The problem with "legal sanction" and/or "legislation" is that you're thinking from a US point of view Karen. Implementing those in the US would have a divisive effect and may burden US researchers specialising in other countries, or even researchers outside the US who need to access US-based resources. Certification and qualification, on the other hand, work because they are voluntarily recognised internationally. There is no issue of jurisdiction. [ I am wearing my international hat, here, as a FHISO representative ] Most of my own historical research is connected with UK and Ireland, with some smaller amount in the US. I am sure most of the people on this mailing list will be looking at multiple countries so that sort of formal control is likely to have undesirable side-effects. Another subject that hasn't been folded into this melting-pot is the issue of academic research, as opposed to genealogical research. I know there are authors on this list, and their research may be in the fields of techniques, historical events, standards, globalisation, software, etc. How do these stand in relation to the term "professional"? Tony Proctor ----- Original Message ----- From: "Karen Rhodes" <bitbucket001@comcast.net> To: <transitional-genealogists-forum@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 3:44 PM Subject: Re: [TGF] Who is a Professional? > On 9/25/2012 8:44 AM, Jillaine Smith wrote: <snip> > Karen Packard Rhodes > currently residing in Pinellas Park, Pinellas County, Florida > > The Transitional Genealogists List was created to provide a supportive > environment for genealogists to learn best practices as they transition to > professional level work. Please respect the kind intentions of this list. > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-request@rootsweb.com with the word > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the > message

On 9/25/2012 11:12 AM, Tony Proctor wrote: > The problem with "legal sanction" and/or "legislation" is that you're > thinking from a US point of view Karen. Well, we often perceive things from our own viewpoint and bailiwick, do we not? And the U.S. is not the only country that has governmental regulation, either. > Implementing those in the US would > have a divisive effect and may burden US researchers specialising in other > countries, or even researchers outside the US who need to access US-based > resources. Possibly, but not necessarily. But what effect would regulations have in Great Britain, or France, or Spain? > Certification and qualification, on the other hand, work because > they are voluntarily recognised internationally. There is no issue of > jurisdiction. [ I am wearing my international hat, here, as a FHISO > representative ] And a number of professions can be self-policing, especially those which do not enter into the realms of affecting life and limb! > Most of my own historical research is connected with UK and Ireland, with > some smaller amount in the US. I am sure most of the people on this mailing > list will be looking at multiple countries so that sort of formal control is > likely to have undesirable side-effects. Undesirable side effects are always a possibility, alas. > Another subject that hasn't been folded into this melting-pot is the issue > of academic research, as opposed to genealogical research. I know there are > authors on this list, and their research may be in the fields of techniques, > historical events, standards, globalisation, software, etc. How do these > stand in relation to the term "professional"? > As a historian-in-training, I'm aware that professionalism in that field is influenced by academic degrees. I don't know yet whether I'm going to go for my Ph.D. or not -- I am 65 years old and not from a long-lived family -- but that would certainly help stature as a historian. I am a member of the American Historical Association. Karen Packard Rhodes currently residing in Pinellas Park, Pinellas County, Florida