[APG Public List] Adopted children in genealogy

Jacqueline Wilson wilssearch at gmail.com
Sat Nov 13 16:22:46 MST 2010


I was adopted at birth, so there is no way for anyone except for my immediate to know this - sure can't tell by my birth records.  I actually have a copy of the adoption decree which states mother's name and sole surviving parent for father.  **&())*  no name given - whine!!!!!!!   I have been told that I can not apply to places like DAR unless it is by blood.  

As to my client, the youngest is a part of the adoptive family and does not care about biological parent.  As  to the other adopted person, she did not like her adopted family and her family would like to know about her biological one as well.  I did some research on the adoptive family in order to try to find where they may have crossed paths with biological family - but no such luck.  But I will include the information on what I found on both in my report.

It is interesting how some want to know and some do not.  I think wanting to know my history is why genealogy holds such a fascination for me.  

all the best!
~Jackie
On Nov 13, 2010, at 4:11 PM, Christy Fillerup wrote:

Jacqueline, who says?
 
I can tell you my personal experience with this. I am the issue of my mother's first marriage. They divorced when I was 1. Her second husband adopted me when I was 3. He is, and always will be, my father. He raised me and I trace his line as my own. That said, I will also eventually trace my biological father's line as well, primarily for health reasons. Unfortunately there is no quick answer to this question. Each adopted individual views their adoptive parents and their biological parents differently, and thus will have a different view on which lines take priority. In the end I would trace both--just more leads to follow!
 
For a client project I'm with Stephen--ask them what they want. For my own personal lines I would prioritize the parents they spent the most time with--were they old enough when they were adopted to have formed a bond w/the biological parents?
 
Incidentally it would take an above average genealogist to discover I was adopted. If they went purely on my vital records they would never guess. Both my birth and my marriage certificates indicate I am the daughter of my adopted father (Utah issues new birth certificates on adoption.) Only by tracing my mother, and discovering that she had a first marriage at the time I was born, would they ever think to look at adoption and/or court records. Of course they may also take one look at that first marriage, discover it was before my birth date, and decide that there must be two Barbara Oldhams. (No census records would cover that first marriage.)
 
I suspect there are more of these hidden relationships in our family lines than we think there are.
 
Christy Fillerup

On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 2:40 PM, Jacqueline Wilson <wilssearch at gmail.com> wrote:
My problem is this - when the first person of the line is the adopted person, I have been told that I must follow the birth family no matter the legalities of no longer belonging to the birth family even if still related by blood.  (hope that made sense!)

I have a client who has an adopted person in their line.  I am trying to decide how to handle it as far as research goes.  Do I include the adopting family in my research and reports?

Thanks
~Jackie
On Nov 13, 2010, at 1:53 PM, Charles S. Mason, Jr. wrote:



In a couple of my families there was a legal adoption.  In all of my cases
they were 20th century adoptions.  Therefore a legal name change was done in
court.


-----Original Message-----
From: apgpubliclist-bounces+cgrs791=netscape.com at apgen.org
[mailto:apgpubliclist-bounces+cgrs791=netscape.com at apgen.org] On Behalf Of
Mary Swanson
Sent: Saturday, November 13, 2010 2:21 PM
To: apgpubliclist at apgen.org
Subject: [APG Public List] Adopted children in genealogy

I'm interested in the list readers' thoughts concerning the following.  A
husband and wife have two children.  The marriage ends in divorce...the
mother remarries and the ex-husband gives up all rights to his two children.

The two children are then known by their adoptive father's surname.  All
family members know the biological and adoptive father's.  The original
husband would be noted, of course, as the woman's first husband and
biological father of the two children.  But should the children be entered
only under their adopted surname or should the biological surname be
included in parenthesis along with the adopted surname?  Or, is there
another way of entering this situation in a genealogy?
Thanks, Mary




Jacqueline Wilson
Evanston, IL


Masters Student,  Dept. US Military History
American Military University

wilssearch at gmail.com

Professional Indexer, Historian, and Genealogist
Deputy Sheriff for Publications of the Chicago Corral of the Westerners
IASPR Newsletter Editor

"Wilssearch - your service of choice for the indexing challenged genealogist."






Jacqueline Wilson  
Evanston, IL


Masters Student,  Dept. US Military History
American Military University

wilssearch at gmail.com

Professional Indexer, Historian, and Genealogist
Deputy Sheriff for Publications of the Chicago Corral of the Westerners
IASPR Newsletter Editor

"Wilssearch - your service of choice for the indexing challenged genealogist."




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <../attachments/20101113/aa8bec0f/attachment.htm>


More information about the APGPublicList mailing list