Ethics in Genealogy - Family History & Genealogy Message Board

Unethical or just doesn't care

userone164 — 2013-05-20 19:48:25Z

One branch of my family founded a very successful business in the English Midlands in the 1870's. Because of this the family and business history can be found easily by Googling the business name either by itself or in combination with the family name. Histories of the area and of the business type, newspaper articles and many other similar items are readily available.
Recently I found a relatively new Ancestry tree with the family members and their photos from 1866 to present attached to someone else. I contacted the tree owner and asked to have the 'erroneous' information removed.
I realize that it is possible if sufficient research is not done to become 'confused' however in this case, it is just completely wrong and the tree owner can verify my information entirely outside the Ancestry community.
My family tree has been kept by family members for well over a hundred years. An official tree was prepared by Debretts (a British genealogy company who have been in business since the early 1800's) for the centennial of the business in 1970.
Any suggestions about how to resolve this issue?
It makes me realize why people keep their trees private!

Re: Your direct line - should it be poached?

fizzbomb — 2013-05-05 14:27:04Z

It's called "thread drift"...

Re: Your direct line - should it be poached?

fizzbomb — 2013-05-05 14:26:05Z

Considering I've been researching for nearly 30 years, I am well aware there is a possibility of multiple people with the same name and have those cases in my family lines (German and Celtic naming patterns), but that isn't the case this time.

Re: Your direct line - should it be poached?

jackart — 2013-05-03 19:20:45Z

Just saying they could be...The possibility (as I have found)is there.
I had one person contact me where they had put their family member with my family member to make someone who had many children that she said did not seem possible since she lived a very short life. She was right. They were two diferent people with very simialar names, but not the same dates,or ages.

Re: Your direct line - should it be poached?

patmob — 2013-05-02 20:48:18Z

Jack - while I'm not exactly sure what you're talking about I can assure you I've never looked at your tree or "poached" anything from it. Best of luck!

Re: Your direct line - should it be poached?

fizzbomb — 2013-05-02 20:21:57Z

jackart, probably more than you will ever know. LOL

However, I'm not sure what your point is. In my last few posts in this thread, I was commenting on the difference between an "actual age" and a "reported age" on records. Are you suggesting those were different people with the same name as my husband's great grandfather because the ages were different from one census/marriage record to the next?

Re: Your direct line - should it be poached?

jackart — 2013-05-02 20:19:51Z

Sorry...you had sort of the same response as she did. Like SO WHAT! She is absolutely no kin to me but has absorbed as much of my tree as possible (leaveing out the living ones) on both sides of my family. Paternal and maternal. That is why I am touchy about it. I know both of my siblings. That is the only way she would be kin to both sides. She also has added stuff I passed on that I knew was not a family link. I did not ask her for help or did any of my kin. And yet she pops up all the time. You can see my confusion. her name is Patricia Thimmel and goes by patandsuejones '

Re: Your direct line - should it be poached?

patmob — 2013-05-02 19:15:18Z

I'm sorry but I don't know what you mean nor do I know who "sue" is nor am I Patricia Thimmel.

Re: Your direct line - should it be poached?

jackart — 2013-05-02 16:38:55Z

Fizzbomb...you do realize a lot of people carry the same name?

Re: Your direct line - should it be poached?

jackart — 2013-05-02 16:07:56Z

Patmob, or is it patricia thimmel or pat and sue . Why are you so interested in this vendevor?

Re: Your direct line - should it be poached?

jackart — 2013-05-02 16:05:43Z

I too wish to share and obtain knowledge from others as I find it also hard to do the research I would like to do ,traveling is not always an option. My problem is when someone takes my tree,both sides of the family,which is a sure impossibility unless they are one of my siblings ,and added on top of that anybody with a simialar name . Then I suddenly see people with a family link taking "hints" from that persons site as true research. One Ancestry member has several diferent named pages on Ancestry. I have asked them why they chose my family history ,and all my kins, to see if they were in any way linked to our family. Their response was not helpful.

Re: Your direct line - should it be poached?

jackart — 2013-05-02 15:56:08Z

Census should not be the only research done to establish a family tree. Yes there are mistakes made by those who took the census,and those who transcribe them. I found one in my group that showed he was from conneticut by the transcriber and yet it could be seen the letters were more as Constatinople than Conneticut. But what does this discussion have to do with the question of "poaching"?

Re: Your direct line - should it be poached?

jackart — 2013-05-02 15:49:03Z

All you have to do is google your name to realize that they are not all "you". So when someone takes your direct line and adds all of those people with the same name to it ,seems to me that is doing damage to future investigation of this tree. I work hard to be accurate in my family history. For someone to just add every "hint" that shows up wagging on their tree is detrimental to the search.

Re: Your direct line - should it be poached?

ElizabethKortz — 2013-04-30 19:29:57Z

What I have done in this circumstance, is save the tree to favorites.. and email the contact requesting permission to use info, or thanking them for documenting well etc. I also never rely on that tree's info, but seek out the sources and verify each and every one. In many cases i have had a response from the contact and we end up sharing info!

Re: FAMILY TREE ETIQUETTE

dlloyd500 — 2013-04-22 15:47:49Z

I had a similiar situation with my G-Grandfather's family. I chose to add the family of his first wife (not my ancestor). A year ago, I heard from a descendant of that family, and ended up invited to their family reunion. They provided me with pictures of my G-grandparents (including one of him in military uniform, didn't know that), and a picture of my gg-grandmother taken in 1871. You never know where "half counsins" can lead.

Re: Sharing Family Information

falsterden — 2013-03-09 04:49:09Z

To me it sounds as if someone has posted information about living people on the internet. I agree that this is not only ethically wrong but can pose problems (and possibly serious problems, including exposure to scam artists) for the living people. Meanwhile, posting that information is of small consequence to the person who posted it. It's really not a big deal to them - just expands their "collection" of names a little bit. In some nations it is against the law and considered a violation of privacy laws to post on the internet about living people. On Ancestry message boards, posting information about living people is against community guidelines. Yes information about living people can be found online, but that does not mean we as family historians should pull that information together and make it available in a more convenient and easily accessible format.

I too have had the experience of finding a living relative (an aunt-in-law) on a family tree online and reading her "death date." If I ever find myself on a family tree online - time to call the lawyers.

Re: How Honest Should You Be?

falsterden — 2013-03-09 04:38:42Z

You can check the "Defective, Dependent, and Delinquent Classes" schedule for more information (see link). On a family tree I did for a niece-in-law, I found a great-grandfather institutionalized. She knew the story: he had been kicked in the head by a horse in his 40s and was brain injured.
LINK:
http://www.genealogy.com/heard042601.html

I would absolutely share the information as found. Our ancestors struggles and shortcomings and challenges inform our own, just as do their achievements.

Re: HIPPA Requirements at Nursing Home for patient who died 1917

buckelvis_1 — 2013-02-11 20:30:39Z

Hi! I have the exact same problem in PA.. my husband's great-grandfather was at Dixmont for 54 years of his life and we have been denied access to his records in Harrisburg... I am hoping the new 50 year law has changed that. He died in 1956. I hope we both get our records! Let me know, please, if you do, and I'll do the same. My email address is buckelvis@hotmail.com. Good Luck!

Re: FAMILY TREE ETIQUETTE

jonathan761 — 2012-11-10 18:00:05Z

I agree with Cyndi 100%. From my families history, you are very lucky that your grandmother was so loving. She raised a loving family. My grandfather was not as lucky. Just put in the correct info.

Good luck,
Jonathan

Re: How Honest Should You Be?

keyesbob — 2012-11-06 19:58:54Z

You have to ask yourself 'What am I trying to do?' - are you a historian, or are you trying to write a gift for your family to make them feel better? If you're a historian, you have to collect all information, complimentary or not. But, you may decide to publish two versions of your tree, one for the sensitive people and children, and another with the cold hard truth included as well. For instance, I recently found out that a distant relative was sent to prison for drug smuggling. I am going to keep this information from the casual viewer of the tree, but anyone who is seriously interested in family issues, and who I think is responsible, I will share the information with. I am still not sure what to do about sharing mere rumors, and person opinions, though. I will collect them and keep them but I have yet to decide how to share them.

Re: Sharing-----or not

Tengen3 — 2012-10-15 02:17:59Z

I would just ask straight out that they only copy what pertains to their relative, but it's risky business if you are dealing with someone you don't know. I have not up- loaded my family tree at all so it isn't a problem for me. If I ask for pictures, I make sure the person knows up front that I will give the credit to them.

Re: Sharing-----or not

AGHatchett3rd — 2012-10-13 19:19:22Z

I *very* rarely invite someone to view my tree.

When I get such a request I politely let them know that while I'm willing to provide information about any individual they find indexed in any or my trees that I just don't grant access or provide full lines.

Re: Sharing-----or not

goldbergjanice — 2012-10-13 16:54:35Z

I agree with you and I am just as much an idealist as you; learning a little etiquette would make these situations less intolerable. It's the same as the rules of the road, which are just as much trampled as these. I tried tracking down this "researcher" but have no proof of anything yet; she has a tree called "Lower East Side Beginnings" and it's a tree all right but there is something fishy about it.

Let me ask you this: if you've been asked to invite someone to view your tree, how do you nicely ask them not to post your photos/articles in their public tree unless they are photos of their own relatives? This is a sticky situation for me. Thanks!

Re: Sharing-----or not

Tengen3 — 2012-10-13 15:52:37Z

It might be worthwhile to look into copyright law if you think that your information may be used to make money by a pirate - seems like I remember that pictures and original writing are under copyright automatically - I reviewed it sometime ago in regard to some stories published on Facebook. Of course that would mean an attorney and lawsuit. It's so simple to give credit where credit is due. Unfortunately there isn't near enough emphasis on the website regarding integrity and sound reseach. The "just point and click to find your family" ads are adding to the problem. Personally, I think mandatory courses should be part of the subscription and subscribers not given access to the website until completing the courses. I know, I'm an idealist :)

Re: Sharing-----or not

goldbergjanice — 2012-10-13 14:04:36Z

I agree with both of you -- Tengen: having also spent hundreds of hours and dollars I also am wary and do not open the tree indiscriminately anymore. This is your baby! You'd want to see it cared for with respect. Cyndi - I, too, feel as if sharing the documents readily is the right way to go and do share what I have with relatives who are as keen as I am to find the answers and keep the right records. As you said to fiona - if we ever have relatives in common, I'd be happy to share..

The way I found this original post was by looking for any post dealing with the vampires, specifically the photo/article vampires -- if I share my private tree with a cousin who keeps a public tree then my hard-earned photos, articles and documents can be seen by people just collecting names - why are there so many? Recently I realized that one of these unknown takers must be writing a book using my resources because she had no specific family members of her own she was documenting but kept writing to me asking me about my relative who had a bit of a shady past -- she wanted all of the articles! When she finally did allow me entrance into her tree there were no family links to anyone - just a collection of 16,000 names and photos when she could grab them. I realized, when looking at her tree, that the records she had for my shady relative were ones I had shared with a cousin with a public tree -- photos and all! She just wanted more. I was/am furious. How do you deal with these types? Many thanks

Re: Sharing-----or not

Tengen3 — 2012-10-13 02:21:32Z

I think you have a good point and would make that decision depending on the individual I was working with. Unfortunately, as a less experienced researcher, I shared some of my research with a family member who then published it as their own. That has made me very careful with what I share.

Re: Sharing-----or not

cyndi308 — 2012-10-12 15:39:09Z

I've gotten that too and I think most of the time is the person doesn't have a clue what the documentation is. They copied it from someone else. I hit a dead end with my husband's grandfather's siblings. There is an aunt my father-in-law never heard of. She's on a ship manifest (and several years older than the other siblings). She's listed on a good half dozen trees at Ancestry with the same married name (and this unusual maiden name...sometimes the parents' names are given too, so I'm sure it's the same person). I wrote all of the tree owners and only got one or two replies, all telling me they just copied it and don't have documentation. Even using the probable married name I haven't found anything else. Somewhere someone must have at least one doc showing the connection between the married and maiden name, even if it's verbal confirmation from the source.

I don't get it though when someone has a computer file of a document and won't share it. My uncle and I shared everything we each had. I sent all my docs to a distant cousin of my husband's who did a very complete branch of my mother-in-law's family tree (she hasn't sent anything to me, she just tells me when one of my docs is new to her). And I sent all my docs to someone who is almost certainly a cousin of mine but we need to go back one or two more generations (he's shared everything with me too). And if they don't have the computer file, then at least they could say where the doc is from and the basic info on it.

I would understand refusing a request to "share all your docs" with someone you don't know. But one specific person who is a shared ancestor? Makes no sense to me.

If you and I were to have any shared ancestors, I'd be happy to share the info I have.

Cyndi

Re: Sharing-----or not

Tengen3 — 2012-10-11 20:23:13Z

Perhaps I can shed some light on why researchers aren't willing to share. I have spent considerable time (years), money (hundreds), and hours (unnumbered) identifying and documenting my family lines. I'm not willing to post my hard work to a public format were there is no guarantee that the integrity of the information will remain intact. I'm happy to help others by pointing them to the resources I've used, but respect my own efforts too much to give away my conclusions. If I ever choose to make my research public, I will copyright and publish the information I've so painstakingly compiled. I'm sure there are others who feel this way as well.

Re: FAMILY TREE ETIQUETTE (STEP-CHILDREN)

cyndi308 — 2012-10-05 17:00:54Z

It depends who is using the tree and what you want to document. I would add the step child and the new husband, even if your cousin does not have children with him. It does seem a bit improper to me to leave them out (or to include the husband and leave out his child) but people make family trees for different reasons.

This is probably not the only step-family in your tree. If you don't have any yet, you will later. It was very common for people to remarry when widowed. Divorce happened too. And death was not uncommon when young (in childbirth, in wars, disease, and accidents).

As for your cousin's pronouncement that she is not a step-mother, if the child is a minor, I hope she gets over that fast. But that has nothing to do with genealogy. The tree doesn't give her relationship to the child, just to the child's father. The rest is implied.

Cyndi

Re: FAMILY TREE ETIQUETTE

cyndi308 — 2012-10-05 16:55:23Z

Work on all of them with the correct parents listed. You may find cousins and you want them on the tree too. Even if they are "half cousins."

The only reason not to include the half siblings is if you choose not to. This isn't an ethics issue, it's just about how you want to spend your time. I'd add the half-siblings for sure but how far down their lines you want to go is up to you.

Cyndi

FAMILY TREE ETIQUETTE (STEP-CHILDREN)

reunion_de_famille — 2012-10-05 14:12:02Z

I have a cousin who recently got married and she is not a step-mom. Her husband had a child previous to them getting married. When constructing my family tree it it impolite or improper not to add this step-child to the family tree.

FAMILY TREE ETIQUETTE

reunion_de_famille — 2012-10-05 14:10:45Z

My great-grandmother had 9 children. She had these 9 children with 4 different mates. When constructing my family tree do I only work on my direct great-grandfather's branch or do I work on all 4 branches. We were all raised as one family it is only until now I am finding out that they all had differnt fathers.

Re: Etiquette? On family tree.

ChaosAnanke — 2012-10-03 19:13:52Z

since no one has replied yet, I hope you are still wondering about this and that I may be able to help. In the end, when it comes to a sordid past, it's all up to you personally. If the information is publicly available, like a criminal record, whether you add it or not doesn't keep others from finding it. On the other hand, public or not, it may hurt the living descendants emotionally to have it staring them in the face. I have a news article on a deceased relative that can be found easily by anyone looking for this relative. I have it in my offline records, but not my tree because I share that online tree with relatives who don't know the story and their parents have requested that they not find out about it. I see no issue with them knowing, but I accept the personal wishes of my family as in the end telling the story or not telling the story makes no nevermind to me. By keeping their confidence, I've been given greater detail about the incident since they know I'm not trying to air the dirty laundry. I've also used the article as an example for other in the know relatives to show them that I may find things they'd rather keep secret and telling me about them now rather than trying to get me to remove it from my shared tree later when I find it on my own will be better for them.

Re: Sharing-----or not

f1297 — 2012-08-27 05:31:48Z

Hey cousin how about sharing with me already?

Re: Sharing-----or not

goldbergjanice — 2012-08-07 15:36:17Z

Fiona, I can't believe that no one has replied to your simple and honest question. In a search for a thread about genealogical "vampires,"and I came across your post. I might have one or two reasons that you've encountered such rude behavior: there are other researchers out there who have abused the system in such a way that the owners of the trees will not answer requests anymore, and ruin in for people like you (and me!). On the other hand, there are researchers out there who are just plain rude. I've encountered both. A third possibility may be that the person you are trying to reach hasn't logged on in ages and simply didn't get your message ...either way it's frustrating. When that happens to me I was just think, screw them, I'll find it myself! I take it as a challenge. I hope this helps, you sound awfully nice and undeserving of such rude behavior.

Re: Giving credit where credit is due

fiona3637 — 2012-07-23 23:37:33Z

I started my tree twelve years ago, using research given to me by my Mom. Her nephew had spent decades working on it, before the Internet existed and when he died it was given to her. I had zero interest in genealogy at the time and put all of his work on a shelf where it sat for several years. Then I picked it up one day and started going through it in curiosity and that's when the bug bit me. I was hooked. I signed up for Ancestry.com in 2000 and started my tree. I gave credit to my cousin in many places where I manually typed in everything, and over the years have added over a thousand individuals to the tree.

I have NO problem with people "using" my tree. Not my cousin's work, not mine. Because my cousin's work, given to me at a time when I was completely disinterested in genealogy, was the actual spark that lit the fire in me. For which I am so very grateful. In the end, to ME anyway, the gift of genealogy lies in the KNOWING where you came from, the history, the pictures, the stories. For myself, I need no credit. Ten years and a thousand individuals later, I am still more than happy to share anything and everything with anyone who wants the information. And I don't feel I need any "credit". If they want to give it, fine, I would appreciate it, but I don't "need" it. I have been frustrated so many times over the years by cynical, greedy and secretive genealogy buffs that I have no intention of behaving in the same fashion. I think a GOOD genealogist has a generous heart and is willing to help others find their past. JMHO, YMMV.

Re: Qs on copyright restrictions -- quoting or copying old books

Ken_Sch — 2012-07-19 04:58:14Z

A book published in the United States in 1908 would be in the public domain in the United States. You could transcribe the whole thing if you wanted and there most likely would never be a problem. Rest assured that any book from 1908 will eventually be digitized some time soon anyways the way things are going these days. The real issue is with post-1923 to 1950s publications that nobody seems to be able to determine how copyright applies.

Re: Need advice on dealing with local historical/genealogical society...

Ken_Sch — 2012-07-19 04:38:33Z

Not sure actually joining the organization would really make them more open to accepting the information you have. Posting it online would probably be the best way to go.

Re: Giving credit where credit is due

AGHatchett3rd — 2012-07-16 00:48:17Z

I learned long ago to only send info on individuals- never on families and to send that info in a screenshot of my website that shows my name.

If they want to take the time to rekey it into their stuff- fine; but I'm not going to make it easy for them.

Re: Need advice on dealing with local historical/genealogical society...

hrcrtr — 2012-07-15 22:53:15Z

No, I haven't pursued it further, and I still haven't posted my documentation online either. As my dad would say I've been putting out fires elsewhere.

I did notice recently there seems to be another individual on Ancestry researching this individual, where before it looked as though I was the only one. I may contact them to see if they have anything relevant.

I've also considered joining the organization, as another poster suggested, but their meeting schedule conflicts with my work schedule. I'd never be able to attend.

Obviously, I need to get off my bum and do something!

Re: Need advice on dealing with local historical/genealogical society...

Ken_Sch — 2012-07-15 19:11:58Z

Have there been any further developments in this matter?

Re: Giving credit where credit is due

Ken_Sch — 2012-07-15 19:00:21Z

Not quite the same, but I used to maintain a few free websites with military/genealogical information. It was interesting to see where this information eventually ended up without credit. I'm not one who seeks to make a name for myself, but I would like to see my efforts properly cited.

Re: Sharing Family Information

patmob — 2012-07-11 23:57:27Z

To me all it sounds like that all you've found is that a husband and wife and their child with the same names as your relatives lived and died in another state.

Not unusual.

Re: Request to remove information - don't know how to respond.

JanetH88 — 2012-07-11 14:45:33Z

I come to this problem from a different perspective. I did all the leg work. I slogged through many reels of LDS film, combed through courthouses, graveyards, i.e., I tried to find every possible bit of primary source material available. I found the European home of the family. Without my work, no one would be plastering this family all over the internet. I was very foolish to share any of my material (I did not post it on the Internet) and now it's come back to haunt me big time. How can people who are not even related in any way take my results and make them the authority on my family? How can people who may have common blood, but 5 or 6 generations back, put detailed information on my parents and grandparents in a public forum. In doing "whole" families, many of these people are in way over their heads, but quite proud of all the boring (and often erroneous) names and dates and places they enter, and having been successful in "getting back" further than their fellow "genies."

Re: Publishing BDMs and censuses

Saphrani — 2012-07-11 14:20:18Z

Just to add some information; I have noticed that it states on a strip at the bottom of the England censuses "Crown Copyright - not to be reproduced without permission" or "Crown Copyright - not to be reproduced photographically without permission".

I suppose these are more modern additions to the censuses and that genealogy companies, such as Ancestry, need to receive permission from the relevant governmental body before making censuses and other documents available to the public for a price.

Yet, if this is not the case, I still wonder whether genealogists have the right to publish documents (as long as a document doesn't contain personally sensitive information about living persons).

Publishing BDMs and censuses

Saphrani — 2012-07-09 18:34:25Z

Dear all,
Can anyone tell me if it is legal to publish birth, death, marriage certificates and censuses online?

I've bought censuses from Ancestry.co.uk and BDMs from the UK's General Registry Office (GRO) during my research for my family genealogy.

If I could, I would publish BDMs and censuses on my family blog (familia-nostra.blogspot.com) as source evidence and to help other people researching the same family history. However, I haven't noticed other people publish documents online. It's far more common for genealogists/researchers to cite documents, etc. than publish them. (Of course, I'm aware that it would not be legal to publish any documents for living people).

Thanks to anyone who can clarify this for me.
Regards
Saphrani

Re: Your direct line - should it be poached?

patmob — 2012-07-05 14:33:56Z

If only there was a way for people to keep their tree private. Oh wait there is.

Re: Paid Researchers on message boards

kh440 — 2012-06-22 22:02:11Z

I'll find it and do so. I don't know if he is working in tandem with her or is just naive about it & trying to be extra helpful. But, that's for an administrator to determine. Thanks!

Re: Paid Researchers on message boards

barbdale_1 — 2012-06-22 21:33:17Z

I think in that case (posting of the email address) I would report it to the board admin. as a violation of terms.

Re: Paid Researchers on message boards

kh440 — 2012-06-22 21:01:21Z

Hi barbdale_1,

I certainly agree with you.
I too have noticed one person in particular who does this across multiple message boards. To top it off, along comes another person, telling others to contact the person who is the one garnering all of the free information! He posts her email address and assures the person that she will find his or her heritage.