Ed, I assume you are asking whether it's likely child #10 was not of the same father as 1-9, but there are too many variables to predict such a thing. Depression and related ailments can but do not always have an underlying genetic cause. Even if the descendants did acquire a "bad" gene from #10, it is possible that #10, in some pre-natal developmental stage, experienced a genetic mutation, which is in fact an error in DNA replication, which was then passed on to his or her offspring but of course not to the offspring of 1-9. Genetic mutation occurs after conception with varying frequency for different types of DNA. Also, we know that people who suffer with depression often "self medicate" with alcohol and/or drugs (which was particularly true when there was no adequate medical treatment for depression). This could impact the children two ways. First, if #10 was a woman, the children she carried may have been further damaged by such substances in her body. Second, #10 almost certainly exhibited behaviors that would have aggravated his or her own offspring's predisposition to psychiatric/ mental/emotional problems. Not to be overlooked is the fact that certain foods promote healthy body chemistry, including chemicals which govern a person's emotions. A depressed person who self medicates often has a very poor diet lacking in those foods which help the body to produce those chemicals. If the spouse is similarly disposed, the diet offered to their offspring also may have been deficient. I have a cousin who is a physics professor, he gave me this explanation (three paragraphs) of how genetic mutations occur ... "Everyone receives half of their nuclear DNA from each parent. We have 22 pairs of chromosomes (cleverly called Chromosomes 1 through 22) plus two sex-determining chromosomes called X and Y. ... In a complicated process called 'recombination,' which happens when you produce your own reproductive cells, your two copies of each set of Chromosomes 1 through 22 find each other. They then 'line up' and swap different segments. The chromosomes that are then passed into your reproductive cells are a mixture of what you received from your parents. This is why children of the same parents can be so different. Each child gets a different sampling of DNA from their grandparents. Since this mixing or recombination happens at each generation, it is impossible to track most DNA back through the generations. "During normal cellular processes, every time one of the cells in your body replicates (splits into two 'daughter' cells), it must split apart each DNA molecule into two halves and then make the two 'missing' halves. The 'missing' halves can be faithfully reproduced based on the base pairing scheme [description not included here]. For instance, any A must be paired with a T. The end result of this process is that you now have all of the DNA you need for each daughter cell. This replication process is done very carefully. There is even a proof-reading step in which the sequence of bases in the newly manufactured 'missing' half is checked to see if it matches the original half. If it does not, the error is corrected. However, this proof-reading process *isn't perfect*, and errors are occasionally undetected. "An error in replication of your DNA can have disastrous consequences. Many genetic diseases are caused by such errors." Ed, I'm sorry there is no simple, conclusive answer to your question. However, I would not recommend relying on psychological/emotional history as evidence for parentage. Loretta -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Edward D Costello Sent: Friday, November 07, 2008 23:46 To: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: [DONEGALEIRE] ??? ToWhomItMayInterest: Mr/Mrs X had 10 kids; i.e. #1-#10. Descendents of the 10th kid, (who was suicidal,) over the next 3 generations, produced ~9 instances of clinical depression, deep depression, suicides & other sizable psychiatric problems including "state hospital" confinements. Descendents of kids #1-#9, who are knowledgable people, report zero instances of occurances of the magnitude that occured with kid #10. Question: is this feasible? ....... Ed

Loretta thank you for sharing this great explanation with all of us. I expect that many others will have learned a lot from it, as I have done. And thanks to Ed for asking the question which prompted this reply. Regards to all. ray in oz. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Loretta" <[email protected]> > Ed, I assume you are asking whether it's likely child #10 was not of the > same father as 1-9, but there are too many variables to predict such a > thing. ...