Infant deaths - include or exclude?

[Cas (stallc)]

Hi All,

I have viewed a few trees in connection to mine that do not include infants that were born to the family that were stillborn or did not survive the first 5yrs etc.

I always include these children in my tree, after verifying, as I think it is their rightful place, and where they belong.  I would not feel right excluding them.  Also it gives an incite into the family history, loss, tragedy and sign of the times...

Some contacts have said they would have no connections adding them to their tree, as the children did not survive   but I think family history is about the big picture or as near as any of us can get to it.

What are other views on this. Do you include or exclude?

Cas

[nanny jan]

Hi,

I put all the family on the tree;even the babes who only lived a few months.   They were part of the family after all.


Nanny Jan

[Ruskie]

Include! I agree, it adds to the big picture. I often wonder how parents coped with so many infant deaths - perhaps they half expected to lose a number of their children, as so many did. The way of their world ...

[Rena]

Of course I include them.  The tree is 'family history' - any am. genealogist who omits them wouldn't get very high marks from me.  

The silly billies don't realise they may be omitting vital clues to family susceptibility to illness or gene irregularity do they?
My mother's sister had a cot death with her first baby (the  next children grew to adulthood thankfully).  The syndrome isn't in any line I've researched but I bet it's in the father's line somewhere - he died in his early 50's as he was getting on a bus to go to work and his son, my cousin, suffered his heart attack in his late 40's. thankfully he's still with us.

Rena

[KarenM]

Hi,

I include them.  Whether they were stillborn or a few months old.  If I had ever lost a child, I would never forgot them and I can't imagine that their mothers ever did, so I include them all in my tree. 

I have found 3 out of 5 of my gr-grandmothers,  Joseph was 3 months when he died, Ruth 18 months and Phyllis just a few months.  Joseph and Phyllis are buried in Birmingham, but Ruth is in her own little plot in an unmarked grave here in Canada.  She is actually in the same cemetery as my grandfather, her brother, which makes me happy that she is not alone.  I have been saving my money to purchase a marker for her grave.  Joseph and Phyllis are in common graves, but I would like to do something for them.

Karen

[liverpool annie]

Me too ! .... for sure I include them !! 

Annie

[ozlady]

Definitely include them. They were part of the fabric, too. I doubt if the greiving parents forgot about them.

[carol80]

My Granmother had a stillborn daughter. She is in my tree and i have named her.
When my father saw my tree he was surprised to see i knew about her ( My grandmother had told me many years ago ). He also said if his mother had been allowed to name her baby it would have been the name i have given her. Dad was pleased to know she will be remembered.
They are all part of our Family and should be included.
Carol

[Billy Anderson]

HI Cas,I include those who did not survive beyond childhood, when looking through OPR,s in Scotland you can see how fever epidemics wiped through complete comunities.I have a 6 week old child buried at the family grave but no mention on the grave stone but he is listed on the burial records, he is  part of my Family Tree, regards [only slightly silly] Billy