where you know your half siblings have no knowledge of another family, no information or photographs about their father or why he left, or his own family and who they were.
This is not an assumption on my part by the way.
Imagine having to sit not only on information ached for, but the photographs to go with them!
Perhaps ignorance really is bliss eh?
-
On my wifes side, her mother was of the opinion that certain of her ancestors came from the north of England.
When I started doing the research, I found that they were in actual fact a couple of Irish!!!!!! convicts. I have told my wife of course, but have not told my MIL, especially now that she is not really up to understanding the information.
As said earlier, it is a case by case deal. Some you can tell, no trouble, others, no way.
A Chesters
-
I had a similar experience.
My old Mum would never talk about her family and always said her own mother was adopted - it's turned out that they were travelling horse dealers, pot makers, and hawkers!
Amazing eh?
-
Try looking at it from the other side. If you were part of the other family, would you like the answers and see the photo's? I think with all the TV programmes around at the moment 'You do you think you are' and 'Long Lost Families' people are more prepared.
I have a half brother who I tried getting in touch with a few years ago. I just sent a message leaving my phone number and address if he wanted to get in touch, so I left the decision to him. He never got back to me, but at least I gave him the choice.
Carol
-
Hi, I appreciate your dilemma. I discovered that my mothers brother was born out of wedlock. This was never known to my mother or her siblings. I didn't know whether to say anything to the family. He was long dead as was my mother. On telling my cousin I was researching the family history she immediately asked me if I had found out about Uncle *. So it can be surprising what the family already know. With all of the information available on the internet, the first family you mention, might also already know about the second family. It might be worth looking to see if anyone from the first family has posted any information on their family tree on the internet. This might help your decision in whether to try and contact them or not.
Regards
Kathb
-
My Grandmother was widowed at 24 and her four children were brought up by members of both families. She went on to have several other children and not marry the father, although the children took his sir name. The first four children were not aware who was their real mother. Now the offspring of the children are doing research and are wanting information.
The man my Grandmother had several children with, also fathered a few more in the same area! He was caught out when he ended up in hospital, and the families both turned up.
I had just moved from East Anglia and received a request for information re Grandfather. It turned out my Grandfathers other family had relatives in East Anglia, and we lived in the same town. We also had a lot more in common, alas we never met.
My father was furious about all the information discovered and it turned out his siblings were aware of all the other families but dad refused to accept any of it. His sister was more forthcoming but it has caused a big rift in the Family.
I decided to leave my research until a much later date when it can not upset anyone. As has been stated the records are out there, unfortunately the information required from family members may not be.
-
Researching later after relatives have died leaves you with a lot less info........
Oh why did I bother v If only....
Not easy to call
-
I'd research as much as early as possible - no need to pass stuff on until later!
eadaoin
-
After I saw WDYTYA with Jim Moir (Vic Reeves) I had a feeling I would come across skeletons..........I just was not prepared for the out come.
It is very sensitive for all involved. I hope someone in the family will leave some information. I would like to put the clock right as was suggested, but we'll just have to wait for now.
As for my Grandfather, goodness knows how many more offspring he has sired and we do not know about..............for now.
-
As to the ownership, I guess you can look at it as you own it, everyone owns it, no one owns it, that is more or less how I see it, all three in a strange state of limbo. I possess it and I can do whatever I want with it, however if you figured it out (and can prove it, not just I heard once from great uncle bobs step-son that I met once 25 years ago) then anyone else can too so everyone is on the same field, you just pieced it together first (or did you?). Yet this information is just that, who owns the fact that 2+2=4, no one.
Though there is responsiblity with this knowledge that we build up and keep. I for the most part am very transparent with what I find, I embrace it. We previously thought my GGG Grandparents were distant cousins, not so, first cousins and I made sure anyone who thought otherwise knew the truth (as icky as it may be). We are very open about our pasts in my family, my grandfather stole 2 boats when he was in his teens in the thirties, thrown in Juvinile Detention for theft over $10k. Yet these are all facts and we either have documentation to back our discovery or we have the person to tell us.
Yet there are 2 things that I know parts of the information for yet I am responsible for it as well. There is a child that was adopted, he doesn't know so saying things to other people about it is unfair to him and his family - maybe later in life he will be told, or maybe not, but that is not our choice to make for him or his parents. Also there is rumor that one of my cousins has half-siblings. Long story shot their father apparently got married over seas during WW2, never getting divorced, technically making all the children of his that we know here bastards.
The first example as I said it isn't my place to say anything, and I have it documented but stashed away from everything I make accessable to my family (My work book is all online). The 2nd one I would divulge to the proper people, however I would need to be able to prove it (Marriage certificate), even then I would have to be tactful about telling those people simply because of the implications.
So the short of it is everyone has a right to know as long as it is in proof and evidence. Is it your right to tell them, or someone else right? Would it damage the family integrity, they may still need to know but with tact and at the right time (maybe introducing this person to them at the same time?)?
-
Debunking myths can be as challenging as letting the skeletons out of the cupboard.
Today tough I have debunked one of my own family "myths" about the demise of an ancestor who was presumed drowned. His cause of death is on the certificate "senile dementia" no mention of drowning . Reaction of spouse " wonder how the story came about?" Reaction of daughter " pity, drowning was less boring!"
I have spent more than 27 years working within an organisation where being non judgmental was integral to what we did , day in day out. We have no right to judge what our ancestors did, nor impose our own moral standards on them , even if they are our family. Standards change, and were our grandparents alive, they might be shocked by our behaviours. Who said sex was invented in the 1960s? I have more ladies reaching the altar just in time than I care to mention and at least one candidate for bigamy. I know I have a bankrupt and I strongly suspect I have 2 felons. It doesn't worry my relatives fortunately, they all accept I am a FH addict and keenly ( or politely) await the latest secrets.
-
Mavals makes a good point about being non-judgemental about what we find in our searches. Like I said about my GGG-Grandparents being first cousins, I am not the one who did it, and I ma not ashamed to tell people about it. Morals change, what we know changes, what is right and just changes - we just have to learn to take everything in context.
For example in an obit for my GG-Grandfather is mention that "Knights of the KKK" sent flowers for his funeral. What? Well, it turns out that when he died (1927 - and I may have some of the facts wrong) the leaders of the Orange Lodge and the KKK were close. They had an understanding that they will pay respect to the others. Also the KKK didn't actually become the one we know as today until a few decades later. So it wasn't as bad as it seemed, when taken in context of the times.
-
It is difficult when we find relatives and especially parents with feet of clay and not the people you thought they quite were and that I suppose we can keep to ourselves, record it, and pass down to our own.
Like others I've discovered things about my family that from abandoned responsibilities to child molestation (quite a while back I hasten to add) and it does make for a bit of toe curling. In possession of such knowledge while others close to home sing praises of loyalty and fidelity is also difficult when knowing that the person in question was actually like.
Wouldn't be nice to find some lost inheritance, hero or famous connection instead eh?
-
Mavals makes a good point about being non-judgemental about what we find in our searches. Like I said about my GGG-Grandparents being first cousins, I am not the one who did it, and I ma not ashamed to tell people about it. Morals change, what we know changes, what is right and just changes - we just have to learn to take everything in context.
For example in an obit for my GG-Grandfather is mention that "Knights of the KKK" sent flowers for his funeral. What? Well, it turns out that when he died (1927 - and I may have some of the facts wrong) the leaders of the Orange Lodge and the KKK were close. They had an understanding that they will pay respect to the others. Also the KKK didn't actually become the one we know as today until a few decades later. So it wasn't as bad as it seemed, when taken in context of the times.
We discovered a late 1930's photograph of a family member from our Italian side attending a fascist funeral..... complete with arm raised in salute over the coffin! As you say with Klan they were perceived differently in those days and we know for example that the fascist had the support of establishment members and some of the press.
The problem now is whether to put that photograph at the top of the pile or the bottom!
-
Top! That picture speaks volumes about the times, and that is what we are trying to capture.
-
Top! That picture speaks volumes about the times, and that is what we are trying to capture.
Absolutely at the Top. I would then hope to be able to explain to future generations about the need to be vigilant about not forgetting some terrible things were done in years past and that we need to learn the lessons of history to try to avoid repeating such things.
;D (although to mis quote (probably) the Reduced Shakespeare Company Millennium the Musical - "the lesson of history is that we do not learn the lesson of history"...) ;D
-
The top of the pile it is then guys ;)
-
Some good news out of this is that having been contacted by a half sister of my half sister (yes, it's complicated) a meeting is now being arranged between all four siblings for the end of this year when one will be back from her home France, one from New Zealand, and another from their retirement yacht somewhere in the Black Sea!
It's going to an emotional Christmas for them :'(
-
Have fun Graham 47 it sounds like there will be lots to talk about. It would be very hard to not even have a photo of your Father. My son has a half brother and sister from his father and he would love to meet them his father has died so it is hard to find them. My sons only sibling died when 4 years old . I hope he gets the chance to meet his half siblings. There are a lot of skeletons in my family and some I am just learning about . Take Care.Lynette
-
Thanks Lyn but oddly enough, I will not be part of it as they are not my half siblings, but my half siblings half siblings..... I said it was complicated!
No doubt they will want me there but on this I'll probably take a back seat.
-
Graham
Hope the meeting is successful for everyone
best wishes
Sylvia
-
If I might attach my own dilema to this thread...?
Having extensively researched my own direct family, including detailed information about my Grandfathers many siblings, I was contacted about two years ago by a researcher who was trying to trace her mother's absent father. His name, and birth year are the same as my Granddad's brother, and I can not find any other instances of a person of the same name, other than he.
This researcher has persued this line of research for a long time, and has even been through Adoption Services, who, too, have seemingly also come to the conclusion that it must be the same man, and have advised her accordingly.
She has sent me a copy of his signature, and having compared it with the marriage cert of my Dad's uncle, similarities could be claimed, however, ther is almost fifteen years between the signing of these signatures.
Now, I have been in direct contact with a grandchild of my Dad's uncle, and this person's affected parent is still living.
The researcher's claims infer that my dad's uncle would have to have led a life of bigamy for a period of years, fathering two children in the process, even though now long deceased, my dad's uncle is buried with his wife. Still, the birth years of the two children fall within the final three years of his life, so plausible....
The researcher has asked if I would contact his family for her, however, I have hesitated and mulled over the implication of this for almost two years. Given the information I possess, (and I don't doubt the genuine nature of her search), I find it hard to belive that the situation could occurred.
In what way might people advise I approach this potentially explosive situation? Should I leave well alone, given that this researcher may well some day approach this line of my family direct, or, should I in some way broach the subject with the granddaughter?
Paul
-
Now that is a dilema
immediate reaction, take care not to hurt close family, before you consider the 'needs' of a ''''''stranger'''''
I would myself talk to the person and explain that - though I wished them well - with their research, and understand their need to ...discover .... the truth. YOU cannot be the one to pass on the information. They must do this themselves.. BUT thats a Xin opinion...
:-\ :)
-
Hi,
Yes, it is a difficult one. >:(
I stated that bigamy would have been committed in my previous post if the claims are proved, however, that was wrong of me, as there is no proof that he married the other woman.
Paul
-
In previous generations (in my family at least) information seems to have been distributed on a need to know basis, and the norm was You didn't! My grandmother's family according to her were deeply moral, upright and religious. What have I found? First born children seem to appear on average after around 6 1/2 months of marriage! One of my great grandfathers was an alcoholic, but the entire family was teatotal! But the classic is there was a marriage outside the permitted bounds in 1900, marrying his deceased wife's aunt! My grandmother would have supposedly have been appalled, but there is one problem. She appears as a witness to the wedding!! A similar marriage a few generations further back means that I am in fact my own 4th cousin.
-
Hi
Ask before its too late and information lost, just keep your cards close to your chest, and write everyting down.
-
In previous generations (in my family at least) information seems to have been distributed on a need to know basis, and the norm was You didn't! My grandmother's family according to her were deeply moral, upright and religious. What have I found? First born children seem to appear on average after around 6 1/2 months of marriage! One of my great grandfathers was an alcoholic, but the entire family was teatotal! But the classic is there was a marriage outside the permitted bounds in 1900, marrying his deceased wife's aunt! My grandmother would have supposedly have been appalled, but there is one problem. She appears as a witness to the wedding!! A similar marriage a few generations further back means that I am in fact my own 4th cousin.
Ha....fantastic Redroger. Love the revelation that your Grandmother was actually a witness at said marriage. Brilliant. ;D
-
looking into that side of the tree I found another where early in the 19th century, a woman obviously wanted a "toy boy" so she married a man 16 years younger than herself. unfortunately she was his mother's sister! Seems to have been a tradition, the vicar must have known, it was a small rural village.