GENIRE-L Archives

Archiver > GENIRE > 1999-08 > 0933661851


From: "Michelle Ehlers" <>
Subject: Re: excessive charges
Date: Mon, 2 Aug 1999 23:30:51 -0700


When I first wrote to the group about this issue, my complaint wasn't so
much about paying for information, as I most certainly do not begrudge
paying my way in this world. However, what I was suggesting was that if
particularly accurate and considerable information is supplied to assist a
search, it is just a tad annoying to receive incorrect information, be told
a 2nd fee is essential for a 2nd try at the search (even using no additional
information), receive the correct information, question why a 2nd fee was
necessary when the information was there all the time and then be given a
somewhat insulting written reprimand. We were not rude in our
correspondence, however the response suggested that the writer really didn't
give a frog's bottom about very more than his own credentials.

I just thought whilst there is most certainly a valid labour component to be
considered, from a business perspective, perhaps if we consider this
enormous business more like a business partnership between researchers and
paying customers, then we must continue to politely try to persuade more
attention to just a little bit more customer service; if nothing but than
for the good of the business.....Michelle
Anne Lamb wrote in message <>...
>From:
>>Here is another place that is a ripoff.
>>I wanted a copy of my grandfathers baptisimal record and I contacted
>>The Catholicarchdioses of Boston and they wanted $25 for it and I told
>>them I thought that was nothing short of thievery. Needless to say, I
>didn"t
>>get the copy
>
>Now, just wait a minute. Let's think this through. What would it take
>for the archivist to get that certificate for you?
>First, you probably knew your grandfather's birthdate and possibly his
>parents' names (but maybe not). But you are unlikely to know the
>baptismal date. The archivist has to go and retrieve the books, or more
>likely microfilms, for the approximate time period and read through all
>the entries starting from the time of his birthdate and going forward
>until the entry was found. Most church record books have the child's
>surname written in the margin, but all the entries are written in Latin
>in that time period. While the archivist probably reads Latin, it is not
>his or her first language, which slows up skimming. When he finds it, he
>has to either photocopy it (often blocking out the names above and below,
>for privacy) or transcribe it. Then he needs to write you a note,
>address and mail the letter, and record the transaction. Then return the
>books or films to their proper location. How long did all this take?
>More than just a few minutes, I'll wager. How much is a professional's
>time worth?
>
>Remember that if this search was for a sacramental reason (a person
>requests his own baptismal record because he is going to be married),
>there would not be a charge. Genealogy is not the primary purpose of the
>archdiocesan archivist.
>
>Some dioceses have allowed their old sacramental records (mainly
>baptismal and marriage, but some burials) to be filmed and made available
>through the FHL (eg. Dioc. of Milwaukee, WI) , some have filmed their
>own and you can search them at their archives, have them search for you
>for a fee, or purchase a copy of the film to use at home (eg. ArchDioc.
>of St. Paul, MN) and others will search them for a fee (Apparently
>Boston), and there may be others who won't permit access at all except by
>the immediate family. It is strictly a local decision. Perhaps a
>courteously framed request by a local genealogy group might be succussful
>in changing the bishop's mind about permitting easier (and thus cheaper)
>access.
>
>Anne Lamb
>
>___________________________________________________________________
>Get the Internet just the way you want it.
>Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
>Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.
>

This thread: