Showing posts with label ethics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ethics. Show all posts

Wednesday, August 21, 2019

Ethics in Genealogy

This past Saturday, at the Akron Main Library, Judy Russell presented an all day seminar on Ethics in Genealogy.

Floating Suns sculpture by Don Drumm studios outside the auditorium
at the Main Branch of Akron Summit County Public Library.
Photo provided courtesy of the State Library of Ohio.
https://library.ohio.gov/visit/akron-summit-county-public-library/



Ethics in genealogy is a almost unknown topic in the field, and it was reflected in the attendance numbers. Judy Russell is a nationally-known and top rated speaker in genealogy circles. Any time she speaks, all the seats are always filled.  Of the 400 available seats on Saturday, only 100 were filled. Weren't people interested?



Or perhaps, they just didn't understand exactly what ethics has to do with genealogy...


While I cannot and will not cover everything Judy talked about - besides trying to recreate 4 hours of lecture, it would by a copyright violation - I will share some of what I learned and some resolutions going forward.

Ethics in genealogy is the invisible underpinning that should be the bedrock of everything we do in genealogy and family history research.


First and foremost - DO NO HARM!*

Photo "Primum Non Nocere" provided courtesy of Wiki Commons.



All of the major professional genealogy groups have versions of their Code of Ethics, but it all boils down to the statement above.





If you need more detail, Judy Russell relates it to the rules we are learn in kindergarten:
  • Tell the truth - be honest
  • Play nice with others - courtesy
  • Don't tell tales out of school - respect confidentiality
These rules take many forms, but I will address the ones that I have personally struggled with:

Photo by geralt on pixabay (CC0)


Confidentiality - don't share the story if it isn't your story to tell. This is a hard one for most genealogists. We love to tell the stories. Especially the juicy ones. We love sharing our new discoveries. I have been guilty of violating this:
  • The marriage that took place years after the couple lived together and had children. While relating the story to one of my cousins, the adult child of the couple overheard. They had no idea that their parents weren't married at the time of their birth.
  • The first marriage of my great uncle. I told his adult child, who was from his second marriage,  who had only known their father as a young child, as he died young. I didn't hear from them for months.
Not only is the story not mine to tell. I didn't take into consideration the feelings of the living people who were effected by the information. While the information is true and factual, once it is divulged, you cannot control who learns about it and how it impacts them. 

Photo "Franklin-Benjamin" provided courtesy of
Wiki Commons.




Honesty - Sometimes, the truth destroys the family story, or can be uncomfortable in other ways, such as when we learn of ancestors who held slaves or committed other despicable acts. Sometimes, we have the uncomfortable job is setting the story straight. Our family oral history had several traditions that my research demolished.






  •  No, our 3 x great grandmother was not 3/4 Cherokee, despite the high cheekbones and dark complexion. The paper trail didn't prove it and now, extensive DNA testing of my siblings and various cousins proves there was NO Native American DNA passed down to any of us. DEMOLISHED family legend. At least our family story didn't say she was a "Cherokee Princess"...
  • Another great grandmother was supposed to be "Indian" based on her unusual surname, which proved to be Dutch, and the fact that dogs didn't like her. Her family line has been traced back to the state of Delaware in the 1700's. Family story DESTROYED!
  • My 2x great grandfather was NOT a nice man. He was married twice and had nearly 20 children with his two wives. But by one descendant's count he had over 40 children, 20 of them illegitimate. Not something to be proud of, but which definitely needs to be documented.
Photo provided from Max Pixel(CC0)


Courtesy - or "play nice with others". Judy gave examples of people taking "their" family information from public institutions, when clearly they need to be available to everyone. THAT I have never done. And it is also showing common courtesy to the clerks and volunteers that assist us in our ongoing quest. But I have my own examples of not playing nice with others:
  • I can be VERY impatient with people who are very new to family history research and who really don't know what they are doing. They don't want to put the work in to learn the process of researching and want it all to be laid out for them. Sometimes, genealogy is HARD. But that doesn't mean that I should dismiss their questions and assertions. I need to find a kinder and gentler way of steering them in the right direction. Luckily, I work with a great bunch of people who set a very good example for me.
  • Giving credit where credit is due. Whether it is citing my sources or making notations of who told me which family story, I can be a sloppy researcher. Even when I do cite my sources, as I try to for every blog, I can get sloppy about citation format and layout.  Another example of this is when I use photos from FindaGrave.com. I cite the source, but do not credit the photographer. I will try to do better in the future.
  • Respecting copyrights. I have a very basic understanding of copyright law. But I have often "looked the other way" believing  much of my use of copyrighted material would fall under "fair use". Or that it would only be a problem if someone objected to my use of their material and for that they would have to have stumbled upon my work. I can do better than that.
Photo by Tumisu on pixabay (CC0)


DNA testing. I have "urged" my siblings to have their DNA tested and most of them have agreed. When DNA testing first became available to the average consumer, I assured my siblings that their information could never be used against them without a court order. All of that has changed in the last 18 months. Because of the use of third party web sites, like GedMatch, law enforcement has been able to use peoples' DNA results, that were submitted for genealogical purposes, to track down violent criminals. Without the use of subpoenas. While I believe that to be generally for the public good, it is a substantial change in policy from what I understood and what I communicated to my siblings. Basically, when they gave their consent and their DNA, it wasn't informed consent. I need to go to each of my siblings and inform them of this change and give them the option to withdraw their DNA samples and findings. And also to admit that I cannot say with certainty how their DNA might be used in the future. Besides impacting my siblings in ways we could not have anticipated, it could impact anyone genetically related to us.

So remember:

  • Play nicely with others.
  • Be honest. But never do, say or write something that will in any way hurt a living person.
  • Tell only the stories that are yours to tell.


*While the ancient Greek Hippocrates did not actually say "Do no harm" in his famous Hippocratic Oath, which some doctors are still asked to abide by upon graduation, he did say it in his work Of the Epidemics.

SOURCES:
Posted by at 2 comments:
Labels: , , , ,

Wednesday, October 5, 2016

We All Have 'Em

Black Sheep*


We all have 'em. The ne'er-do-wells. The rascals. The "not mentioned in polite company". And the criminal. (read to the end to learn about my family's many "Black Sheep") Many families never do mention their black sheep relatives. And then there are those who celebrate them: Black Sheep Ancestors.

Question is, what do we do with them when we are documenting the family history?

First of all, we do document them. We document them just like any other ancestor or relative. And luckily, they turn up in the written records more often than their tamer cousins. You will find them listed in the newspaper accounts and in the court systems. You might even find these ne'er-do-wells in the history books.

And we interview our living relatives about these characters. And this is where it can get a little sticky, because not everyone will see these individuals in the same light as a genealogist looking to flesh out the lives of ALL of the relatives. Some people would really rather NOT talk about them. Or they might try to gloss over the perceived shortcomings of the eccentric members of the family. And just how hard to you push your living relatives about these "oddballs"?

Recently, I read an article from a respected genealogist who said that you pressure the reluctant relative to reveal all they know about their more infamous ancestors because "you will find it out one way or another". And by answering your questions they at least have a chance to give their side of the story.

I do not agree with this tactic. To begin with, by pressuring someone to reveal family history that they are not comfortable revealing pretty well guarantees that you will never be invited back for more interviews. You could cause real grief and possibly a rift in the family. Also, that person will never want to talk to anyone else about the family either, thereby closing off an avenue of discovery.

Judy Russell, The Legal Genealogist, recently posted about this topic on her blog:
The Legal Genealogist and she re-posted from another blog hosted by her friend and Certified Genealogist, Debbie Parker Wayne, Deb's Delvings in Genealogy. Deb says that these sensitive situations should be dealt with using Context. Empathy. Time. 

Basically, you want to treat ALL your relatives, the living and the dead, with respect. (EMPATHY) You don't pressure them into revelations that they will regret later and you don't broadcast all of their misdoings for the entertainment or edification of others.

TIME. If an incident happened 100 or 200 years ago and everyone immediately involved is long since dead, the effects of revealing an indiscretion are going to be minimal.

So you will want to "shield" some of your family information and not publicly broadcast it while the interested people are still alive. This is just a common courtesy. You don't lie about it. And you can share the information in a respectful manner.

And while I have a number of "black sheep" stories about my living relatives, the following events all relate to individuals who have long been dead:
Not just for sinners

  • One of my great grandfathers was often quoted as saying "Stop Signs are for sinners." It was always said to indicate that he never heeded stop signs.  A newspaper article about his traffic violations seems to confirm this little tidbit. (But as we are all "sinners" wouldn't this indicate that stop signs were for everyone?)
  • Another grandfather went to prison for 5-10 years for attempted manslaughter. He told the judge that he was just trying to scare the victim into telling him where his wife was. As he was an avid hunter and only wounded the victim, I suspect the he was "under the influence" at the time of the incident. He was also wounded during the exchange and was found walking up and down the street in front of his house by the sheriff. When asked what he was doing, he replied that he was afraid to go into the house by himself because he believed he would bleed to death. I would like to nominate this relative for an episode of America's Dumbest Criminals.
    Grandpa?
  • This same grandfather was arrested as a young man for "disturbing the peace on the Sabbath" as he raced his horse past a church during service, whooping and hollering at the congregants.
  • And in yet another example of bad decision making, this man left his wife and 3 young children for his sister-in-law, eventually having a fourth child by her. His wife, not to be out-done by her errant husband, also took up with another man and had his child before finally filing for divorce some 9 years later.
  • One of my 2 X great grandfathers was arrested for not showing up when was drafted
    Battle Flag of the 76th OVI
    for the second time during the Civil War. In his defense, he did show up the first time and was part of the Bloody 76th OVI. He had a medical discharge from that unit due to a "head injury received in camp, but not related to any battle injury". When he was later called up for the Ohio 43rd, he just did not show up. So they came and got him. Thirty years after the Civil War ended, his wife had him committed to an Insane Asylum for locking her out of the house. His commitment papers sound a lot like he was suffering from Alzheimer's which has been passed down on that side of the family.
  • Another, more distant, relative was sentenced for horse theft in 1820's Delaware. The Governor commuted his sentence, but the commutation arrived too late. The "corporal punishment" had already been administered. I am still researching to find out what that corporal punishment was.
I could go on, and on, and on... Yep, we all got 'em.


*Wikipedia definition of Black Sheep.
Posted by at 2 comments:
Labels: , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)