TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2001-09 > 0999382334


From: Bob Velke <>
Subject: Re: [TMG] Step children
Date: Sat, 01 Sep 2001 18:15:17 -0400
References: <MPBBIHKABPIFJBGOECLHCEPNDEAA.guitarman@surfbest.net>
In-Reply-To: <3B914ED5.D9E69F2F@infoave.net>


Richard said:

>My opinion is that you should be able, at your option, to include
>step, adopted, foster and other non-biological relationships and
>have them clearly marked as what they are.

You can, as I have responded to Dennis.

>Bob insists that any report or chart that contains non-biological
>relationships not look like any existing genealogy report or chart.

You've misrepresented my position. If I insist anything, it is that if the
user records a person as a non-primary parent, then TMG will not produce a
report which reflects (by the nature of the report) that the relationship
is a biological one. That's what some people wanted to do in the
discussion to which you are referring (i.e., to have one primary father and
one non-primary father and then have a report option that will cause TMG to
use the non-primary one for reports without any further action on the part
of the user.)

That's not Dennis' situation. He has recorded Doug as the primary father
of the children. Doing so communicates to TMG that you want to use him as
"the" father for the sake of relationship calculations (e.g., calculating
"descendants"), despite the fact that you have recorded for your own
records that he is really the stepfather, adoptive father, etc. If that's
not the behavior that you want, then you shouldn't link the father as primary.

>Since your report looks like any other Descendants Journal Narrative and
>contains
>non-biological relationships there is, IMO, a major flaw in TMG.

Well, then, the flaw is allowing the user to have enough control to do as
he likes.

-Bob

This thread: