Records mistakenly restricted?
Notarial records from South-Holland, The Netherlands, presently are unavailable for viewing as the appear to be "restricted ". In the past these records were viewable, and as these records are well over 100 years old, it's very unlikely that these records are restricted for reasons of privacy. Could this restriction possibly be a mistake?
It concerns eg the 's-Gravenzande notarial records DGS 008970357-008970368
Best Answer
-
@JJCA van Beurden These films may be temporarily restricted for a variety of reasons. I will add them to a growing list of questionable restrictions to be reviewed.
@StephenDespot As an update on the films you reported, one was found to have the wrong metadata date which has been corrected (Item 2, DGS 4594776). The others are awaiting review and I'm sorry that there is a lot of backlog.
2
Answers
-
@SerraNola can you shed any light please?
0 -
This seems to be a problem on a lot of records these days. I was working on some and then after a few days they were restricted but only some of them were and not all, like even some of the same types of records in the same year were but others weren't. I put in a request over a month ago to look into it and it still isn't fixed so you may be waiting a long time for this to get handled.
2 -
@JJCA van Beurden @StephenDespot
I can understand how disappointing it is when access changes or disappears.
FamilySearch has to follow legal and contractual rules when it comes to record access, and sometimes that means certain collections become restricted. It’s frustrating—we’ve all felt that—but the careful approach helps maintain good relationships with archives and often leads to more access in the long run. FamilySearch's goal is always to make as many records as possible freely available.
Access to these records may return, so it’s worth checking back from time to time. In the meantime, you might try WorldCat to see if a library holds the same materials, or check other research sites like Ancestry or FindMyPast, which sometimes have different agreements.
0 -
@SerraNola Thank you for your reply and adding them to the list of questionable restrictions. As it happens, the list is of 'restricted' items is apparently growing rapidly. This morning whilst viewing orphanage records form the 18th century, the film suddenly became restricted … (DGS 008904944)
0 -
@JJCA van Beurden According to our history for Image Group 8904944, it went to No Access on 11/20. That doesn't explain why it was restricted or how you were able to view it a few days ago. Regardless, we will try to find out if the restriction should be lifted. Thanks for the feedback.
3
