Am I on the right thinking here.

[Steve3180]

Hi, I've been following this thread with interest as I have a similar puzzle in my dna matches, albeit further back.
It seems to me the simplest solution is the correct one, as David said above, A and C are 1st cousins and not half-brothers, everything (dna wise) then fits.

[Essnell]

Hi David Nicoll.  Sorry about confusing everyone even myself. 

Yes, I was struggling as to how to put those shared DNA results. 

so first I used A's match list and that's for A to  C and A to D   

and then with pro-tools C to D which gave the 309cM  over 16 cM

Then I changed it to make C the person with a match list and looked at that list 
It did not show A  or D.  in his list.    This was confusing too.    That was what I meant in the last two items. 

Now I also have a huge task set by Biggles which I will tackle tomorrow  But I have more    :

I thought i might see what i could fond about A's mother via Ancestry.   

Again it's a hind sight endeavour and again I am on the outside looking in and have been told that "it has all been done ,There is no need to do it again'  Well!  Done by other's than me and I should know better than to accept that. 

So I began on A's mother. It has altered quite a few things , all which need seriously checking .  But I do probably have the unknown father of C. I also need to check through all the matches as I need to find that surname which I am sure I saw.  It's added two more male children and lost the Sister.     

Question for anybody : Dose anyone know how and where to find divorce records.  C 1961.  South Australia Area.


Hi Steve3180,  Thank you for your reply.  Yes I am pretty certain that the issue of the half brother has resolved.  And as above I think I know his father but I need to check that out first.  I hope you sort yours out too.

Thank you  everyone  I will check tomorrow as it's late here, Aussie Land. 

[David Nicoll]

Essnell,

   That’s kind of what I meant. Which should be impossible, but you mention pro-tools for C to D only, don’t you have pro tools for them all?
   If not worth investing for a month on all the accounts.
   I have had some funny results which make me wonder if there is a subtle bug in Ancestry’s matching algorithm.

Happy Hunting

[Biggles50]

QUOTE
Thank you for your reply.    yes A is the one wanting to know.
                                                B is his full sister... same parents both sides
                                                C is half sibling to both A & B    same mother different father.

                                              D is dau of B  so niece of A.
   ages approx as i really do not know the exact dates.   A  early 60-65
                                                                                       B  mid 60-65
                                                                                       C late 60 - close or in 70.
                                                                                        B 25-30
The relationship between C & D  is stated as:   Half 1st Cousin 1 x Removed or 1st Cousin 2 x Removed.

Hi David Nicoll,    I have just got a partial comparison of those Shared DNA.

A  to C   14%  976 cM     37 segs
A  to D   27% 1867cM    42 segs

C to D   309  cM   16 segs Longest 52 cM

B has not tested  she may need to. 
C to A   Nothing on the match page re A
C to D  similar to A. 

So C appears to have no DNA to either A or D.

Now I have just read your post as well.    : According to what I have been told emphatically is that A's mother had a child before she married A & B's father. That child was adopted out by her.  Her family have always known but A was never told. He only found this out last year. 
We have been looking for A's father for about 5 years with no success.     This half brother visited our place last Christmas. That is all I know.   But if this is the true DNA story that screws everything for a lot of people. 

That does not change anything about looking for his father.  Might be another search looking for who C's father was and his mother. 

So C looks likely to be not a close relative.
Been thinking  : drew a map   What if the adopted out child married and had a son ....    that being C  which makes him a Half First Cousin. ... which is what is coming up on Ancestry.  !!!!!

so one problem looking solved but another on the horizon but for much later.     

Still hunting for A's grandfather.     
Cheers Essnell.

C is not a half sibling at 976cM it is simply not likely to be a half Sibling relationship, my Half Nephew who tested shares 933cM with me.

My Half Sister who also has tested, shares 1817cM with me, two Half Sisters in my tree who I have spoken to on the phone share nearly 2000cM with each other.

DNA Painter has the mean of a half sibling DNA range as 1759cM.

Using the DNA Sci relationship tool which takes into account the number of segments, does not report any possibility of a Half Sibling relationship.

Suggest you revisit your relationship theories

[Essnell]

Hi   Biggles50 and David Nicoll  and anyone else following this thread.     

As above, accepting the DNA evidence that C is not a Half Brother but a Half first Cousin to A  means that I am still looking for the elusive half brother that A's mother is said to have adopted out.

Now I found one related  match that has information that might just sort this out.  It's in the Ancestry account tree etc that they have. However that information is also confusing.  i am not sure yet just how much is accurate but it's the first and so far only place where anything on this section has been included.   

I appears to be naming the person to whom A's mother had this adopted out child.   If this part is accurate then this whole bit about a half Brother gets confirmed. 
So I am about to go look at all of that . 

What Biggles has suggested I should do should show up this from a different point relying on DNA. 

Still Hunting 
Essnell

[David Nicoll]

Essnell,

   Hi, no I was suggesting C as a full cousin, of A, common grandparents.
   976 cM is right in the middle of the curve for that relationship.
   You really need to plot the cM relationships for everyone.

David

[Essnell]

Hi David,  I have had to do some thinking.....
  I cannot find any common grandparents for A and C.  as I said before I had two things to lookup,  one being A's mother. She has been document on the pages for one of A's matches. The other was the name contained in those pages in any of the match lists.  .....none.

However the first is really quite amazing what is there  but I have looked pretty closely and I just cannot put two and two together. It makes no sense.
But this is what is reliable.  Her first marriage which I already had. then the birth of the first child to that relationship which I already had.  This child married and has since passed away.  which we knew.

Then the divorce reference for the Australian state where that occurred which I knew about but not the record.. 
It names a reference party.   who is referred to as "husband'  where his death is documented.   Now this is where it comes unstuck;   and is causing me to question .
It has a son recorded not named as this person's child but born in 1961 with the mother's now divorced married name.   

there are also electoral roll images for where she was living and I have checked those and what are there are accurate but there is no mention of her last and current husband. He is also on some of those electoral rolls at the same address as A's mother.     there is no electoral roll image showing the reference person. 
Marriage Certificate  dated 1953 in a different state is not recorded . so I am totally lost ...

How can a child be born 1961 mother divorced 1952 and married again 1953 but child's father is someone else.   
I could almost cry with frustration.

This is not what we set out to find.  A's fathers parents. 
I need to backtrack on this to find him. 
Essnell

[David Nicoll]

Essnell,

      Hi, it sounds complicated. Don’t
      Just a couple of clarifications.
      Have I misunderstood, do you just have access to A’s Ancestry matches?
      Did A’s mother have any siblings?
      Did either of A’s mother’s husbands have siblings?
      Can you clarify what you mean by reference party, it is not a term I have come across. Is this an alternative for co-respondent?

      I think you need to forget names for the moment and look at the DNA alone.

     Where are the next further back matches, do you have any second third and fourth cousins in the matches?

     Try to build some trees around them

     Paper records can be complex, especially, if there are complex family relationships.
   
     There are other DNA relationships I can think of but that does then get complicated. I would focus on slightly more distant relatives first.

     

[Biggles50]

In this situation you cannot rely on documentary evidence alone.

DNA does not lie but it can hide true relationships!

Alarm bells should sound when “remote rural communities” come into play and these can lead to DNA matches whose cM values are skewed.  The end result is that sites like Ancestry, DNA Painter el al predict a relationship that is incorrect.

Alas in this case there is no easy solution but to “work the problem”, develop and test likely relationships and do keep options open.

Do use the techniques that have been suggested, it is the only way that is likely to be effective.