TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2010-02 > 1267312857


From: Pierce Reid <>
Subject: Re: [TMG] Actual place of birth and death
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2010 15:20:57 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <mailman.1033.1267085486.20875.tmg@rootsweb.com>


Lee Hoffman wrote:

<<A close friend collapsed in her daughter-in-law's business. The
doctor was right next door. He came and immediately called the
ambulance to take the friend to the hospital where she was declared
dead on arrival. The doctor later told me that the friend was
already dead when he arrived, but he did not want the daughter-in-law
to worry that there was something that she could have done. He said
that the friend probably was already dead by the time they called
him. In this case, the death certificate states that the death
occurred at the hospital rather than at the place of business and the
time was some fifteen minutes later than actual. A difference, but
not of any significance. I have her in TMG dying at the hospital as
that is what the death certificate says.>>

I have a general rule: don't lie to your data base (except maybe where you have to be sensitive to living people).

You have conflicting evidence, both credible. That is hardly unusual in genealogy.

Which is the most creditable, the doctor on the scene or the doctor at the hospital?

I would say the doctor at the scene. The doctor at the hospital may have tried to revive the person, but couldn't say for sure whether death occurred before it arrived, or soon after he/she first saw the person. That doctor made the final determination of death, and could only give the location where he/she was.

Both sets of evidence should be recorded (which I presume you did) and you come to your own conclusion when entering the death tag.

As you said, in this case it was probably of no significance. But I would handled it differently.

Pierce

This thread: