Thriller Thursday just almost hits the spot for this bit of thoughts pounding in my head.
This morning I read Genea-Musings by Randy Seaver and thought back to a week or so ago when there was another post on this topic of sorts. Needless it was prompted I believe by a Saturday fun game Randy had suggested regarding ones heritage and whom were your parents.
The bottom line was some one, I read, but did not keep name stated that all the answers were wrong.
The reason being unless you had your Ydna and Mtdna done you had no proof positive whom your parents were. It was there for only a paper trail with out source.
Ever since the YDna and Mtdna started to come to the fore I was wondering how long it would take for the genealogical community to realize what was going to happen. Obviously the time is now to really think on this.
I have had YDna and Mtdna done for several years now. I do have data on both my Mom and my Dad.
I have it on my Grand Mom and my Grand Dad by having various members of the family tested on my Mom's side and I have data on my Fathers parents also. Which I was thinking I did not but do have.
I then had my husbands side done, both the YDna and the Mtdna for his parents. I am hoping to go back further by having various other members tested.
I originally started with the basic test so we could at least preserve the information and could expand on it later if we felt we needed to.
Now we are splitting hairs and getting very technical with our research. I have a strong feeling that if there is a sibling around of the opposite sex of oneself they need tested, ie I mean if your female have your brother tested to get the YDna and the Mtdna for your Dad and for your MOM. He carries both. Do not need a special one for you separate.
I still think if there is no brother you need to locate an Uncle's male child of father to use as tests, reason is the link goes to the Grandparents.
It is very hard to get these tests to ferret out the Indian lineages though. If you have a female Indian in lineage it must be from a female descendant under her to keep the line clear. If it was a male descendant and you are a female you must find a male descendant of this line to track back, ie collateral kin.
Cousins will share the same grandparents.
So today we found them talking about in vitro fertilization. I am not sure Mr. Greenspan is ready to explain what happens when a fetus is transplanted in another's body, or when is a step in parent by carrying the sperm.
It is one thing to adopt and share and have different parents due to circumstances beyond your own control. Alas we are not controlling the other form either. So when we started, siting our intense resources did you ever realize it would get to the over information of data I suspect no one really wants revealed.
Randy quotes lots of sources on his Genea-Musing article today. It would behoove most genealogist to read it.
My marriage is 52 years strong our children are ours. But we all have today some kin that charts do not follow or even prepare to give you space to present.
When a marriage with children ends and the parents remarry and more children come you now have 1/2 siblings. Now Dick Eastman wrote on this topic and said if I understood him right kin is kin the 1/2 is not viable. I totally concur with that concept. Which 1/2 were you going to accept and which 1/2 were you going to deny. But if your charting this it makes a difference.
The comment that was most profound by Randy was one on the percentage of children born to married couples that are not really both of them's child.
Now you can see why I put it under Thriller Thursday.
Would love to hear feed back and learn what you do in charting these situations.