Every time I hear the controversy of whether or not certain genealogy data
should be published, I am reminded of a letter I have written in 1910 by a
family member who left out some information about people still living ...
month, day & location of relatives born in 1840 & 1850; birth date of a
child whose father was her step-father, and etc. That information is lost
forever.
I see my job as a genealogist, as preserving the facts. It's hard to
imagine, in this day & age, that information from the 1950's, 60's &
70's
being lost forever ... but I hear quite often from folks born during that
time period, who can't find their ancestors because some family member for
some reason or the other didn't want to pass on the facts. Therefore ... I
record everything, living or dead, good or bad.
Pat Sabin wrote:
This particular person who complained is trying to stand on
the statutes to say that her parents' divorce should not be
listed because their birth dates are less than 100 years.
That doesn't sound like a valid complaint...
I would agree wi th you ... CT
makes death records available, and many of
them contain birth dates.
... but if it includes something that hurts one half of the family,
I guess it would have to be considered on a case by case basis.
That's what I
dd, when someone requests me to remove something ... which
has happened only three times in the last five years. So far I've only had
to remove month & day of birth to make the protester happy. On the other
hand, today I added the birth date of a new relative ... November 13 2009
... at the request of his mom, because that's the date her C-Section is for.
Daryl