Linda That's a great question for you and Alan to discuss off-list. Regards, Ken Guilette South Barrington, IL ----- Original Message ----- From: Linda To: PAF-5-USERS-L@rootsweb.com Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 5:33 PM Subject: [PAF-5] Biological/adoptive parents - again! OT Alan, I know this is not germane to the point, but why couldn't you ordain your stepson? Linda ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alan Whitcomb" <alan.whitcomb@gmail.com> To: <PAF-5-USERS-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 2:04 PM Subject: Re: [PAF-5] Re: Biological/adoptive parents - again! > As a stepfather (who is really p.o.ed at my branch for not allowing me to > ordain my stepson) - I have his mother with this biological father listed. > Then I also create another "family group" with is mother and I being > listed > as a couple with this boy "adopted". > Why do I do it that way? Well as it has been pointed out to me many times > by my LDS leaders here ... I am NOT the biological father. > > > ==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== > PAF-5-USERS Mailing List Archives > http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/PAF-5-USERS/ > > ==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== FreeBMD - Free Access to England and Wales Civil Registration Index Volunteer as a Transcriber Today! http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/

Continuing the comments on Names, AKA, and Nicknames - I tested a couple of forms/ reports - I don't print out much from my DB, so it was worth checking. In the Book format, the AKA doesn't show - but the Nickname does Johanna Dorothea BLUMM "Tia" was born about 1734 in Caribon,Java,Indonesia. She died on 18 Oct 1755 in Erfurt,Sachen,Prussia,Germany Also, the Named As event will show with dates She was named as Anna Florsee in 1744 in Caribon, Java, Indonesia. .... The Individual Summary shows everything - I tend to use the Married Name field for women when I only know them as Joan Smith my daughter and have little information re: the husbands' name. Nickname: Tia AKA: Sande Married Name: ... So for everyone who wants to print all the names, all the time, the Named As event would give you the option of dates/ places to go with your names Regina Barry * rmbarry1066@earthlink.net * http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~rbarry4145/index.htm There are two possible outcomes: if the result confirms the hypothesis, then you've made a discovery. If the result is contrary to the hypothesis, then you've made a discovery. E. Fermi

All the more reason to document the situation in the notes!!! Dick Cazier ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stewart Millar" <sm999@tiscali.co.uk> To: <PAF-5-USERS-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 12:34 AM Subject: RE: [PAF-5] Re: Biological/adoptive parents - again! > BUT . . . . BUT -- > > As are ANY gedcom tagged items that are not mutually recognised between > any > two genealogical software programs (i.e., not part of the gedcom > standard). > There continues to exist a range of "invented" gedcom tags in differing > software programs that are only applicable to exchanges of data between > the > same software programs. > > . . . . . . I really (really) don't mean to open up a new discussion! > > Regards, > > Stewart > > > -----Original Message----- > From: E.Rodier [mailto:cerear@telusplanet.net] > Sent: 07 June 2005 03:13 > To: PAF-5-USERS-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [PAF-5] Re: Biological/adoptive parents - again! > > BUT the child-parent relationships entered the limited PAF way are likely > to > > be lost in a GEDCOM transfer to other programs. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Stewart Millar" >> PAF does deal with the situation. > > > > ==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== > PAF @ FamilySearch Internet Genealogy Service > http://www.familysearch.org/eng/paf/ > > > > > ==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== > FreeBMD - Free Access to England and Wales Civil Registration Index > Volunteer as a Transcriber Today! > http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ > >

As a stepfather (who is really p.o.ed at my branch for not allowing me to ordain my stepson) - I have his mother with this biological father listed. Then I also create another "family group" with is mother and I being listed as a couple with this boy "adopted". Why do I do it that way? Well as it has been pointed out to me many times by my LDS leaders here ... I am NOT the biological father.

Dick, Previously you said you disagreed with my perspective on this - but I must say that it is not a question of disagreeing with any view but rather a question of understanding how PAF deals with the issue - and on that point there has been a great deal of making a mountain out of a mole hill. PAF does deal with the situation. It allows biological parents to be identified and simultaneously allows adopted parents or parent to be identified. The program does not necessarily replicate any strict legal interpretation which as we have seen from responses varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. With a child linked to a set of parents defined as biological and the same child linked to a set of parents defined as adopted - it is a no-brainer option to right-mouse click on the selected child (in either family), select the edit parents link and view in the sub-window the list of parents the child is linked to - in this list, any repeated mother or father clearly identifies a parent that is in both the biological and the adopted set of parents. Seems like a good solution. Any notes against the child would obviously make the situation clear on any printed report. I see this is quite a good solution and not at all as serious as the length of comments on this issue would imply. Further, I do not believe that there is any implied LDS view in the provisions of the program. Regards, Stewart -----Original Message----- From: Dick Cazier [mailto:dcazier@comcast.net] Sent: 06 June 2005 21:30 To: PAF-5-USERS-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [PAF-5] Re: Biological/adoptive parents - again! I send this, not to upset any people, but to help summarize what has been discussed and (hopefully) put the issue to rest. I'm not sure the developers and/or the LDS position matters, unless it responds to the question of "how do we accomplish that which we need/desire to accomplish." I think John Waugh's response probably states the developer and/or LDS point of view (whether or not he is in a position to officially state such). I don't think we are a group that gets together to pool our ignorance, but a group that is trying to find a way to solve a problem that we (or at least some of us) have. It's rather obvious, after all the discussion, that the PAF program design does not provide a way to record what the original questioner wants to accomplish; to have the family screen show that one party to the marriage is the natural parent of the children and the other party to the marriage is the adoptive parent or the guardian of the children. Knowing that this program limitation exists, it seems the only way to make sure this information is included is through use of the Notes. This should make the information available to others who read/use the researcher's efforts to provide relationship data. This relationship info will probably (and unfortunately) not appear when the genealogical data is presented in a book report format. Hopefully, some day someone will develop a program, as Alan Jones puts it, "to handle our modern day, mixed and matched families" and unmarried or same sex union parentage. Dick Cazier Lakewood, Colorado ----- Original Message ----- From: <HoutsRFred@aol.com> To: <PAF-5-USERS-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2005 7:07 PM Subject: Re: [PAF-5] Re: Biological/adoptive parents - again! > > This has been one of those interesting discussions that hasn't really > resolved anything. At least that's the way I see it . . . but still, it's > been fun > to get the different viewpoints on the matter. I appreciate all of you > contributing as you have. > > Just before leaving the topic altogether (I hope) I do have one other > question and, of course, it DOES RELATE -- > > It is this: Does anyone in this PAF-5 users group list actually speak > on > behalf of the PAF-5 developers and/or the LDS Church position on these > matters? That's who really needs to address us on it, don't you think? > (Not that > there aren't many intelligent people among our group. You've all tried > very > hard in your own way to explain your position, your viewpoint, and > sometimes, your "explanation." Once I heard a bunch of people > discussing a Bible > Study group and since there was no theologian or minister among them, it > was > described as a group where "we just all get together and pool our > ignorance." > Not a good thing for Bible Study, I think. But, anyhow, maybe that's > what > we've been doing here -- just "pooling our ignorance" when it would be > nice to > get the official PAF-5 and/or LDS position. > > Fred, Brooklyn Center MN > > > ==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== > AVG Anti-Virus Users > Disable the 'Certify outgoing messages' option via the E-mail Scanner tab. > > ==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== RootsWeb's WorldConnect Project: Connecting the World One GEDCOM at a Time http://worldconnect.rootsweb.com/

I want to show the children of a former marriage on the second marriage family group sheet. My research indicates that the children were neither adopted nor legally put under guardianship. Can I add a category to the choices that is simply step-parent? Helen

BUT the child-parent relationships entered the limited PAF way are likely to be lost in a GEDCOM transfer to other programs. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stewart Millar" > PAF does deal with the situation.

Thanks to All for your input. Emptying the Temporary Files solved this. Donna -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.6.4 - Release Date: 6/6/2005

Alan, I know this is not germane to the point, but why couldn't you ordain your stepson? Linda ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alan Whitcomb" <alan.whitcomb@gmail.com> To: <PAF-5-USERS-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 2:04 PM Subject: Re: [PAF-5] Re: Biological/adoptive parents - again! > As a stepfather (who is really p.o.ed at my branch for not allowing me to > ordain my stepson) - I have his mother with this biological father listed. > Then I also create another "family group" with is mother and I being > listed > as a couple with this boy "adopted". > Why do I do it that way? Well as it has been pointed out to me many times > by my LDS leaders here ... I am NOT the biological father. > > > ==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== > PAF-5-USERS Mailing List Archives > http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/PAF-5-USERS/ > >

Regina, You have an approach I hadn't thought of (even though the AKA field is right under my nose). I know, if used, it will always be there on the family screen. Do you know if that info will show up with a person's primary name, from the top of the screen, if the genealogy is presented in Book Report format? Dick Cazier Lakewood, Colorado ----- Original Message ----- From: "Regina Barry" <rmbarry1066@earthlink.net> To: <PAF-5-USERS-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 4:45 AM Subject: [PAF-5] RE: Names, biological, adopted, changed, etc > In re: the names a person may be known by (adoption, birth name etc) the > field Also Known As provides as many places as needed (just keep adding > the > event as you go) for names that may be changed or different. Example in my > case - at birth, an Indonesian woman with one name (1700s), given to a > Dutch colonial couple (called by a totally different, Dutch name after her > conversion to the Dutch Reformed Church) and then married under yet > another > name after moving to Germany and aquiring a Germanized form of her > Indonesian name. > > I recorded her under the name used in Germany, because that was where I > found the bulk of written records - mentioning her previous names, etc. > But all of her names are recorded as multiple Also Known As entries. I > could as easily have used her Indonesian name for the 'primary' name. > > Regina Barry * rmbarry1066@earthlink.net * > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~rbarry4145/index.htm > > > > > > > > > > > > > ==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== > FreeBMD - Free Access to England and Wales Civil Registration Index > Volunteer as a Transcriber Today! > http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ > >

I send this, not to upset any people, but to help summarize what has been discussed and (hopefully) put the issue to rest. I'm not sure the developers and/or the LDS position matters, unless it responds to the question of "how do we accomplish that which we need/desire to accomplish." I think John Waugh's response probably states the developer and/or LDS point of view (whether or not he is in a position to officially state such). I don't think we are a group that gets together to pool our ignorance, but a group that is trying to find a way to solve a problem that we (or at least some of us) have. It's rather obvious, after all the discussion, that the PAF program design does not provide a way to record what the original questioner wants to accomplish; to have the family screen show that one party to the marriage is the natural parent of the children and the other party to the marriage is the adoptive parent or the guardian of the children. Knowing that this program limitation exists, it seems the only way to make sure this information is included is through use of the Notes. This should make the information available to others who read/use the researcher's efforts to provide relationship data. This relationship info will probably (and unfortunately) not appear when the genealogical data is presented in a book report format. Hopefully, some day someone will develop a program, as Alan Jones puts it, "to handle our modern day, mixed and matched families" and unmarried or same sex union parentage. Dick Cazier Lakewood, Colorado ----- Original Message ----- From: <HoutsRFred@aol.com> To: <PAF-5-USERS-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2005 7:07 PM Subject: Re: [PAF-5] Re: Biological/adoptive parents - again! > > This has been one of those interesting discussions that hasn't really > resolved anything. At least that's the way I see it . . . but still, it's > been fun > to get the different viewpoints on the matter. I appreciate all of you > contributing as you have. > > Just before leaving the topic altogether (I hope) I do have one other > question and, of course, it DOES RELATE -- > > It is this: Does anyone in this PAF-5 users group list actually speak > on > behalf of the PAF-5 developers and/or the LDS Church position on these > matters? That's who really needs to address us on it, don't you think? > (Not that > there aren't many intelligent people among our group. You've all tried > very > hard in your own way to explain your position, your viewpoint, and > sometimes, your "explanation." Once I heard a bunch of people > discussing a Bible > Study group and since there was no theologian or minister among them, it > was > described as a group where "we just all get together and pool our > ignorance." > Not a good thing for Bible Study, I think. But, anyhow, maybe that's > what > we've been doing here -- just "pooling our ignorance" when it would be > nice to > get the official PAF-5 and/or LDS position. > > Fred, Brooklyn Center MN > > > ==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== > AVG Anti-Virus Users > Disable the 'Certify outgoing messages' option via the E-mail Scanner tab. > >

The adoption made her his real daughter, not a step-daughter, and I live in Virginia which does have some mighty strange laws, but I didn't know about this one <smile>. I personally worked with many adoptions (law firms, Maryland and DC) and in all cases the natural (biological) parent in the marriage consented to the adoption by the adopting parent. In some cases if the child was over a certain age, the Judge also asked for the child's consent, often impressing upon the child that he or she also was accepting the responsibility of a parent and the future risks of caring for that aging or ailing parent. In all cases the original birth certificate reflecting the biological parents was removed from state records and the "correct" birth certificate reflecting the parents of the child (after adoption) was placed in the records. This is slightly off subject for the PAF list, but it might help some who are still researching and have come up with official records information that may differ from family lore. Elaine Cemetery: (n) A marble orchard not to be taken for granite. Hello Charlotte On Monday, June 6, 2005, you wrote > Dick, > I am afraid you are misinformed. In 1968 I > was required by the state of > Virginia to adopt my own biological child > when my husband adopted her as > a stepdaughter. It was explained to me that > this was a "mere legal > formality to make both of us parties to the > adoption", and we were > required to have home visits by a social > worker to insure the home was a > proper home for her. > Charlotte

I am having problems printing a Alphabetical List. I keep getting "Unexpected error in Alpha List while trying to open Temp. File:10-. Can anyone help me here Input please. Donna -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.6.4 - Release Date: 6/6/2005

Beverly, I don't know the intention of the program writers, but I do recognize its limitations. Like you, I'd like it to show the relationship to each parent (Biological to the biological parent) and Adopted or Guardian to the second spouse. Since the program doesn't do that, I think your solution is the best we can do. Your notes approach is exactly the way I approach it. Dick Cazier ----- Original Message ----- From: "Beverly" <kngsldy@cableone.net> To: <PAF-5-USERS-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2005 6:00 PM Subject: [PAF-5] Re: Biological/adoptive parents - again! >I think I have waded through all the e-mails on this subject but suspect >that somewhere in there I may have missed something, so I am going to post >my question - "my" question because it is my family group sheet I'm >discussing. > > I married, had a son and divorced. I have a fgs with my son, his > biological father and me as mother. Fine; no problem. > > After I remarried, my second husband adopted my biological son. ( I state > "biological" because I also have a "sealing" son as a result of this > second marriage, but that's another subject, isn't it?) So now my second > fgs shows my biological son as "adopted" which is correct as far as his > adopted father is concerned. However, he is still my biological son and I > have simply accepted the fact the the fgs in PAF is designed to show > relationship to fathers, not mothers. Do I like this? Not particularly; > I would like to see a designation such as "adopted/biological" as an > option but until that happens (if it ever does), I just make certain my > notes are full and complete of explanations. > If anyone has a better way, please let us all know. I know I'm not the > only mother who has this situation. > > Beverly > > -- > Mailto:kngsldy@cableone.net > Families are Forever! > > > ==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== > PAF-5-USERS Mailing List Search > http://searches2.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl?list=PAF-5-USERS > >

Wilma, My apology. You indicate a state with a law that I wasn't aware of. It doesn't make sense to me, but if that's the law, then that's the law. Dick ----- Original Message ----- From: <Wimmie1@aol.com> To: <PAF-5-USERS-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2005 6:10 PM Subject: [PAF-5] Re: PAF-5-USERS-D Digest V05 #109 > > In a message dated 6/5/2005 7:39:21 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, > PAF-5-USERS-D-request@rootsweb.com writes: > > I hate to disagree with you, but a natural parent cannot also be an > adoptive > > parent of their natural child. Under no adoption law that I'm aware of, > is > there a requirement to, or provision for, the natural parent to go > through > the adoption process required for a second spouse to adopt the child of > his > spouse and another natural parent. > > The natural parent's name may appear in the adoption records and it may > require that parent's consent to the adoption, but the natural parent is > not > an adopter. > Dick Cazier > Lakewood, Colorado > USA > > > > Unless I have completely forgotten the details, when I remarried and my > husband adopted my little girl (in New York State), about 55 years ago, I > was > required to also adopt my child. > > Wilma Horton > > > ==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== > FreeBMD - Free Access to England and Wales Civil Registration Index > Volunteer as a Transcriber Today! > http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ > >

Is it possible in PAF to split a date into its sub-fields? I would like to create a permanent event calendar (birthdays etc) for my own because PAF's own version is too inflexible, e.g. - it's only valid for one year because it is based on calendar weeks - 12 calls necessary for the months of one year - only the name (given names abbreviated) and optionally age printed - no possibility to differenciate between a dozen or so of "John Smith" Has SKS already created a solution for these and other problems? -- Nikolaus (Ordemann) http://privat.genealogy.net/ordemann Die genealogische Ordemann-Homepage The (German language) genealogical Ordemann homepage

Dick, I am afraid you are misinformed. In 1968 I was required by the state of Virginia to adopt my own biological child when my husband adopted her as a stepdaughter. It was explained to me that this was a "mere legal formality to make both of us parties to the adoption", and we were required to have home visits by a social worker to insure the home was a proper home for her. Charlotte > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: > Re: [PAF-5] Re: Biological/Adopted > From: > "Dick Cazier" <dcazier@comcast.net> > Date: > Sun, 5 Jun 2005 12:41:02 -0600 > To: > PAF-5-USERS-L@rootsweb.com > > To: > PAF-5-USERS-L@rootsweb.com > > > Stewart, > I hate to disagree with you, but a natural parent cannot also be an > adoptive parent of their natural child. Under no adoption law that > I'm aware of, is there a requirement to, or provision for, the natural > parent to go through the adoption process required for a second spouse > to adopt the child of his spouse and another natural parent. > > The natural parent's name may appear in the adoption records and it > may require that parent's consent to the adoption, but the natural > parent is not an adopter. > Dick Cazier > Lakewood, Colorado > USA >

HoutsRFred@aol.com wrote: > > It is this: Does anyone in this PAF-5 users group list actually speak on > behalf of the PAF-5 developers and/or the LDS Church position on these I don't, that's fer-shurr, I'm not even a member. > matters? That's who really needs to address us on it, don't you think? (Not that > there aren't many intelligent people among our group. You've all tried very > hard in your own way to explain your position, your viewpoint, and > sometimes, your "explanation." Once I heard a bunch of people discussing a Bible > Study group and since there was no theologian or minister among them, it was > described as a group where "we just all get together and pool our ignorance." > Not a good thing for Bible Study, I think. But, anyhow, maybe that's what I think I'd prefer that to having the meaning "interpreted" for me; that doesn't seem to have worked for Martin Luther either. > we've been doing here -- just "pooling our ignorance" when it would be nice to > get the official PAF-5 and/or LDS position. > Another drop in the pool then -- PAF was intended to make it easy for LDS members to get information into the Temple. The Temple is interested ONLY in husband-wife, and husband-wife-child relationships. Any function beyound that is lagniappe for the user. PAF was *NEVER* intended to be a commercially competitive product, and for much/all of V.1, wasn't even available to non-members. Cheryl

Alan Jones at home wrote: > Beverly, > > You raise an interesting view, but I would like to point out that it > will say ADOPTED > even if it is the mother that adopted the child. So it is not tied to > the father, but > rather the software takes the non-biological relationship to mark the > Parental Link column. The "adopted"/"biological" link appears to be the child's relationship to the Union, not to an individual within that Union. All children are the result of a Union -- whether that Union is male/female or female/test-tube. > I have not seen any program that can handle our modern day, mixed and > matched families. Ummm, may I clear up that little myth? (GBG) Unless you're using "modern" in the historical sense that makes a distinction between Ancient and Modern, blended families aren't a "modern" phenomenon. I have families back in the 1700s where Bob marries Sally and has issue; Bob's sister marries Harry, who is a widower with 3 rug-rats, and she has 3 more before Harry dies; Sally's brother Fred married Ethel and had issue before Ethel dies with the last one, and Fred then marries Bob's sister and their family now consists of 3 kids not related to either of 'em, 3 related to Sis, 3 related to Fred, and oops, next year there's 1 related to both of 'em. Time spins on and Harry's youngest marries Bob's oldest and their grandchild marries Ethel's grandchild. Yeah, actually I DO have something like that, only I have a nagging suspicion I've forgotten a step about Ethel .. > I think it needs to be some 3 or 4 dimensional chart (there fore not > able to print on paper). Indeed. (g) As a friend says, some sentences can't be diagrammed on a flat surface. Cheryl

In re: the names a person may be known by (adoption, birth name etc) the field Also Known As provides as many places as needed (just keep adding the event as you go) for names that may be changed or different. Example in my case - at birth, an Indonesian woman with one name (1700s), given to a Dutch colonial couple (called by a totally different, Dutch name after her conversion to the Dutch Reformed Church) and then married under yet another name after moving to Germany and aquiring a Germanized form of her Indonesian name. I recorded her under the name used in Germany, because that was where I found the bulk of written records - mentioning her previous names, etc. But all of her names are recorded as multiple Also Known As entries. I could as easily have used her Indonesian name for the 'primary' name. Regina Barry * rmbarry1066@earthlink.net * http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~rbarry4145/index.htm