GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2004-02 > 1076067543


From: "ernest hurst" <>
Subject: RE: [DNA] Non-paternity/hidden break
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 06:39:03 -0500


Pam

Thanks for an excellent explanation of "possibilities" that might cause a
"hidden break". The statement that "no such thing existed" made me laugh.
I've found five, two from bastardy bonds, two from Y DNA "disconnects"
(14/25 or 13/25 mismatches) and one from a mysterious name change on
census, later verified with other descendants, just in a couple of the
families I've researched a lot. The only ones I can "prove" as illegitimate
kids are the bonds - others may have been any of other possibilities you
listed.

Ernie Hurst, IBSSG


> [Original Message]
> From: Pam <>
> To: <>
> Date: 2/6/2004 3:27:35 AM
> Subject: [DNA] Non-paternity/hidden break
>
> It would strain credulity to assume that we can know all of our
ancestors'
> reproductive or family secrets--or that they had none. Human frailties
have been
> the same throughout the ages. A "non-paternity event" (I prefer the
term
> hidden break myself) need not have been the result of someone's sainted
grandma
> fooling around with the milkman, though infidelity has always been more
common
> than some want to believe. We like to think of our ancestors in more
elevated
> terms.
>
> What about all the babies that wound up floating in the bullrushes or
left on
> the steps of convents throughout history? Babies mixed up in hospitals or
> elsewhere and never discovered? Those from large families "shared" with
> childless relatives. Think of all the rapes in history that resulted in
> pregnancies. The families who took in orphans or runaways and raised them
as
> their own? A daughter's love child being raised as her sibling? The
children of
> priests. Stolen children or those captured and kept by conquerors. Men
who
> married abandoned women pregnant by someone else. All these people
contributed
> to the gene pool with everyone else and some of them are bound to be our
> ancestors. The circumstances of their conception or early life may never
have
> been known even to themselves, or never spoken of if outside any social
norm of
> the time. In a few generations such knowledge is lost, even if once
known.
> Regardless of paper trails, I think it is safest to assume that many or
most
> genealogy lines of much length have potential for hidden breaks that can
really
> be disproved only by DNA testing. Regardless, historical events should
have no
> shame for us now. --Pam B.
>
> Richard Cottrell wrote:
>
> > Mr. Bond,
> >
> > I know for a fact it is not a non-paternity event because of documents
and
> > records that I have on my ancestor.
> >
> > I also know because I have accounts from great granddaughter that gave
> > accounts on my ancestor that coincide with the documents and records.
And
> > that individual did not know anything about what documents and records
> > stated about my ancestor because that individual did not care about
doing
> > anything called genealogy research.
> >
> > And that descendent of my ancestor did not tell me that about my
ancestor
> > because that is what that person wanted me to believe, but rather, that
> > person told me that on my ancestor because it was the truth.
> >
> > So not everyone in the world that doesn't match they way DNA testing
wants
> > everyone to believe doesn't mean they are adopted, nor a illegimate
child,
> > or a product of a name change.
> >
> > Richard
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Andrew Bond" <>
> > To: <>
> > Sent: Sunday, February 01, 2004 8:45 AM
> > Subject: Re: [DNA] Is there anyone on the list that can give me a
conclusive
> > answer as to which rule is the "Standard Rule for the 12 marker world
> > standard test".
> >
> > > How do you know for a fact that there isn't a non-paternity event?
> > >
> > > Andrew Bond
> > >
> > > Richard Cottrell <> wrote:
> > > >I know for a fact there is no non-paternity event.
> > >
> > >
> > > ==============================
> > > Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration
> > > Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more.
> > > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237
> > >
> > >
> >
> > ==============================
> > Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration
> > Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more.
> > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237
>
>
> ==============================
> Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration
> Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more.
> http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237


This thread: