MOGREENE-L Archives

Archiver > MOGREENE > 2003-07 > 1058563255


From: Ben Franklin <>
Subject: Re: [MOGreene] Greene Co. death records circa 1916
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 17:20:55 -0400
References: <IHEKIDEMOIDDINIANDCJAEJCDGAA.robinkaspar@comcast.net> <003501c34d2b$87255890$6501a8c0@Audrey>
In-Reply-To: <003501c34d2b$87255890$6501a8c0@Audrey>


Yes!

The way I usually teach this is to remind people that in our culture, it
is considered poor form to ask the dying person information needed to
fill out the death certificate. Therefore, the information is provided
by someone else, usually a grieving family member, who is in no shape to
answer the questions and does not necessarily know the answers. No one
researches the correctness of the information given, and if an answer is
not known, the space is left blank, or sometimes filled in with "Not known".

When death certificates are described in terms of "primary" vs.
"secondary" source material, one way of describing them is to say that
they are a primary source for information about the death and burial,
and secondary, at best, for the other information. As with other
records, the further from the event, the less accurate the information
tends to be.

Ben


Audrey Stanaland wrote:

>
> ...Death Certificates are very revealing for the info provided by a
surviving
> family member at time of death---but I'm realizing that even that info
> relies on just how much info that person or family knows.
>


This thread: