TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2001-09 > 0999516907


From: Mike Fox <>
Subject: RE: [TMG] Step children and MAILMEN and Philosophic Musings
Date: Mon, 03 Sep 2001 06:35:07 -0500
In-Reply-To: <00d801c133f4$ffbe8f80$a60e1e3f@69hwp01>


Birth or natural parents should be clearly shown. I'm also saying the other
types of relationships should also be shown at the same time.

Here's the problem in a technical sense-how do we clearly define, document,
and finally display the different types of relationships through software?
How do we enable people to choose which relationships, any or all, to
display in their genealogy [or family history]? Is this a big problem? I
don't know; I don't write software code.

In a broader sense, the problem is the millennia old mindset that "blood is
thicker than water". It's the paternalistic, legalistic approach that has
made bloodlines all-important and superior to all other relationships to
their total exclusion as the proper subject of genealogy. It isn't going to
happen, but the family historians among us would better off if we did away
with the word "genealogy" and thereby rid ourselves of its baggage.

If I reflect on it, I don't remember meeting many genealogists at the
library or family history center. They seem more to be family historians.
As a family historian, I'm much more interested in who my ancestors were and
not who were my ancestors. In other words, I not as interested in my
ancestor's bloodlines as I am in the history of the times that forged their
character and how this character has been passed down to me to make me who I
am. As part of this, I want to pass the "who I am" down to my descendants.
I can see the day when a person's gene sequence will be part of a family
history. Actually, this is the easy part. It is much harder and more
important to pass on the elements of character that make us "who we are"!

Times are changing! I think the people who are taking up genealogy and
buying genealogy software today are more "family historians"! I wonder how
the numbers really break down between genealogist and family historian?
And why make a big deal about it? Why can't we have it both ways in the
same software? Everyone says TMG is the best. That may be, but it still
doesn't do what I want it to. Does any?

Mike

Hi Mike and all,

I agree with you that the passing of family character traits of love,
compassion and unselfishness are very important in our lives. But....(and
tell me if I am reading your message wrong)...are you saying and if so, do
you believe it to be right, to say that John Smith (who was adopted and took
the Smith name) should be listed as having been given birth to by Susan
Smith, when Susan never gave birth to him at all? Again, I could be reading
you wrong...and my apologies if I am.



This thread: