TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2010-02 > 1267000956

From: DE Neilley <>
Subject: Re: [TMG] Actual place of birth and death
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2010 01:42:36 -0700
References: <BLU0-SMTP68B66BBC74F2140ECCA027DA410@phx.gbl><004201cab4f6$c7526220$0200a8c0@viking7><005d01cab4f8$6ea003b0$4be00b10$@net> <><> <><> <>
In-Reply-To: <>

Let's get a little extreme about this - what about someone who dies on
holiday while rock climbing in Alaska, but lives in Alberta? Without
recording the actual place of death, a researcher could be looking for
records in Alberta, Canada instead of Alaska, USA.

Take it down a notch. There is a city in Alberta which straddles the
border between Alberta and Saskatchewan. The hospital is in
Saskatchewan. If someone died at home on the Alberta side and a doctor
declared them dead there, you would apply for a copy of the death
certificate from the Alberta Registries. But if they died in the
hospital, you would have to apply to the Sask Registries.

To my mind, most of us are doing all of this research and recording
with a view to passing it on to someone in the future. "Little things"
like my granddaughter knowing that her great-uncle died on Hwy 621
near Range Road 75, rather than just "near town x" might be of
interest to her. So why NOT record the actual place of death?

Doreen Neilley

On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 11:47 PM, Darrell A. Martin
<> wrote:
> Rick Van Dusen wrote:
> [snip]
> >
> > But I still can't think of any cases where place of death would matter,
> > although time of death could make a difference, e.g. where two people
> > die at approximately the same time and pre-decease affects an estate.

This thread: