"the old "genealogy vs. family history" debate" is not a debate. They are the same thing, as one can be used to define the other. See 3 dictionasry entries below
>From the Encarta World Dictionary: ge�ne�al�o�gy [jnee �lljee ] (plural ge�ne�al�o�gies) noun 1. study of the history of families: the study of the history of families and the line of descent from their ancestors 2. family history: a pedigree or line of descent that can be traced directly from an ancestor or earlier form, especially that of an individual or family 3. family tree: a chart or table that shows the line of descent from an ancestor or earlier form, especially that of an individual or family [14th century. Via French g�n�alogie from, ultimately, Greek genealogia , from genea "race, generation."] >From Webster's Dictionary: ge�ne�al�o�gy Etymology: Middle English genealogie, from Middle French, from Late Latin genealogia, from Greek, from genea race, family + -logia -logy; akin to Greek genos race Date: 14th century 1 : an account of the descent of a person, family, or group from an ancestor or from older forms 2 : regular descent of a person, family, or group of organisms from a progenitor or older form : PEDIGREE 3 : the study of family pedigrees >From Dictionary.com ge�ne�al�o�gy Pronunciation Key (jn-l-j, -l-, jn-) n. pl. ge�ne�al�o�gies 1. A record or table of the descent of a person, family, or group from an ancestor or ancestors; a family tree. 2. Direct descent from an ancestor; lineage or pedigree. 3. The study or investigation of ancestry and family histories. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------- [Middle English genealogie, from Old French, from Late Latin genelogia, from Greek genelogi : gene, family; see gen- in Indo-European Roots + -logi, -logy.] -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Aliceann or Scott Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2002 9:56 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] QUESTION Robert-- Not to unreasonably revisit old ground, but this situation again raises the question of purpose of your research. Which is, simply, the old "genealogy vs. family history" debate. If your file is intended to reflect genealogy, then the inclusion of a gene or two would be important. A family member who does not meet this qualification ... while a member of the "family" ... is not a member of the FAMILY. (If that makes any sense.) If, on the other hand, a gene or two IS included, one is effectively presented with a modern equivalent of what all of us, I presume, have from time to time encountered -- the old "unknown" spouse, father, mother, etc. Any person can, of course, be included in the Legacy file as an unlinked individual... linked only by notes or events or such should you elect to go that route. Not sure this helps, but the political correctness and social sensitivities issues have been around a long time and are not likely to go away any time soon. Scott Carlton ----- Original Message ----- From: Robert Carneal Saturday, March 09, 2002 8:28 AM You hit the nail on the head. What the answer is, I am not sure. I mean I know what the answer is, but I can't think of an answer that everyone will be happy to live with. I am still struggling with this one: Couple who cannot have a child get friends of theirs to bear a child for them. They had agreed to let him get her pregnant (what that means, I can take more than one way). It did not "take" so rather ask the husband of the couple if he wanted to try it again and embarrass him , she got a mixed high school male kid to get her pregnant. Paid him $10.00. She admits it, if you ask her. HIS name? No one knows, and the real mother says she doesn't either- she called him off the street. (I hope he was at least 18, but I have a funny feeling perhaps not). The real mother admits she is his mother. Admits she took $500 to bear a kid for the couple. (Is this even legal?) I guess we +should+ decide what is best for the kid now that he has been born. I can tell he isn't all American, he "looks" 75 percent American, and Indian & Taiwan half & half for the remaining part. (I can see a problem. How long before other kids say "he was made in Taiwan?") Ok, uuuuhhhhhh, how do I do this delicately and professionally? The parents wanting the child suggested I just label him as child by unnatural means and explain they paid for him by getting other people to bear him. I am not sure yet. That sounded awfully close to: "Let's go to McDonald's and get us a blue eyed- blonde kid." The parents are going to tell the kid that he was "purchased" when he is old enough. I am still working on this one, just not sure how to enter him. He deserves to be entered- he IS part of the family now. Robert To unsubscribe please visit: http://www.legacyfamilytree.com/LegacyLists.asp Legacy User Group Etiquette guidelines can be found at: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp To unsubscribe please visit: http://www.legacyfamilytree.com/LegacyLists.asp Legacy User Group Etiquette guidelines can be found at: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp
