Flag person as not married
We all find relatives that never married. In the "Spouse and Children" window, it would be good if there was a way to indicate "never married". This will avoid others wasting time researching only to come to the same conclusion.
Under ordinances, "Sealing to Spouse", it should also say, "never married".
Example:
A young man dies at age 16 and the death records shows "Single" and no other records show he was married. It highly unlikely he ever married. Flag this person as "never married"
A child dies at age less than 15. In this case the FamilySearch software should automatically flag the person as "never married".
Comments
-
On the person's Details> Other Information> Facts - you can add No Couple Relationships:
5 -
Thank you, that is good to know. I still think it would be better to display "never married" right where it says "Add Spouse".
1 -
Furthermore, "never married" status should prevent someone from entering a spouse, unless the "never married" status is removed with a reason why.
0 -
The problem with your idea is that, in many cases, the "Never married" status would be based on assumption.
Two examples are, firstly, an ancestor / relative might have married, then their spouse died between census records. If that marriage took place away from the locality of their residence the event could be very difficult to find, hence an assumption that the individual remained single all their life. Secondly, FamilySearch includes the records of individuals born in different parts of the world - many of which still have a provision for child marriages, even though they might not be legally recognised. So, age is not necessarily a factor in many cases.
I know you still might argue that one would only apply this where it is a known fact that someone never married, but that in itself would lead to inconsistency with users' inputs and confusion over whether a missing "Never married" indicator would mean the person possibly / probably did marry, but the marriage remains undiscovered.
I would simply follow the advice of @genthusiast - additionally adding a headed note to that effect in the Collaboration section of their profile.
1 -
You can add 'no couple relationship' and 'no children,' as shown above, if needed. I have done that to some of my relative that I'm positively sure were not married or did not have children. This certainly applies to very young children. It is particularly useful for childless couples as it save searching for non-existent children.
0 -
Maybe we need to propose something slightly different.
Firstly, we have the "No Couple Relationship" pointed out by @genthusiast , which can be used with the usual requirements for proof, etc.
Secondly, it still bugs me that my GF's sisters, who died when only a few days old, have, by their boxes on the tree diagram, the imperative command to any user - "ADD SPOUSE". This appears despite my adding in the "No Couple Relationship" against them. Such an instruction is blatant nonsense and slightly disturbing.
I would suggest that if "No Couple Relationship" is set, then the "ADD SPOUSE" command should be either removed or replaced with another box reading "No Couple Relationship".
Note please that I am working on the basis that the requirement should be about whether the person was in a couple relationship, not about whether they were married.
Note 2 - I am slightly concerned about what the box on the tree should look like if the person was never in a relationship but they had a child with someone.
2 -
That would be helpful. Having a child who died very young I would also like to be able to remove the 'spouse' box. As I find it upsetting and hurtful, to be honest I just avoid looking at it. I know that is not the intent of the designers, so, hopefully in the future it will be possible.
1 -
I agree with the idea that if 'never married' with proof included - "never married" could appear instead of Add Spouse. One aspect - that change would need additional conditional programming (could be based on several conditions being met - might have time to explain later) - as it stands the program just allows continued "add Spouse" to appear whether that fact is selected or not (easier programming). I guess we could look on the bright side - who knows - maybe in the next life some will get married that never married in this life.
@Adrian Bruce1 if the couple never married - I learned from another recent thread there are two basic approaches: 1. After adding the couple, open the couple relationship and remove them from the relationship 2. Add as parents of any children separately (with no couple relationship). Anyway - I think the difference is one presents them as a couple - but with no couple relationship and the other shows them as separate parents with no couple relationship. I guess if I get around to it - I can show with some pictures the two different options.
0 -
"I learned from another recent thread there are two basic approaches:
1. After adding the couple, open the couple relationship and remove them from the relationship
2. Add as parents of any children separately (with no couple relationship)."
Yes, I suspect, @genthusiast, that's the same thread I saw. My objection to method 1 has always been that there's no positive indicator that the relationship shouldn't be there. It could be that the relationship has been accidentally deleted. Maybe setting "No Couple Relationship" is part of the solution. I need to try that on my 3G-GPs who never lived together and see how it looks.
I'm afraid I've always found Method 2 just plain weird. If there's a child, we know there was a biological relationship (as much as we know anything), so to split them apart to that degree seems to deny that a biological relationship existed. After all, what would it look like if two different people each contributed one parent and neither knew the other parent? Odd...
0 -
"Maybe setting "No Couple Relationship" is part of the solution. I need to try that on my 3G-GPs who never lived together and see how it looks."
Well, that bright idea didn't last long 😕 I realised as soon as I got there that both of them were married later on - just not to each other.
At the moment if you open their Couple Relationship, I've stuck a big note there starting... "Never married, never lived together". Plus the same note appears on their Collaboration tab.
0 -
This is ONLY addressing the issue of a person not having been married, and does not address the issue of living together or have having a child together and not married.
The reason this is important: Hours and hours of millions of researchers are wasted looking for spouses that never existed. Such time can be better spent on productive research. If the field that says “add spouse” is flagged, then other researchers will not waste valuable time trying to find the spouse.
There 3 scenarios:
1) Child dies before marriageable age.
Rather than “add Spouse” it should say: “Died before marriageable age”
Under ordinances, it should also say: “Died before marriageable age”
FS software should default to this if the age at death is less than x (15 in most cases)
FS should automatically remove this if birth or death dates are corrected to be within marriageable age.
2) Person dies of marriageable age, but valid records (not assumption) proves person never did marry.
Rather than “add Spouse” it should say: “Never married – see reasons”
FS software should require a note be added to “reason this is correct”
Under ordinances, it should also say: “Never Married”
“Never Married” can only be undone (but not deleted) by providing a reason
3) There are no records of the person ever marrying.
This should be left as is with, “Add Spouse” as records may yet be found.
0
