Hi, Tom you wrote > I did not receive this original thread no worries ... my problem is, an "adopted" child who is listed exactly the same as the biological children in the family sentence, thus "John Lewis and Elspeth Beatson married ... they had four children, Elizabeth, John, Janet and James." Because the surnames are not shown, you can't tell that Elizabeth was _not_ their biological child, her surname was _not_ Lewis but Morwood. > if the last name was not changed then the individual > *usually* is not a court ordered adoption. > there was never a > formal adoption process.....the term used, however, was "adopted". In > these cases the individual can be placed in both families but > "adopted" should be used *only" when it is a legal court action. I have found no record of formal adoption, but the word "adoption" was always used in the family. So what does one call the relationship?? Cheers, Mary Young Legacy User Group Etiquette guidelines can be found at: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp
To find past messages, please go to our searchable archives at: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup%40mail.millenniacorp.com/ To unsubscribe please visit: http://www.legacyfamilytree.com/LegacyLists.asp
