Richard, I see your point. But, as Jerry pointed out, it's good to have some bold notation on the Individual screen to remind you of the situation. Maybe a better entry in the Married Name field would be "No marriage records found." Or, "believed to have never married." Dick Cazier ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard Rands" <rrands@cfmc.com> To: <PAF-5-USERS-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, July 18, 2005 3:39 PM Subject: Re: [PAF-5] unmarried citation > Since I am a big proponent of using the Married Name field, I'd like to > respond to this suggestion with some reservations. > I have always been reluctant to enter any comment that suggests not > married, unmarried, or never married. First of all the notion of marriage > has evolved significantly over the centuries of recorded history, and the > recording of marriages has vacillated back and forth between civil > authorities, religious authorities, and families. My reluctance to making > such a comment in the most visible fields is that the connotation of not > married carries a lot of negative baggage, and that putting such a comment > where it is readily seen seems so final. Such a comment will stop anyone > from ever looking further for a spouse. What if a parent, angry that a > daughter married someone unacceptable, entered that comment in a family > bible? I can imagine a lot of similar circumstances that would lead to > such a situation. Many times there is a common-law spouse that may not be > recorded, but should have been. I have seen cases where a young person > was married for a few weeks and ended up getting a divorce or annulment > without ever telling anyone. As far as the rest of the family was > concerned, that person never married. I have tried to convince myself > that having a not-married comment is actually useful except buried in the > notes. > > I recall one experience some years ago when I was searching through some > British parish records. that covered a lengthy period of time. The > parish priests were consistent about noting the BB in the record for > bastard born. At one point I began to notice that there was an unusual > number of children in the record that had been born before the parents > were married, or too soon after the marriage. It was so unusual that I > asked the professional genealogist on duty. I was told that there were > times during plagues and other similar times when the infant survival rate > was so low, that it became common for betrothed couples to bear a child > before marriage to make certain it would survive. Sometimes they waited > until it was clear that the child was alive and kicking in the womb before > the official marriage. Others waited to see if the child was male before > getting married. > > I always ask myself, "does this comment serve any real purpose?" If > someone without a recorded spouse has children in the database, PAF > automatically enters Unknown. I believe that is sufficient information > for that circumstance. If there are no children listed, then I believe > that leaving the spouse blank is appropriate with any comments about > marriages being placed in the notes. If you have the names of both the > father and the mother, but there is no officially recorded date, I believe > blank here is appropriate as well. We just don't know the circumstances > and leaving it blank serves to indicate that you don't know. Entering > something that may be incorrect seems to judgmental and final. > > Just my thoughts > Richard Rands > > At 01:24 PM 7/18/2005 -0700, Alishea Durham wrote: >>My thoughts go back to a previous discussion on the >>Married Name field. Some folks have suggested putting >>the spouses full name in this field. I could see >>putting in Unmarried for someone who never did. >> >> >> >>--- FHB39@cs.com wrote: >> >> > In the marriage box instead of the date I put >> > unwed.. >> > Since she had a child, in the spouse space I put >> > unknown since the marriage >> > information is unwed I'm hoping that anyone reading >> > it will realize that the >> > child's father is unknown. This child was born in >> > Bavaria in 1863. His >> > baptismal records in the church records state that >> > he is the bastard son of >> > Catharine. >> > If there had not been any child I would have put >> > none in the spouse box >> > Fran >> > >> > >> > ==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== >> > Replying to Posts >> > When quoting a post you're replying to, omit >> > signatures and taglines that are appended to the >> > post. >> > >> > >> >> >>==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== >>RootsWeb's WorldConnect Project: >>Connecting the World One GEDCOM at a Time >>http://worldconnect.rootsweb.com/ > > > > ==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== > RootsWeb > http://www.rootsweb.com/ > >