On Geneanet, a person asks how to register children whose legitimate father is different from their natural father.
In replying to him, I reflected that the default “Birth” (“Naissance” using the French version of Gramps) type of relationship between the child and one or other of the parents did not mean much, particularly in this specific context but also more generally.
The relationship is Legitimate, usually, or something else like Natural, Guardian, etc…
Why this choice of “Birth” relationship by default? Is there a special meaning? An obligation to follow the Gedcom standard?
I would suggest this is very much an historical point of view and
becoming less and less accurate for two reasons.
The English language and the meaning of words changes more and more
rapidly. Example the word “gay” has changed completely at least 3 times
in my lifetime.
“Father” has an implication of a bond and long term commitment which
is disappearing artificial insemination and illegitimate births being
largely responsible.
Whilst both “legitimate” and “natural” are “English” words their uses
are geographically different that is “Natural” is more Scotland and
“Legitimate” more England.
“Husband” is a term associated with a long term/legal relationship
which is disappearing and “Partner” both long and short term is gaining
ground.
What the mother says is not necessarily always the truth and can be
considered a moveable object. In times past was it more likely than not?
in times recent it is anybody’s guess.
I believe in the old phrase “It is a wise man who knows his father” and
also after a recent discussion on another forum “his mother” as well.
It is my contention that family trees historically are largely works of
fiction some being more accurate than others, it is only when they are
complemented by the science of genetics do we get improvements in accuracy.
GRAMPS has to be able to accept and adapt to these changes.
phil
Birth is an event which unique to the female of the species usually referred to as the mother of the child, the male of the species usually referred to as the father is usually the fundamental cause of the event so those two relationships are immutable.
Subsequent to the birth, either parent may die or otherwise abandon the child. In which case, surrogates typically come in to play (i.e. step-father, step-mother, adoptive father and/or mother which are legal guardianship events) which can result in the child calling the individuals concerned “mother” and “father”. These are never the genetic father and mother and there are acceptable ways of displaying these alternative arrangements.
To me, it all depends what you want to make a family tree for. Legal documents (birth certificates) are a source of an existing bond between children and the previous generation. Divorces and adoption are also documented in many countries.
I do not care about other genetic analysis. First of all, commercial ones are bette at proving that a a biological bond does not exist, less realiable to prove such bond exist. And I see in our current period more people that get to know about “irregularities” when they are already older, but the previous generation involved is long gone, so what???
We are also pretty sure that some of the mothers mentioned in birth certificates (by law named their ‘natural mother’) aren’t always the biological mothers of the child. I have decided to always follow the legal timeline and record every change in the childs timeline (and if needed in either or both parents.)
So verify your sources and explain decisions made if they are not obvious. Rather be thorough then vague. (Like: how do we know? Is it a legal fact, a family tradition, oral history). Have some very complex cases that will probably never be solved and have accepted that completeness of understanding or completeness facts doesn’t always exist.
Two definitions, definitely. What is the third? Or, if it changed 3 times, do you mean there are 4 different definitions?
Related story. In the late 1980s, I was visiting my grandmother (b. 1904) who had recently moved in with her daughter/my aunt. We were talking about when she was young and she made a comment along the lines of “We were all so gay!” I nearly spit my tea across the room! While I was choking, my aunt dryly reminded her mother that the meaning of the word “gay” had morphed, somewhat. In my defence, there are pictures of my grandmother in what would be described as being influenced by the “flapper” style!
Derogatory reference to an individuals fashion choice ie “that shirt
you are wearing is totally gay” (note I have given the polite version)
I once had to go on a training course about inclusion/appropriate
behaviour with regard to people’s sexual preferences very woke. The nice
lady running the course (she was openly gay as per (2) was really
vehement about the word having been stolen from her community and put to
such use (3) I was nearly escorted from the room when I stated I was
equally appalled about her use of the word it having been stolen from me
(1)however I did point out it was in the very nature of the English
language that such changes would occur and we should all just grin and
bear it.
phil