Hi Peter and Listers Peter, I agree with all the points that you make. When at Uni, we were told that scientific method was 'If A then B, if B, then C' not 'I think that I might have B now lets see whether I can manufacture A to suit my needs or wants', which is what seems to be happening here. I think that if a child is adopted, post mortem of one of the people in a marriage, there can be NO justification of that adopted child to claim any familial links with the deceased. After all, what they have in common is a name, no more. It's like me saying that I'm related to the Fuller brewing family in the UK, the only known link, which is no more than a coincidence, is that the guy who runs it is also Anthony Fuller, one of 5 people with the same name that I know of and none of us are related. If people are doing so, I think it's part of what I call genealogical social climbing, like people who search for links back to the Norman Conquest, making huge leaps of faith - and often logic - to 'prove' a relationship with a noble or famous (not usually infamous tho) family. Unfortunately, for whatever reasons best known to themselves, there are any number of people who share our family history passion that seem more intent on collecting countries of origin, noble families, being descended from the Mayflower immigrants, married Indian princesses (there are hundreds of reports of British soldiers marrying Indian princesses in India over a period of 200 years, just to cover up the fact they were living with Indian women and having illegitimate children) just to acquire some social kudos. I think that Andrew Sellon has the right idea with his ag labs, pornographers and the like. My lot were all working class, ordinary people and I'm happy with that because they made me what I am. The bottom line is be happy with what you have in your family line and don't invent anything because if you do, eventually the HWE familial analysts will get you!!!!!!!!!!!!! Regards Tony Fuller