MORAL DILLEMAS!.....

Sobil · Post by **Sobil** » Sun Sep 25, 2005 1:26 pm

Hi all,

Can I have some aghast feedback of the following?

I know that some websites like all people listed on a tree to be over 100 years old, to avoid offence apparently. I can understand not listing the living, but I have seen later records and deaths up into the new millenia. Is it etiquette to have the approval of living relatives before posting the dead ones.... considering so much information is now online anyway.

Another issue I am facing is "limiting the truth". Some information I have may upset immediate relatives of the dead, but I do not even know if they exist, and if they do they are the last of that generation. I am quite happy to assume that what happened two generations ago is really just a bit of colour in an otherwise boring family history. Should I be more sensitive?

And lastly, "editing the truth". I feel that family trees should be honest.... otherwise why are we all trying so hard to find the truth? I know some information on my tree has been edited, and I suspect there are more skeletons. But again, whether this happened either a long time ago, or in more modern accepting times I don't think the truth is offensive.

Is this just a clash of the generations or is there some prevailing etiquette I am missing?

Sobil

DavidWW · Post by **DavidWW** » Sun Sep 25, 2005 2:26 pm

Generally accepted practice is not to show living people, or at very least to disguise them by removing given names and surnames in terms of spouses.

Some would argue that it's OK to show that there has been a marriage and a number of issue but not to identify by given name those involved, in terms of living people.............

As regards skeletons I think that you need to be aware that some older relations may find it unacceptable to find their relatives shown, for example as illegitimate, or even having applied for poor relief.

You have to make the judgement on that situation on a case-by-case basis. For me, when paid research is involved, I have no choice but to tell it as it is, as my professional code of conduct doesn't allow me to do otherwise, although I might try to "soften the blow" by explaining the background, e.g. poor relief in the second half of the 19th C is simply ivalent of today's social security benefits and nothing to be ashamed of, and that the subsequent marriage of the parents automatically legitimated earlier births shown as illegitimate, as long as the parents were free to marry at the time.

But there ain't much can be done to disguise suicide, although it will often be found that some registrars appeared to be loath to use the word on the register entry, and it's only when the RCE entry is investigated that suicide is confirmed.

David

Post by **Tracey** » Sun Sep 25, 2005 4:41 pm

Hello Sobil

When i submitted my family tree on the web i omited notes and sources - as we all know that when we start looking we find things that to us are fascinating and make us greatful for having a colourful past - for the simple reason that we still have older living relatives in their late 90,s. I feel its slightly disrespectful to be broadcasting what they think of as shameful or would rather not talk about even if you dont know or ever met the people concerned. All us family know what happened and its of no interest to anyone really but us about the goings on so feel there is no need to make these notes available on the web and some family dismiss it as rubbish, they are usually the ones that know you are telling the truth !. I have removed some posts on here after having guilt pangs ! . There are a few of our family just starting out in their research and are left opened jawed when one of us tells them about the past. I dont know how your tree software works but all the causes of death, who certain childrens fathers were ect are contained in my notes and thats where they are staying as far as the rest of the world are concerned even though they (the goings on) did happen early 1900,s. I started my tree as far as the web is concerned from my grandparents and omitted their children although i did have permission to publish the names i chose not to as anyone researching will know our grandparents names and im easily contactable if they want to know more. If i were you i would ask family how they felt about such information being made public if that is what you are doing and if they object its best to agree to their wishes save arguing over the past its best to preserve the present unless you have issue of course !

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Sun Sep 25, 2005 7:50 pm

It is sometimes interesting to see how differenct sources report events. The best example I have found is the death of a Scottish cousin. [the XXXs are my edits, of course]

Ref : Marine Returns. 028/MR 148. [courtesy of John Stevenson]

XXXX INGLIS .
3rd Engineer S.S. COMERIC ON 108757 Age 39.
Died 21/4/1911 in 29.4E - 45.22N
Venereal disease and diabetes accelerated by drink.
Normal place of residence : Torridon Terrace , Gourock.

The obituary from the hometown newspaper [courtesy of Elaine McShefferty]
Deaths at Sea
Obituary

XXXX Inglis, engineer, husband of Agnes XXXX, 19 Cardwell Rd, Gourock, son of the late XXX and XXXX Inglis, Greenock. Died at sea 21/4/1911 age 38 (GT 4/5/1911)

Catherine

Sobil · Post by **Sobil** » Mon Sep 26, 2005 3:03 am

My family is starting to sound very tame. I can understand not publicising some aspects but if a family member requests a full history am I not obliged to provide all I know, warts and all?

I remember sitting with my parents and my then boyfriend talking. We were off to celebrate his parents 25th wedding anniversary. My father said "oh, but I thought you were 24 way back...." My boyfriend had not realised until that point that he was conceived out of wedlock. It had a profound effect of him especially because his parents had always told him they disapproved of premarital affairs. A sad occasion but wasn't it better to find out the truth from people who loved him rather than years later by himself... ?

I guess it must come down to how we feel about epitaphs... I know mine will never be complete, if I am lucky it will be flattering but I would be very upset if it were inaccurate!

Sobil

Post by **Tracey** » Mon Sep 26, 2005 3:20 am

Hi Sobil
First off havent we both got beds to go to !!
I think if anyone asks then tell them. Whether they want to believe it or not its up to them. We have family members alive that remember the xxxxxxxxxxxx ( as he was given money to go away by the punters !) there is also talk of xxxx xxxxxxx and known xxxxx so from our point of view it depends on who you tell ! Sometimes you wish you had never started as it can cause arguments, but thats part of the game so to speak. We only discovered in the last few years that the name my grandfather was born with was totally different from the name we knew him as and the name we carry - so in short we dont know for sure what our sir name should really be. My dad said once that my grandfather would love to be here now with our ability to find family he would find it fascinating - i dont fink so ! i think he would kill us or dissown us for getting this far

---

Edited for reasons mentioned previously !

Post by **Tracey** » Mon Sep 26, 2005 3:31 am

P.S i have said that i am not telling anyone anything about me until 10 mins before i die and in that case they are going to have to hope i dont have a long life coping with a memory debilitating illness ( god forbid ) and if thats the case they are never going to know the truth !

.........i should be so interesting !! (not so far !)

Sobil · Post by **Sobil** » Mon Sep 26, 2005 3:43 am

Thanks Tracy,

No bed to go to, I just got up.... different time zone.

I'm definitely not in your league when it comes to a colourful family.... from what I know anyway.

I love the intrigue, it's like playing detective and who wants to watch "Little House on the Prairie" when "The Life of Lucretia De Bourgia(?)" is on the other channel

Sobil

Post by **Tracey** » Mon Sep 26, 2005 3:46 am

No for us its (was) a cross between Sex and the City and News at 10 !! no competition !

Post by **Tracey** » Mon Sep 26, 2005 3:51 am

P.S i just noticed this site clock is an hour slow so its definitly well past my bed time 03.50am !! Goodnight !