RootsChat.Com
General => Ancestral Family Tree DNA Testing => Topic started by: Tsu on Friday 26 January 18 12:55 GMT (UK)
-
I'm helping my husband find the biological family of his adopted grandfather.
His grandmother's side of the tree is well researched and there are lots of version of it online. His maternal grandfather is a complete mystery apart from the name of his birth mother and his date of birth.
He has had an Ancestry DNA test done and I have been slowly working my way through the possible mothers (common name in the place he was born).
I'm now in the position where I have a possible birth mother and a close cousin who is also researching but I haven't managed to persuade her to also take the Ancestry DNA test.
The only match on the tree is for someone who is the '1st cousin of wife of 1st cousin 2x removed' and I can't get my head around whether that makes her related by DNA to the birth mother or not. If it isn't the birth mother, could it be somehow connected to the birth father (who doesn't appear on the original birth certificate).
I really need a second pair of eyes on this. Can any clear-headed person assist?
-
Here's what the distant cousin said (names redacted):
Here's how I'm related, broken down (literally just copied and pasted)
Margaret E P (my husband's assumed great grandmother) (1887 - 1925 )
1st cousin of wife of 1st cousin 2x removed
James P (1853 - 1906)
father of Margaret E P
William P (1813 - )
father of James P
David P (1850 - 1940)
son of William P
Jane Elisabeth P (1879 - 1968)
daughter of David P
Cadwaladr J (1880 - 1959)
husband of Jane Elisabeth P
Mary H (1848 - )
mother of Cadwaladr J
Hugh H (1822 - 1898)
father of Mary H
Hugh H (1853 - 1912)
son of Hugh H
Catherine H (1886 - 1944)
daughter of Hugh H
Norah N (1920 - 1998)
daughter of Catherine H
You are the daughter of Norah N
See what I mean?
The area they are all born and lived in is a smallish area of north Wales (if it helps).
-
Hi Tsu,
I'm not sure if I understand your question, but I have had a look at the family tree information you have given and drawn up a family tree.
I don't know how well I can draw up the tree here, but, if I've got it right, there are two lines of descent, each with two branches, like this:
William P Hugh H
| | | |
James P David P Mary H Hugh H
| | | |
Marg EP Jane P ------------ J Cadwaladr Cath H
|
Norah H
|
"You" - I presume this means your husband.
Now it is clear, if that diagram is correct, that there is no DNA in common between Marg EP and "you" - the only connection between the two lines is by marriage (J Cadwaladr & Jane P). If there is actually a match, there must be a connection not shown, probably further back.
I don't know if that helps. Have I understood the family tree and the question?
-
Hi
Eric I think you have drawn the tree correctly. I take it all to mean that Catherine H's husband, who was adopted, was the son of Margaret EP? I think
-
Thank you both.
Margaret E P was the mother of my husband's adopted grandfather. The daughter of Norah H is the DNA match on Ancestry that I have been in contact with. She is showing as being related by DNA to my husband.
It's odd that Margaret E P is on her tree if they're not related but that must mean that Norah's daughter is related to the as yet unidentified father of his grandfather, which is exciting. I just have to work out who.
-
Hi Tsu, DNA is way over the top of my head at present and have been reading as many forums as I can, and I hope to improve on it all. I have ordered a kit through Ancestry which according to the delivery tracker, is due to arrive on Thursday.
-
Hi Tsu,
The information you are giving us isn’t quite clear to me yet. Do you mind if I clarify?
Assuming I have drawn the tree correctly, we can now add your husband’s adopted grandfather as the daughter of Marg EP, and the daughter of Norah we can now show as your husband’s match.
Now when you say “husband’s adopted grandfather” (let’s call him X), do you mean X was adopted by Marg EP, or that X was the son of Marg EP and he adopted your husband’s father? Whichever way, I think it means that Marg EP is not related biologically to your husband, is that correct?
If I have understood all this correctly (and it is quite complex, so I may not), then your husband must be related biologically to the H family, and adopted into the P family, which I think is what you are saying in your last paragraph.
It could be that someone in the H family had a child outside of marriage, and that child was adopted by the P family because they were connected by marriage. If this is so, it seems that your task is to estimate the number of generations back to the common ancestor between your husband and his match.
I don’t think I am telling you anything new, just working out for myself, but hopefully it may help confirm your thinking.
You don’t say what is the estimated match relationship but that will give you an idea of how far back you need to go - if an nth cousin than it will be n+1 generations back to the common ancestor. From the tree I have drawn, it seems the match is one generation further back than your husband. So, for example, if the match is 4th cousin, then it will be 5 generations back approximately - maybe 5 on the match's side and 6 on your husband's, or 5 on your husband's and 4 on the match's. That means that someone in your tree (Hugh H senior) may be the common ancestor, or maybe his parents. So that tells you where to start, by looking at children and grandchildren of the common ancestor.
I hope that helps.
-
Hi Tsu,
The information you are giving us isn’t quite clear to me yet. Do you mind if I clarify? Not at all
Assuming I have drawn the tree correctly, we can now add your husband’s adopted grandfather as the daughter of Marg EP, and the daughter of Norah we can now show as your husband’s match. Yes, my husband's grandfather is the son of Margaret EP and Norah's daughter is my husband's Ancestry match.
Now when you say “husband’s adopted grandfather” (let’s call him X), do you mean X was adopted by Marg EP, or that X was the son of Marg EP and he adopted your husband’s father? Whichever way, I think it means that Marg EP is not related biologically to your husband, is that correct? Husband's grandfather was given up for adoption by Margaret EP. Margaret was his biological mother. The father's name is blank on the original birth certificate.
If I have understood all this correctly (and it is quite complex, so I may not), then your husband must be related biologically to the H family, and adopted into the P family, which I think is what you are saying in your last paragraph.
It could be that someone in the H family had a child outside of marriage, and that child was adopted by the P family because they were connected by marriage. If this is so, it seems that your task is to estimate the number of generations back to the common ancestor between your husband and his match.
I don’t think I am telling you anything new, just working out for myself, but hopefully it may help confirm your thinking.
You don’t say what is the estimated match relationship but that will give you an idea of how far back you need to go - if an nth cousin than it will be n+1 generations back to the common ancestor. From the tree I have drawn, it seems the match is one generation further back than your husband. So, for example, if the match is 4th cousin, then it will be 5 generations back approximately - maybe 5 on the match's side and 6 on your husband's, or 5 on your husband's and 4 on the match's. That means that someone in your tree (Hugh H senior) may be the common ancestor, or maybe his parents. So that tells you where to start, by looking at children and grandchildren of the common ancestor.
I hope that helps.
The match shows as a high confidence 4th - 6th cousin.
-
Intrigued by your problem, I have modified Eric's chart from the further details you gave. If I understood them correctly, there appears to be no blood relationship between your husband and the DNA match through the names shown here. But of course there are many people missing from the chart who may make the blood connection.
Mike.
-
Thanks Mike. That's what I thought too but what a co-incidence!
Of course, I don't definitively know that Margaret EP is "the" Margaret P who appears on the grandfather's birth certificate. I'm slowly ruling them out one by one. It's a fairly small area where I know she lived but there are a lot of them as I don't know her exact age.
The biological mother's family were friends with the adoptive family and the adoption was arranged before the birth and done privately. The child was given the names chosen by the adoptive family at birth.
I wonder if it's the biological father's DNA he's being matched with?
-
DNA is foreign territory for me at the moment, but if the confidence is high for a 4th-6th cousin I would think a bit more research on that family is worthwile.
If my maths is right (not guaranteed!) there are 32 possible common ancestors for 4th cousins. The marriage between Jane Elisabeth and Cadwaladr could be a red herring - a simple coincidence, if both families lived in the same area for several generations.
Mike.
-
Hi Tsu, thanks for that clarification. I can see I still had it a little wrong. But I think Mike has got the family tree correct now.
So it seems we are trying to identify the biological father of Margaret EP's child, and that child is your husband's grandfather. And as Mike has observed, there is no biological connection in the tree so far that explains the match. So it seems that there are two connections between the P family and the H family - the one through the marriage of Jane P and J Calwaladr, and the other via the relationship between Margaret EP and this unknown man. Such linked family trees must be common in small villages in UK.
So as I said before, since the match is 4-6 cousins (and my limited experience with Ancestry suggests 4th or 5th may be most likely), it seems likely that the common ancestor is Hugh H senior's father, perhaps his grandfather or perhaps even Hugh himself. That would mean that the biological father we are looking for is Hugh H senior's grandchild, or his father's, uncle's or aunt's great grandchild. If you know that part of the family tree, you may be able to draw all of these generations and identify everyone who could be the one. You seem to be experienced enough to work all that out.
The tricky bit will then be to work out which of the possibilities is the right one, and that may require some more DNA testing down some of those lines, which may or may not be possible. But if you don't have too many branches in that tree and not too many possible fathers of Margaret P's child, and if some people in those lines are willing to test, then it might be possible to work it out.
There are websites, forums and organisations that specialise in helping with adoptions, and you may find some better advice there, but that is as much as I can understand.
-
Good luck with this
I'm not sure I understand your tree but I can offer encouragement
My grandmother was adopted too we knew her maiden name and that she.d got married and had a son but didn't know the surname
By finding a 3rd cousin match who didn't match any of my paternal family on DNA or any of the birth fathers family we worked out he must be her descendant...asked what his grandmother s maiden name was ....bingo
We had the name of the birth father tho
You can sometimes find that from a court case ...do you know the child's origins l name ?
Sometimes informal adoptions were by family members ..married sisters cousins or aunts so there could be DNA connection there too
Have you tried looking at your DNA matches by location rather than by name ...I've just found that function !