TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2002-07 > 1026502550


From: Ida Skarson McCormick <>
Subject: Re: [TMG] 5.02 relationship tags
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2002 12:35:50 -0700
References: <BBELINAJCPNPOALLDGONOELEDFAA.clcasper@sprynet.com>
In-Reply-To: <3D2994C0.BA2451C4@minn.net>


I would use the adoption information in the suffix field of the adopted
child only, [adopted by Joe] or some such. The prior name variant could
even be identical except for the suffix field. If we use the suffix field
and subsequently forget or don't want to switch the primary parent to the
biological one, misinformation is not perpetuated inadvertently. This also
applies to the stepchild who uses the stepfather's surname, e.g. [stepson
of John Doe], without a formal adoption. Thus there are 3 parts to
coordinate: the primary relationship, the event such as adoption with its
sentence, and the primary name.

Perhaps if we had some form of household report in TMG, people would feel
less need to make a nonbiological relationship primary.

If you missed the discussions we had on TMG-L on the "Genogram chart of
social & biological relationships," about mixed family units, search for
genogram in the TMG list archives for 2001 & 2002
<http://searches2.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl>;.

--Ida Skarson McCormick, , Seattle

At 08:33 AM 07/08/2002 -0500, "Ted Meikle" <> wrote:

>But how does this work for a child that is a biological
>child of the mother and adopted by the father?


This thread: