GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2007-10 > 1192828323


From: (John Chandler)
Subject: Re: [DNA] Response to genetic genealogists from authors ofOct. 19th Science article
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 17:12:03 -0400 (EDT)
References: <7.0.1.0.2.20071019121224.02154e80@nature.berkeley.edu><E82B04D7-6A1E-4444-AD1B-6AB3695E05D0@utoronto.ca>
In-Reply-To: <E82B04D7-6A1E-4444-AD1B-6AB3695E05D0@utoronto.ca> (message fromGabriela Novak on Fri, 19 Oct 2007 16:15:39 -0400)


Gabriela wrote:
> From the article:
>
> "Test-takers may reshape their personal identities, and they may
> suffer emotional distress if test results are unexpected or
> undesired" - I have yet to see any evidence of that, this is fear
> mongering.

Actually, this is true, and I have seen it happen. A large amount
of genealogy is done cooperatively by groups sharing a common
ancestor. Under these conditions, the members of a group have a
big investment in the shared heritage, and the discovery that one
or more members do not really share that heritage can shake the
group as well as re-orient the affected members. If it were simply
a matter of a previously unsuspected false paternity, the cultural
and familial heritage would still be shared, but the fact is that
genetic disproofs often signify that the supposed connection was
based on a genealogical blunder all along.

John Chandler

This thread: