Looking for FamilySearch Policy on minimum standard for ordinances

American Twyman

Someone is asking me if the church wants them to verify anything before submitting a name for ordinance work, or if they can just throw tons of names into the tree from a (somewhat shady in my view) other source and submit names to the temple system. I know many including me would personally discourage not verifying anything at all, but I don't want to just give my own opinion--I want to know FamilySearch's official position on the matter.

I used to refer people to a FS help article that essentially said an ancestor's name should not be reserved for ordinance work until essential information has been verified. It left it up to the user to determine how much verification was necessary, but it clearly stated verification should precede reservation and submission of temple ordinances.

I can no longer find that help article. Can anyone point me to it, or to any similar article on the topic? I can find dozens that essentially say the ancestor is ready for ordinances as soon as the green icon lights up, but none that say anything about verification before reserving ordinances. I'm worried that FamilySearch no longer cares about verification before ordinances--I don't like that if so, but I want to tell this person the Church's position even if I don't like it.

American Twyman

@Cindy Hecker thanks--I appreciate hearing your understanding, but I am looking for FamilySearch's position on the matter, if they have one. If it is true, I can accept that FamilySearch doesn't encourage any effort at verification at all, and they are happy with us doing temple ordinances for random dumps of garbage data. But in the past they have published official guidance that at least encourages verification prior to ordinances when possible. I don't want to presume FamilySearch has completely abandoned that guidance just because I can't find it anymore--but maybe they no longer want users to worry about that.

As a side note, I don't deal with users who can't get evidence, I'm work with users who could, but simply don't think it matters to make any effort at that prior to ordinances. Perhaps FamilySearch sides with that position nowadays--I don't know.

@MNuttall thanks very much for that additional reference. It does help and although it doesn't talk about verification, it kind of suggests doing enough research such that the individual is unlikely to be duplicated in the future, which in many cases may prod the user to do at least some verification. I can definitely use this since it is a church publication, but it isn't FamilySearch's official position on the matter.

I appreciate your personal views. I've read similar things in the past from FamilySearch guidelines, and more particularly have read that it is their responsibility to do appropriate verification prior to ordinance work. But I am looking for FamilySearch's position on the matter, because personal opinions are not persuasive to the average user I work with--honestly, a lot of people I talk to simply see the colored icon saying it is possible to do ordinances, and assume that icon means FamilySearch believes all necessary research has been done--no need for anything else. Thus they see my own views as in conflict with FamilySearch--and they are more apt to trust what they think FamilySearch is telling them.

The best way for me to help them see that a colored icon does not necessarily mean "sufficient verification has been done" is to cite FamilySearch themselves. I use to be able to do that but can no longer find any official guidance on that.

I have heard that someone at FamilySearch at least reads these posts--if no users know what their position is on the matter, perhaps someone at FamilySearch knows?

Miss Jessie

@American Twyman

This article discusses the need to have accurate information when submitting names for temple ordinances. In part the article states

"Because of the sacred nature of this work, members should be diligent in assuring the accuracy of all information submitted [for ordinance work]" (letter dated 16 June 1995 and signed by the First Presidency for all Church members, Ensign, September 1995, 80).

To ensure the accuracy of the information, please document the information on Family Tree. In many cases, the FamilySearch software helps this process. Be sure to evaluate possible duplicate records before you reserve temple ordinances. https://www.familysearch.org/en/help/helpcenter/article/accuracy-of-information-submitted-for-temple-ordinances

How much documentation is required is a lower minimum standard than some users would desire. This is in part due to variation in availability of any documentation as well as user access to such documentation.

For example, the only record I have found for some children who died in infancy is a rock marker & the memory of my now deceased grandmother. She knew the names of the parents, but only approximate birth and death dates/places. No “official” record is available.

American Twyman

Bumping this. Am I asking in the wrong forum?

Chas Howell

@American Twyman , maybe you would get a better responce by posting under the Temple Category? https://community.familysearch.org/en/categories/temple

Cindy Hecker

Here is a link to the information about temple ordinances policy that you are asking about

https://www.familysearch.org/en/help/helpcenter/article/what-information-is-required-to-do-temple-ordinances-for-my-ancestors

American Twyman

@Cindy Hecker Thank you! That helps, but isn't quite what I was looking for. That page simply states what data has to be there, whereas I am looking for FamilySearch guidelines on whether that data should be verified in any way prior to ordinances being reserved/completed.

Again, the user simply found some random genealogical data with no sources. Some of the data seems pretty unbelievable to my view. My personal advice is to actually at least try a little bit to verify the data. I used to have a FamilySearch help page that essentially said it was important to verify the data prior to ordinances, but left it up to the user to determine just how much was necessary. That was a helpful page because even though the guideline was to leave it up to the user, it at least said verification was important. Hearing that from FamilySearch makes a difference.

For the past little while and again with this case, I've been unable to convince certain people that verification before ordinances is even worthwhile--they have that common tendency to believe that if the data exists, it must be correct, so any verification work is not important to do before completing ordinances. I am hoping to find that guidance again.

Or if FamilySearch no longer thinks verification before ordinances is important, or if they simply don't care to take a position on the matter--regardless of what their thoughts are on the matter, I'd like to be able to share it with those I am trying to help.

MNuttall

Hello @American Twyman

While not specific to your question, you might find the hints of what work should be done before submitting names for temple work in this article: https://www.familysearch.org/en/help/helpcenter/article/what-is-the-purpose-of-familysearch-and-family-tree:

"It is our hope that, through Family Tree, we can work together to create the best-sourced, public genealogical family tree in the world and allow family members to connect both in the past as well as the present."

• The features in Family Tree are to help you find, reserve, prepare, and share temple ordinances.
• Family Tree compares records and sources to help you resolve and prevent the duplication of these ordinances.

And, then there is the Genealogical Proof Standard (from the FS Research Wiki):

The purpose of the Genealogical Proof Standard is to show what the minimums are that a genealogist must do for his or her work to be credible.

There are five elements to the Genealogical Proof Standard:

1. Reasonably exhaustive research has been conducted.
2. Each statement of fact has a complete and accurate source citation.
3. The evidence is reliable and has been skillfully correlated and interpreted.
4. Any contradictory evidence has been resolved.
5. The conclusion has been soundly reasoned and coherently written.

Any proof statement is subject to re-evaluation when new evidence arises.

American Twyman

Thanks @MNuttall, I appreciate it. These are great pages but are silent on how much verification FamilySearch suggests or requires prior to ordinance work being done (or if they still recommend any pre-ordinance verification at all). I don't see anything that really hints at it either (though I could be missing the obvious--I've certainly done that plenty of times).

Cindy Hecker

From my understanding there is not required proof or sources. Because it is a world wide tree, some areas of the world do not have written records, they rely on oral records and some area cannot get access to the records as sources so if that is what you are looking for, there is no threshold other than the info in the link I provided as far as what must be known about a person. Name, dates, sex, location, etc.

MNuttall

Here is more on the subject taken from chapter 4 of the Family History Student Manual:

Obtain and preserve as much information as possible. [4.3.2]

Although temple ordinances can be performed when only the minimum information is available, try to provide as much information about an ancestor as possible. More complete information reduces the chance that your ancestor will be confused with another person. With less information, ordinances might be done more than once for the same person, or someone may think the temple work has been done for an ancestor when it has not. Providing more information about a person greatly reduces the likelihood of error in identification and duplication of the temple work. However, there are instances when details are simply not available; therefore, if a minimum of information can be obtained, the temple work can be performed.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/introduction-to-family-history-student-manual/chapter-4?lang=eng

Ultimately, the documentation and verification of the life details of a deceased ancestor remain the responsibility of the living descendants. We've always been counseled to learn correct principles and to "govern ourselves." While we can perform temple ordinances with a "minimum" amount of information and documentation, I always like to find as much information as possible documented with sources, as available.

American Twyman

@Miss Jessie Hey hey! That's great, thank you! Looks to me like it is the same as it was before--FamilySearch wants the user to ensure accuracy but leaves it up to the user to decide just how much assurance is needed. This forum throws an error when I try to mark your comment as the "answer," but this is precisely what I was hoping for--much appreciated.