Regardless of the biological issues, what we do need is a way to separaely source "Did not marry" (or the equivqlent) and the issue of "Had no children" . It is quite common to find the proof of these two matters from separate and different sources, However there is no provision in Legacy to source these items separately. Perhaps this something that we can expect from the next upgrade. This matter has been raised as a sugestion on several ocasions. Boyd On 19/06/2013 9:23 a.m., mbstx wrote: > AND in Germany as well in certain areas because only the oldest son > inherited, the younger sons couldn't "set up a household" for many > years because of financial constraints - having a child out of wedlock > in those cases was not condemned, and one can find notes in baptismal > records of "illegitimati" who were legitimized years later by a > notation of the parents' marriage. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jay 1FamilyTree <[email protected]> > Sent: Jun 18, 2013 3:51 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Never married option in Legacy 8 > > In some locations (especially if a proposed marriage involved > either a man and woman relocating from a different governing > jurisdiction) the couple had to prove they were capable of having > a child (by having one) prior to a decision on whether relocation > to the other jurisdiction was or was not allowed to occur, and > prior to a “marriage†being approved to occur (either by either > the church or the civil jurisdictions or both). > > *AND in some areas in the early 1800's it was OK to get a woman > pregnant before a marriage to "be sure" she would not be barren > especially if there was"farm land" to be inherited. * > > > > On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 11:25 AM, Lee Bruch <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > It’s not just an issue with 21^st century. > > In the 17^th and 18^th century (maybe at other times too) in > some areas of what is now called Germany there were various > sanctioned traditions of having children outside of marriage. > (Some of these were called “farm marriagesâ€). > > In some locations (especially if a proposed marriage involved > either a man and woman relocating from a different governing > jurisdiction) the couple had to prove they were capable of > having a child (by having one) prior to a decision on whether > relocation to the other jurisdiction was or was not allowed to > occur, and prior to a “marriage†being approved to occur > (either by either the church or the civil jurisdictions or both). > > *From:* Larry Lee [mailto:[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>] > *Sent:* Tuesday, June 18, 2013 10:24 AM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [LegacyUG] Never married option in Legacy 8 > > John, etal, > > I have seen this discussion several times in the past and > presented my thoughts to the compendium. I favor being able to > assign the proper titles in the labels in Family View. > > I dislike having to make my data 'fit' the software! I also > prefer not to put minutiae in my notes for things the program > should accommodate. > > So, I agree. Relationship window is more correct. Allowing the > use of relationship titles, as a marriage option, would enable > the user to keep their data as they prefer. > > Although I am 'old school' I realize we have moved into the > 21st century and need to be able to use today's terminology > within Legacy. > > > Larry Lee > > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 9:10 AM, John Zimmerman > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Why not simply rename the "Marriage Indormation Window" to > call it the "Relationship Information Window"? > > John Zimmerman > Mesa, AZ > > Sent from my iPhone 5 > > > On Jun 18, 2013, at 8:32 AM, Ronald Bernier > <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > Just curious - how is Millennia confusing newbies? Maybe > Millennia could take a cue from Heredis and call the term to > partner. Of course, this would satisfy some and have others > up in arms. > > > > The only other option is for those who are not happy with > the program to consider writing their own program. Then, they > could have the exact terminology they want and not try to > force a change for those who are satisfied with the status quo. > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > > > On Jun 18, 2013, at 11:25 AM, "Mike Fry" <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > >> On 2013/06/18 16:33, Sherry/Support wrote: > >> > >>> It's incorrect to separate "never married" and "had no > children" > >>> > >>> When a person has a child, a relationship is established > with another person - a > >>> "marriage" is created whether or not the couple was > actually married. It takes > >>> two to make a child (even if one of them is an anonymous > sperm donor!) and both > >>> parents need to be shown. > >>> > >>> On the "marriage" screen, you can indicate that the couple > never married and set > >>> the Status to "Unmarried" or another choice. > >>> > >>> But there must be a relationship with another person to > create a child. > >>> > >>> Therefore it would be incorrect to say "this person never > married" if there was > >>> a child because a relationship has to be established in > Legacy to create that > >>> child..... > >>> > >>> There is no 100% certain way to know if a person never had > any children unless > >>> he or she died before puberty.... I'm sure all of us have > at least one "hidden" > >>> marriage or child that was never acknowledged > >> > >> Ain't English a funny language :-) Methinks it's time for > Millennium to sort > >> their terminology out and stop confusing newbies. > >> > >> -- > >> Regards, > >> Mike Fry > >> Johannesburg (g) > >> > >> > >> > > > > Legacy User Group guidelines: > http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp > Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp > Follow Legacy on Facebook > (http://www.facebook.com/LegacyFamilyTree) and on our blog > (http://news.LegacyFamilyTree.com). > To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp > > > > > Legacy User Group guidelines: > http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp > Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp > Follow Legacy on Facebook > (http://www.facebook.com/LegacyFamilyTree) and on our blog > (http://news.LegacyFamilyTree.com). > To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp > > > > Legacy User Group guidelines: > http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp > Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp > Follow Legacy on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/LegacyFamilyTree) > and on our blog (http://news.LegacyFamilyTree.com). > To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp Follow Legacy on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/LegacyFamilyTree) and on our blog (http://news.LegacyFamilyTree.com). To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
