Is a DNA test really worthwhile ?

[PommieG]

I have just destroyed my family tree and started over again. 15 years of work because of one discovery. I had a DNA test some years ago, the 23 and Me site. They sent me contacts who might be relatives. I found about 6 or 8 second cousins. All from my mother's side of the family who by the records in the 'paper trail' appear to have been 'decent moral' people.
      Nothing, not one contact from my father's side. Why ? I decided to do a bit of digging. I am my father's son, no doubt about it. My resemblance to him leaves me no doubt. But, was the man I have on paper as my grandfather really my grandfather ? This man died when My father was 4 yr old and had never married my grandmother. It appears 'Grannie' was a prostitute in the late 1800's and had at least 4 children before living with 'Grandpa'.
      So, my Family Tree is a genealogy construct rather that a biological one.
      So, is family history really worthwhile ?

[CaroleW]

I’m puzzled as to why you decided to destroy your whole tree?  Presumably your mothers side is correct?

A huge number of people have discovered illegitimacy in their research.  If you are certain who your paternal grandfather was - you can continue researching him

If you are certain who your paternal grandmother was - you can continue researching her.  Your father clearly had half siblings but it doesn’t mean you have to research them as well

[AngelaR]

I suppose it depends why you wanted to research your family at all - so many people don't!

I'm with Carole in that there is no need to destroy a tree of which at least 50% is correct and presumably more than that if you have researched your paternal grandmother's ancestors.

However, if you are mainly interested in researching your surname, I can see it is a massive disappointment. On the other hand, these kinds of discoveries add to the intrigue, surely? I love finding out "irregular" stories as it all adds to the dectective work!

One suggestion though - if you have only used the DNA test within 23andMe, that will restrict the possible matches available. You would have to pay for an additional test if you wanted to check matches on Ancestry, but it might be worth uploading your results onto, e.g. MyHeritage as they take imported results and, in my experience, have a very different set of possible matches from the other sites I've used.

[Zaphod99]

5 years ago, early in my research I found that my father's parents weren't who I had believed. This came about by luck, confirmed by DNA. I haven't spent a vast amount on research, but £60 for a DNA test is a bargain. They say 1-4% of births are not as believed, so I think any one seriously doing research should get it done.

Zaph

[Guy Etchells]

I have just destroyed my family tree and started over again. 15 years of work because of one discovery. I had a DNA test some years ago, the 23 and Me site. They sent me contacts who might be relatives. I found about 6 or 8 second cousins. All from my mother's side of the family who by the records in the 'paper trail' appear to have been 'decent moral' people.
      Nothing, not one contact from my father's side. Why ? I decided to do a bit of digging. I am my father's son, no doubt about it. My resemblance to him leaves me no doubt. But, was the man I have on paper as my grandfather really my grandfather ? This man died when My father was 4 yr old and had never married my grandmother. It appears 'Grannie' was a prostitute in the late 1800's and had at least 4 children before living with 'Grandpa'.
      So, my Family Tree is a genealogy construct rather that a biological one.
      So, is family history really worthwhile ?

Yes if you are careful in your research and seek all available evidence to back up your assumptions.
Many people tend to rely on very basic research to develop thier assumptions then complain when things go wrong, for the last 20 or so years DNA has been added to the family historians toolbox and more and more indiviuals are being tested, this dataset will only grow and become more useful over time.

You now have the oppertunity not only to check your decent through your mother but DNA has opened possible research of your father as well.

Whether you think it is worthwhile or not is up to you but I certainly do, my only dilema is whether to send some envelopes my mother licked and sealed in the 60 & 70s to be tested for her DNA or not
Cheers
Guy

[AngelaR]

my only dilema is whether to send some envelopes my mother licked and sealed in the 60 & 70s to be tested for her DNA or not

Is that a genuine possibility, Guy?

[andrewalston]

Why not adjust the relationship to "step-" or "adopted-" ? The situation is similar to modern adoption, but there was less of a paper trail then.

What you had done already was not "wrong"; it was just not the whole picture. We hit situations of this sort all the time, but yours was a biggie and hit you quite hard.

There are no rules about what you can research. I help people who visit our FHS centre. I've researched all the previous owners of my car. I've researched the victim of a crime committed by a cousin in the 1880s.

All this informs us about life in other times and other places.

And many of us find the search quite pleasurable. 

[Ayashi]

It's awkward when that happens and no doubt it can cause a lot of hurt in a family. In my case, my great grandmother (who was married with four children already) had an affair with her lodger and ran away with him. She gave birth to my grandfather, who was registered with her affair partner's name. Family resemblance, and later DNA, proved her husband was the biological father. We've recorded our tree by DNA, but that doesn't mean the legal father wasn't part of my grandfather's history. Did they know at the time who the father was? We'll never know.

Depending on how you feel about this, it opens you up to having even more tree than you did before- the genetic tree and the emotional one. For many, the family connections are more important than any blood. If a man raised a child, that interaction would shape the child regardless of DNA. In the case of a man who died when the child was four years old... That's still a part of the child's history but I admit I probably would be pretty frustrated with the time spent on it.

The man you researched is presumably still someone's family. You might find it at least a little cathartic to help out some people who are related to him trace their family back. At least then you might feel like you still did something worthwhile.

[Rosinish]

My concern is how sure you are, the lack of DNA matches on your paternal side means there was the possibility of your g/father not being your g/father?

My brother & I have both had our DNA done, he used 23&me, I used Ancestry & neither of us have any close matches with our maternal side.

This tells me my maternal side don't seem to be interested in their Genealogy or she wasn't our mother 

How many siblings did your g/father have?
Have you had links with their surname.

Often, when trying to link further back, I find people only have as far as their g/parents (direct lines) on trees which may not include the surnames we need to see from a generation or 2 further back & the results are we have 4th to distant cousins who haven't researched far enough back to the common ancestor(s) i.e. that surname is often not to be found?

I agree with others, a mistake to destroy what you'd done without enough proof your theory is correct?

Annie