Tricky subject

[suttontrust]

  This is a difficult one.  I have been researching the family of a colleague's husband.  He has 2 children by his first wife.  Now he wants me to research his second wife's tree as well and wants to end up with a combined tree which shows the children's stepmother but not their mother.  He wants to wipe his first wife out of the picture altogether.  I've explained that unless we lie about who their mother is, we can't do that.  I can only use some abbreviation which disguises her name.  I use Legacy as my main software plus several other programmes for charts.  I am wondering how I can produce reports which include the guy's ancestors, his children and his second wife.  And what are the ethics of keeping someone's name out of a tree which includes their children?   

[RJ_Paton]

He wants to wipe his first wife out of the picture altogether

Technically its  not possible (IMHO) - my own program (Family Historian) does allow children to one individual without identifying the partner .... but his 2nd wife would have to be marked as such to correctly list the lineage of their children ... thus leaving a trace of the "1st wife" albeit not named or identified.

I don't envy the ethical dilemma as its very dangerous territory.

And what are the ethics of keeping someone's name out of a tree which includes their children?

Personally I dont think I would ..... where would you stop "tampering" with the facts.
I would perhaps present a version to someone minus any facts which I knew would hurt them or cause personal difficulty but without knowing the full circumstances of the end of that particular marriage I'm not in a position to say.
Sorry to say this but its a decision ONLY YOU can make.

[runner]

Since your own personal ethical viewa come out in just about every post you make and this one is troubling you. I would say go with your instincts and leave him to tamper with his own tree!
He wants it to be 'The Immaculate Deception' 
Charge him for what you have done then hand him the paperwork!!!

Russell

[SallyF]

A VERY tricky subject, I agree.

I find it difficult to see how the first wife can be left out of it.  No matter how much he no longer likes the idea, this woman IS the mother of his children.  He could be setting himself up for further problems in the future when the children ask why she's not in it.

But as Falkryn says, some breakups can be very bitter, and without knowing or understanding this man's feelings, it's difficult for outsiders to understand his reasons.

As an area that deals with facts, not emotions, it's going to be hard to accurately complete the story.

Good luck with whatever you decide,

Sally

[annaandchester]

Imagine years from now your tree falling into the hands of an amateur genealogist and over time and many many certificates you found that that the whole tree and family line was based on a lie.

Now imagine yourself as that genealogist - how would you feel?

I feel myself that I have a duty to do my research to the best of my abilities as it is not just for me but for those that come after me.

I dont envy you

Anna x

[hlbradd]

Oooh difficult - glad it's not my decision.

Just imagine how upset and angry his children would feel - their mother 'scrubbed out' of their family history - and their maternal grandparents, etc 

Personally I'd give him

his ancestral tree
his second wife's ancestral tree

and then his children's tree (for them to have once they are old enough to understand and appreciate it).  If he doesn't want to display it or open the envelope he can put it away - you could try asking him how he would feel if he discovered his family history had been conveniently adapted - and that information had been destroyed or withheld deliberately from him.

That way your conscience can be clear - if he then decides to re-write history that's up to him - but you could point out that his children might find it very difficult to forgive him.

Helen

[MarieC]

This really is tricky, suttontrust!!  

It is your decision, of course, but if I were in your shoes I would shy away from this.  As genealogists and family historians, we are always seeking to discover the truth, not conceal it.

I'm thinking, too, about his children.  If they come across the tree when they are older, and find that their own mother has been wiped out of it, they will probably be very hurt.  It could cause a rift between them and their father.  

Hope you reach a decision with which you feel comfortable!

MarieC

[Tephra]

I can only tell you a bit of advice my Grandmother always told me:   If it feels right - do it.   If you have to think about it - don't do it.

Personally I would give him a blank tree and tell him to fill it out himself.


Barbara.                   

[MaryA]

Most of us seem to be in agreement in that we are all here searching for the truth, warts and all.

You don't say whether you are doing this work on a commission basis or as a favour for a friend.  If it were the first and you wanted to continue I would do his tree starting with himself, after all perhaps its just as well to leave living people out of it, but do a separate tree for the second wife up to the same point.  Charge him up plenty for being a meanie to his children.

If you were doing it for the second reason, I'd say you had plenty of other friends you could help 

Is that just me being bichy? (spelling error on purpose)

Mary