ROOTSMAGIC-USERS-L Archives

Archiver > ROOTSMAGIC-USERS > 2003-03 > 1048402426


From: Peter & Glenis Gibbs <>
Subject: Re: [RMagic] Adoptions
Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 18:57:05 +1200
References: <148.d6ca556.2baba085@aol.com>


I've just read all the letters on this topic, because I have two adopted
children. In our case they both found their birth families, and they chose
not to keep in regular contact, except one struck a friendship with his
half-brother. They have not chosen to change their names back and so they
are included in our tree as a member of it. Their names prior to adoption
are shown as a note in their record, and no details as to the parent as it
is not of relevance to us.

All I can say, everyone will probably see it different - there is no right
way.

Peter

----- Original Message -----
From: <>
To: <>
Sent: Friday, March 21, 2003 10:53 AM
Subject: Re: [RMagic] Adoptions


> Still don't have a satisfactory answer to my original question.
>
> In my case, a daughter was adopted OUT of my ancestry. The adoption was
> necessary -- a totally incapacitating illness on the mother's part. None
of
> us knew anything about the daughter until recently, and while she knew she
> was adopted, she was only recently able to find her blood roots -- and is
> completely thrilled (at age 87!) to know she has living cousins!
>
> I have now entered her into my family tree, under her birth name;
however,
> she spent most of her adult life under her adopted name, and I would like
to
> show that name, and also honor her adoptive parents. There seems to be no
> easy way to do this -- even if I enter her adopted name as an "alternate
> name", it doesn't show up in the person list!
>
> So, now that we've had all the discussions and opinions about which family
an
> adopted child belongs in -- can someone tell me how best to do what I
want --
> or even comment on whether it's possible?!
>
> Dave Bartholomew
>

This thread: