Thanks, Tom, for your clear advice. On 5/25/05, Tom Montgomery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If there was no legal adoption then the child should not be > listed as such So, I have marked her as "Foster". > ......she should be listed with her own bio nuclear family. Yes, she is there also > if the bio family is blood related then that is the end of it The baby's mother died soon after the birth, and she was placed with a young couple only just married, two years before they had their first child. I feel she was probably related ... but not yet found the link. > if she was the child of a non related > family, i. e. friend, and raised as one of their own then it is not so > easy .. you can leave her off the children listing ... Prefer to have her listed with the family she knew as her own. > If you decide to list her be sure to use the > proper surname, not the name of her new family This is the nub of my original query - the family sentence in DNBR does *not* make any *difference* between her and the 3 bio children, it implies they all have the same surname.. But I guess I must accept that and be very careful to annotate everywhere I can <vbg> 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
