Is a DNA test really worthwhile ?

[Guy Etchells]

my only dilemma 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?

Yes there are I think three companies that currently offer this but it is very expensive, that is my dilemma, can I justify the cost?
At present I have my DNA and a First Cousin's DNA (from my mother's side of the family).
I also have a living cousin from my father's side of the family (but she has not tested at present).
I should therefore be able to trace both sides of my family, but DNA from letters my mother sent would?may add to the possible pool of DNA connections.
Cheers
Guy

[Annie65115]

A couple of weeks ago I discovered that the man I had thought to be my great-grandfather wasn't. There was always a question of who the "real" gt-grandfather was - I'd settled for the one named on certificates etc, DNA has shown that not to be the case.

I had spent many years, and some money, researching the  "certificated" man's family line. I'm now starting again with the family of my REAL gt-grandfather.

Was it a waste of time to research the wrong man? Well, not really. This whispered query from the past is what started me on this hobby in the first place. I've visited places and learned how to find my way around genealogical records thanks to my initial research on this line; I've learned about social history, religion and migration - it's all been interesting even if ultimately the name at the end of it is wrong. And finding out the real story behind this twist in my family tree has been fascinating.

And of course, like everyone, I've got 4 great-grandparents - starting again with one line doesn't negate all my research on the other three lines!

So no, I don't feel it's been a waste of time at all!

[PommieG]

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

Hi Carole, I had two online trees. One with Tribal Pages which I tried to keep 'pure'. The other on ancestry.com  which I regarded as a 'fun' tree and added anything that seemed plausible. It had 11,000 names. Recently I reviewed my TP tree adding documentation that has come on-line or I obtained from various sources. Some of my entries had no documentation and I thought ' where in hell did I get him/her from ?' A lot of this tree is 15 years old. So I decided to start again and only include people with accessible records.
     My mother's side ? Yes, all goes well back to 1803 when Christopher illegitimate son of Mary. DNA test no help there, but I do get passed Mary with her father. My paternal grandfather I have doubts about but as far as records go I have to accept him in the 'paper trail'.  The rebuilt tree is coming along well.

[PommieG]

23 and Me sends me reports every so often. Possible new relatives. ? 2nd,3rd and 4th cousins ?  Now, 2nd cousins are easily found through the records anyway. I have had 1511 'possibilities' sent to me out of which only 8 were relatives, 4 of which I already had. Not much of a success rate is it.

[Rosinish]

23 and Me sends me reports every so often. Possible new relatives. ? 2nd,3rd and 4th cousins ?  Now, 2nd cousins are easily found through the records anyway. I have had 1511 'possibilities' sent to me out of which only 8 were relatives, 4 of which I already had. Not much of a success rate is it.

DNA doesn't lie so your matches must have some connection but as for being able to find 2nd cousins, yes, if you know of their existence.

A 2nd cousin shares g g/parents, not grandparents.

I have 2nd cousin DNA matches but I knew about them prior to doing internet research etc.

I was able to help them with their genealogy in Scotland as their parents had emigrated to Canada.

Those relatives were the same generation as my paternal g/parents i.e. my father & g/mother told me many, many yrs ago about those people.
I'd always had a fascination about relatives/genealogy since a child & when internet came about, pre my DNA, I'd shared all my info. with those 2nd cousins, who had no records of their Scottish ancestry, only knowledge passed down with little else apart from 'our grandparent was Scottish'...

I've found other relatives unknown to me until finding matches via DNA & I've managed to do the research to connect them via a paper trail now.


Annie

[Dundee]

Just to be clear, you do not have any DNA matches other than on your mother's side?  Wouldn't that mean that nobody on your father's side has tested yet regardless of who he is descended from?

Debra 

[Dundee]

....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'. 

You are drawing some seriously long bows here if you think your grandmother had a child with someone else.  Of course it is not impossible, but extremely low on the 'likely' scale.

Your father was born in 1908 - his parents had been together since at least the time the 1891 census was taken and are still together in 1911.

Sarah had 3 children indexed under her maiden surname, not 4, and two of those were born after the 1891 census.  Your father was the 5th child to be indexed under the father's surname.

Debra 

[PommieG]

....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'. 

You are drawing some seriously long bows here if you think your grandmother had a child with someone else.  Of course it is not impossible, but extremely low on the 'likely' scale.

Your father was born in 1908 - his parents had been together since at least the 1891 census was taken and are still together in 1911.

Sarah had 3 children indexed under her maiden surname, not 4, and two of those were born after the 1891 census.  Your father was the 5th child to be indexed under the father's surname.

Debra 

       My father was born 1907. I have his birth cert. I remember him saying quite often that he didn't have a birth certificate. He knew 13th Dec, but 07 or 08 ? Why he never applied for one I don't know. I bought it from GRO. I did have his marriage certificate which I obtained on the death of my mother in 2003. His mother was still alive in 1933 when he wed. His father's name there is Samuel. Inquiries at Somerset House drew a blank.  Surely his mother knew the correct name.
     Uncle George was born in 1889 when Sarah was 17. His birth cert is blank where father's name should be except for a 'G' struck out. Evidently she wasn't sure who the father was. Then 1891 there is a son Thomas Edward (both her brothers names). Father is just a line. 1893 a daughter registered in her maiden name. All these born in Nottingdale, a notorious slum. By 1896 the family are in Willesden. I don't have the 1891 census. 
     If the family has a sordid past it makes it more interesting.

[Dundee]

Most births in December are registered the following quarter and year, which your father's was.

St Thomas, Chelsea, London

10 Adela Street

George BATHAM, 22, Head, married, Chimney Sweep, born Kensington, London
Sarah E BATHAM, 19, Wife, married, born Barnet, Hertfordshire
George, 17 months, son, born Kensington, London

Just because they were poor doesn't mean it was sordid.  I think that young George was probably George's son.  They were not married, so unless the couple attended the registry office together the father should not have been named.  By the time the fourth child was born they didn't bother with legalites any more.  Both Edward and Sarah were born after 1891 so there is no reason to think that they were not George's children.

Debra