End of Line, Never married, Never had children, Remove boxes for possible children
We all have ancestors who never married or never had children. Their direct family line ended with them. Perhaps they died as children or young soldiers, or many-many other reasons. Can we have an option to mark these ancestors as never married, as well as never had children? Without this, research record hints/tips/suggestions continually appear that are not relevant.
Being able to have these options to mark could also save other people researching the line tremendous time in looking for a spouse/children that never existed.
Additionally, these would be wonderful options to have on our own private person pages. The living can enter their own information as primary resources. Or parents could indicate how many children they had - with no empty boxes appearing for children they never had. Those empty children boxes can be painful reminders for those who wanted a child/more children and were not able to.
Comments
-
chrystalp
.
FYI
.
We ALREADY do have "Options" to indicate:
(1) NO Couple Relationship; and,
(2) NO Children.
.
They are BOTH found in the "Other Information" Section, under "Facts", for a individual/person.
.
And, "NO Children" is additionally found in a "Couple Relationship", under "Relationship Facts".
.
IF, you add these "Facts" (and, it is BEST to include a "Reason Statement"); THEN, if a, Spouse; and/or, a Child (depending on the case), is attempted to be "Added", the User/Patron is DIRECTED to that "Fact". And, as far as I am aware, those "Facts" MUST be REMOVED to proceed, before adding a, Spouse; and/or, Child (depending on the case).
.
Here is a "Knowledge Article" in 'FamilySearch'
.
How do I indicate that a person in Family Tree had no children or was never in a relationship?
.
Now ...
.
"Never Married" is a 'sticky wicket' ...
.
Many say "Never Married" is NOT an 'Event'; and, should NOT be referenced as such.
.
Personally, I prefer a "Never Married" INDICATOR, not so much as an 'Event'.
.
It certainly would be good if we has all THREE (x3), as easy to see INDICATORS ...
.
▬ Never Married ............... ☒
▬ No Couple Relationship ... ☒
▬ No Children ................... ☒
.
And, all those INDICATORS should be able to be "Changed"/"Removed", if needs be ...
.
Regardless of what we, know; or, think we know, in SOME cases (but, certainly NO all) there is ALWAYS the possibility that there may be some sort of, a RELATIONSHIP; and/or, CHILDREN, that we personally do not know about - that comes to light later.
.
So ...
That said ...
.
'FamilySearch' should NOT get rid of, the "+ Spouse"; and/or, the "+ Children", in ANY situation/circumstance, leave the "Design" as is.
.
As, those "Options" to indicate:
(1) NO Couple Relationship; and,
(2) NO Children
are available, to use.
.
Not to mention the ability to "Add" Copious "Notes" EVERYWHERE, you can:
.
▬ Life Sketch;
▬ Other Information section
▬ ▬ Facts
▬ ▬ ▬ + Custom Fact
▬ Collaborate
.... [ BOTH ]
▬ ▬ Notes
▬ ▬ Discussions
.
It can be the SAME or similar "Note" in ALL of the above.
.
That is what I do ... in EVERY case ...
.
Just my thoughts.
.
Brett
.
0 -
Brett,
I do realize that Family Tree has these other options. However, they are NOT easily noticed when on a Person Page. I still think it would very helpful to see some sort of indicator that you've reached an "end-of-the-branch." Though I do agree with you that it should be removable and should always have an explanation as to why this option was selected. "Never Married" or Never Had Children" are not events, nor do I view them as "Notes."
Additionally, I still feel that parents should be able to remove the blank child boxes on their personal pages. Again, it can be upsetting to people who wished they could have had a child (or more children) to see those child boxes sitting there unfilled.
0 -
Chrystalp
.
Unlike some Users/Patrons, I do agree that having INDICATORS, in the "Family Members" Section, on the 'left-hand-side' under "Spouses and Children", such as ...
▬ Never Married ............... ☒
▬ No Couple Relationship ... ☒
▬ No Children ................... ☒
would be great
.
And, I do agree that the "Options" (and, their locations) to indicate:
(1) NO Couple Relationship; and,
(2) NO Children.
are easy to miss.
.
One thing that you have to remember is that 'FamilySearch' (including: the "Family Tree" part) is a FREE service provided by the Church.
.
Just my thoughts here ...
.
And, I am NOT trying to be insensitive ...
[ As I have Family that could not/did not have Children ]
.
But ...
That said ...
.
NOT all situations/circumstances can be EASILY covered, catered for ...
[ As they are often seem simple; but, can be very complex to Programme/Code for ... ]
.
The problem/issue with with Users/Patrons having the ability to "Remove" those functions/facilities/features of, "+ Spouse"; and/or, the "+ Children", is that, I can guarantee that:
(1) some Users/Patrons will not do the proper research; and, just 'gloss over' such individuals/persons or couples; and/or,
(2) worse, some Users/Patrons will have different, conflicting, information (that is Confirmed/Supported) - but, not know how to add a Spouse or Child/Children; as, there is NO function/facility/feature there to, "+ Spouse"; and/or, the "+ Children", if they are "Removed", by a previous User/Patron.
.
'No', regardless, I would suggest that those functions/facilities/features of, "+ Spouse"; and/or, the "+ Children", be left as is, 'in situ'; and, not to be able to be "Removed" by Users/Patrons under any circumstances.
.
Again, just my thoughts....
.
Each to their own ...
.
You do not have to worry ...
.
We are advised that "Official 'FamilySearch' Representatives" do monitor the "Ideas" in this 'Feedback' Forum.
.
Collectively, they may agree with you ...
.
Brett
.
0
