Kim, There is another possibility concerning you deviation. A child could have been taken in or adopted and never knew this was the case. And, a small note of caution: Because the Cox line is close, do not assume it is a part of the equation. You should have a 67 maker test and require an exact match before speculating that another family name is the reason for the deviation. It is a shock to find that you do not correspond to a lineage that you assumed to be yours--particularly if you are the first one to get the results. Your friend may want to have cousins that are known to be of the same stock to take the test as well. It could be the individual has uncovered another Townsend linage. At 09:14 PM 4/11/2009 -0600, Kim Spangrude wrote: >Hello, > >I don't want to be too specific in my request because I want to keep >the individuals involved anonymous. > >I am trying to help a distant cousin (at least according to his paper >line) figure out a mystery. He recently had his yDNA tested, and was >taken completely by surprise to find out that it did not match the >Townsend line that he had expected it to match, but instead matched a >Cox family very very closely. > >Here is what I am looking for: > > >Anyone by the last name of Cox or Townsend, male of female, who were >dis-invited from membership because of parenting a child out of >wedlock, most likely in Ohio, Indiana, Illinois or South Carolina, >any time during the 19th or early 20th century. > >Thanks in advance, > >Kim Townsend Spangrude > >------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >[email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' >without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message