Who Should Be On the Family Tree?

...
The New York Times published "Who's On the Family Tree? Now It's Complicated" yesterday (note, the article may disappear soon) describing modern family structures that include blended families, surrogate mothers, sperm donors, adoptions, etc.

So just who should be included in our genealogy and family history research?  Several genea-bloggers discussed this in June - see my post More Thoughts on "Scientific" and "Traditional" Genealogy and linked posts to other writers for the discussion. 

The Association of Professional Genealogists (APG) have a Public Mailing List (see Archives here) and have been addressing the Times article over the past two days.  There are several threads in the July 2011 posts.  Some of the interesting and challenging posts include:

*  Michelle Kemper has three present-day examples
*  Ray Beere Johnson suggests "Cultural," "Biological/Medical" and "Legal" definitions
*  Jacqueline Wilson notes that, as an adoptee, she is prohibited from joining some lineage groups (e.g., DAR) on her adoptive parents lines
*  Gayle A. Livecchia thinks the DAR rule is disgusting and discriminatory.
*  Joan Young explains that the DAR membership is based on blood lineal descent.
*  John Wiley notes the "the-husband-of-the-mother-is-not-the-father-of-child" percentage may be about 10%

The discussion continues - I selected some of them above, please read all of the threads in the Archives for content and context.

Some of the discussion on the APG list went into an "inclusive" vs. "exclusive" argument about rules and membership criteria (gee, just like the current American cultural discussions, eh?), but done in a civil manner (good, the APGen list has rules too!). 

I like Ray Beere Johnson's categories of "family types" (my interpretation):

1.  "Cultural" (or "Emotional," "Private" or "Social") -- those in a "family" structure (married, unmarried, adoptive, same sex, sperm bank, surrogate, etc.)

2.  "Genetic" (or "Biological") -- those with DNA from the provider of the sperm and the egg.

3.  "Legal" --  those specified in a legal document (e.g., birth record, marriage record, adoptive, probate, deed, etc.)

My opinion:  I think that every genealogical researcher should know the differences between those three categories, accept them as such, and perform whatever research they choose to follow.  Genealogy software and online trees should be inclusive and permit identification of the correct relationships and permit reports and charts to reflect what the user desires.  Genealogists who enter data on forms, into software and family trees, or books, articles, manuscripts and websites should be truthful, but sensitive about "family secrets" and information about living people.  Private groups can create whatever rules they want to, and people can choose to apply or not. 

What say you?  Do you agree with the three categories above?  How would you better describe them, or categorize them? 

Isn't it interesting how a human interest story about two children who are step-siblings and cousins can lead to the genealogical community discussing the broader issue?

The URL for this post is http://www.geneamusings.com/2011/07/who-should-be-on-family-tree.html

(c) 2011. Randall J. Seaver. All Rights Reserved. If you wish to re-publish my content, please contact me for permission, which I will usually grant. If you are reading this on any other genealogy website, then they have stolen my work.

UPDATED:  Edited and added some terms in my definitions.