RootsChat.Com

Hello, and many thanks to Nick for starting this debate on the topic of DNA testing when it comes to family tree research 

Y-DNA testing definately has its place in genealogy research, and is a very useful tool in the kit of researchers. I admit the cost can be a hindrance. That said, the cost is coming down all the time, and you need to keep an eye open for specials that are announced now and then (I'm a Familytree DNA customer, and they had one last December 2012).

Those people who have been able to explore both their maternal and paternal lines of their families, in great depth, are very fortunate. I haven't been so fortunate, for I've hit an "illegitimacy brick wall", like some other researchers that I've come across, and can sympathise with those people. My paternal grandfather was illegitimate, and there is a big "NR" in capital letters on the part of his birth certificate where his father's information is supposed to be. I've explored my mother's side, and my father's mother's side, but have gotten NOWHERE with my father's father's side. It would be lovely to know what my actual maiden name should have been, and I get a bit annoyed when some people disparage DNA research for genealogy purposes. How lucky they are to not have a big brick wall to try and break down without needing to resort to DNA testing. It means so much to me to solve this mystery, and to find out my paternal roots.

So anyway... back to my paternal grandfather...

He was told, in later years, that his biological father was a BURGESS. Instead of blindly accepting that bit of information, I researched the Burgess family in New Zealand (where I live) and I entertained the possibility of using DNA to test this theory (after all, what use is a paper trail when you cannot prove that paper trail?) At least I had a surname to go on - what was there to lose? So in 2009 I sent my brother's DNA off to the FTDNA company, requesting a Y-67 marker test. My results came back... no close matches at that stage, which was a bit of a disappointment. Still, I was optimistic that in time, as more people got tested, I'd be closer to solving the mystery of my paternal line. A year or so later, I get a Y-67 one step removed result with a DICKSON. Scratching my head, I asked for advice from the Burgess Surname Project administrator (Michael Burgess), and he said the only way forward was to enlist a male from the Burgess family that I could be connected with.

Then I had a serendipitous discovery a couple of years ago. My son's teacher, a Burgess, came from that NZ Burgess family that could possibly be my biological paternal line! It wasn't so straightforward, however, because this teacher is a female (I needed a sample from a male). After while of agonising on exactly how to broach this idea with her ("Hey, how do you feel about getting your Dad to submit his DNA for genealogy purposes?"), she asked her Dad, who then agreed to helping me prove or disprove this Burgess connection. Not only did I have to get my teacher on board, we had to have her Dad on board, too! The cost of it all (which I gladly paid) didn't matter to me. Enlisting a member of the Burgess family to do DNA testing was my only way to find out once and for all if I belonged to the Burgess family.

Ecstatic! I arranged for a swab test (Y-37 markers was recommended to me, and not Y-67 markers), waited for it to arrive, gave it to my teacher (who then gave it to her Dad), and then he speedily did the swabbing before I hurriedly posted it back to the USA. For an agonising amount of time (3 months, I think it was), I waited. I cannot say how disappointed I was to get the results, to find out that my brother's DNA did not match my teacher's father's DNA. I was secretly hoping all along to have proved that I was a Burgess. Still, even after the disappointment, I was able to PROVE that I wasn't a Burgess... which was still significantly important to me. DNA testing made that possible, and that's why DNA testing is so important, and the reason why we need genealogists to swab. If you don't believe in the importance of DNA, please think of your children/grandchildren and so forth and do it for them. After all... once you've gone, it's one less person that they can approach for assistance should they be into researching their tree at some point in their lives. In many instances, it can be too late to test theories that require DNA, because the person that could have provided their DNA has passed away.

Anyway (this is getting to be very long...sorry!)
Michael (the Burgess co-ordinator person, who's been a very helpful man!) recommended that I upgrade to Y-111 markers. So I've done that, and await a match at some point in the future. I know that DNA testing for genealogy purposes is a waiting game, and doesn't give you gratifyingly instant results. But I'm happy to wait, and with more people testing I'll have a better chance of solving my "illegitimacy brick wall". It a very useful tool indeed!

Best of luck to those who those who are awaiting test results, or hoping for a match in the near future!

Rachel

Hello,

my paternal great grandma is turning out to have had a colourful past.
She had a baby girl in 1910 at the age of 15 (and this girl disappeared from trace - I haven't found her, but the rumour is that she went to Australia). Then (or so I had thought) she had a boy, my grandfather in 1916. Both children were born out of wedlock, and the NZ birth printouts give the ever helpful 'NR' in the "Father" details. Both were given her surname (Southee).
I then find yet another birth for my great grandma, which was registered in 1912.
So, off I go, and order the birth printout for this baby. I was very disappointed today, when I was emailed the printout, full of 'NR's and not much else. I worked out the date of birth myself (10 Feb 1912), and the only new information that this printout gave me was that the baby was a male, born in Upper Hutt, and that the informant was the baby's maternal grandmother.

After some to-ing and fro-ing with a woman at the ISBDM Issuance Team, and asking why some printouts were photocopies of handwritten records, whereas others (like the one I got today) were computer printouts with little information... she said this:

We are unable to issue this printout in the handwritten format.  Legislation has been passed since the event was registered that deleted certain information collected at the time of the registration.  This means the record must be updated into the typed format with the deleted information removed.
 
 
 
It is understandable that you may like to know what was deleted, however it is not possible for us to advise you of this.  The effect of the legislation is that certain information must be treated as though it was never registered, so it would be contrary to that intention to distribute the information.
 
 
 
The typed printout contains all of the information from the original record other than that deleted by legislation.
 
 
 
I hope this explains the situation clearly.

Okay, okay.... it's frustrating, even with this explanation. This male born in 1912 has probably passed away like his brother, my grandfather, has... and the mother is long-gone - no people are left to offend or distress with the truth. Why the secrecy? All I am doing is researching my family tree.

Where to from here? How do I go about trying to find out the first name of the baby? The baby would have been adopted out, or perhaps died, because my grandfather had no idea about his mother giving birth to a boy four years earlier. Is it possible to find out if the baby was adopted, and trace them?

Many thanks
Rachel

Have just read this thread and find this story of Joseph Guest and Cae Clogyn or Clogwyn very interesting..... Joseph Guest is my Great Grandmothers brother and ive never heard of this before. Its all very interesting!! I have been looking if I can obtain a copy of the North Wales Guardian and London Gazette for this time but cannot find anything. If anybody could let me know how to get hold of it and have any other information I would be extremely grateful.
Regards
Julie McNair

Hi Julie, I think we've been in touch via GenesReunited a few years ago?
Your great grandmother, Eleanor "Ellen" Kirkham (nee Guest) married 2nd husband Thomas "Tom" Henry Ernest Gould (who was my great granduncle, for he was brother to my great grandfather, Herbert William Gould.... we have a case of two brothers marrying two sisters,.. well, half-sisters).
I have Ellen and Tom's children down as Doris and Thomas Ernest "Ernie" Gould. Was Doris your grandmother, and were her children: Constance  Gould  Ankers, Ronald Gould Ankers, and Frank Gould Ankers? Which line do you descend from?

That bit that Wilcoxon mentioned:

I found  a report in another paper,  she threatened to throw a bucket of manure over David Roberts,  again a gun was involved.
I must have been like the Wild West up Cymmau way .

was very interesting!

Hi everyone, and thanks to wilcoxon, gnu, and countrylover for your posts :-)
It's interesting that your husband's 2nd cousin and his wife have the original newspaper, one hundred years on, Countrylover! I would be glad to read any articles to find out more, and maybe see a photo of Joseph. Gnu has told me about the Times article, which is very good.
When I found out this about Joseph Guest it was getting late here - today I will try my librarys online newspaper collection to see what newspapers they have (though they probably wont have the North Wales one)

Best wishes,
Rachel.