GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-05 > 1116527634
Subject: Re: [DNA] Non-paternity
Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 14:33:54 EDT
Yes, and this is the case with my ggggrandfather. We had family verbal lore
passed down through the generations, letters from his mother, etc to
document the paternity, geographic proximity & local history. Plenty of
documentation that we believed, but no legal documents.
No "duped" daddy; rather, a well-known out-of-wedlock birth.
Results from Y chromosome DNA tests of 9th & 3rd cousins confirmed the
paternity & link into the paper trail back 11 generations to our immigrant
ancestor from Dorset, 1620.
In a message dated 5/19/2005 10:55:21 AM Pacific Standard Time,
In the "duped daddy" case, documentation might be tough. The child would be
legitimate, since the term normally would apply when the couple either got
married or were already married when the pregnancy was discovered.
Doug McDonald <> wrote:
The real phrase that correctly describes "non-paternity event"
for our DNA-genealogy purposes is "bad documentation". It doesn't
matter whether somebody is adopted, or a bastard, if it is correctly
documented. One of he most famous of my ancestors was a bastard, but
we all know who the parents were.
Admin: FTDNA Humphrey project
Co-Admin: FTDNA Liles project
multi-family project:Humphrey, Liles, Morton