How to Resolve Duplicate Living Profiles for Someone Who Has Died
It is a fact that in the shared family tree there are many duplicate living profiles. When they die, how do we consolidate all their duplicate profiles since you can't merge a living profile with a deceased profile, or even see the the living profile if you didn't create the profile. Given that the system administrator can send all of us messages, let's take advantage of that capability. That is, when I change a living profile to deceased, the system could: 1) use the profile information to identify possible living duplicates, and 2) send a message to the "creators" that this person may now be deceased and show the unique identifier of the deceased person. With this system "heads up", each creator may change their living profile to deceased and do a merger of the deceased profiles. An added advantage of this approach is letting others make a correction if the person has in fact not died.
Comments
-
It sounds to me like you're advocating for wholesale privacy breach and break of trust on FS's part.
What if the person starting the chain is mistaken (or worse, ill-intentioned)?
...
Generally, very few people actually have any reason to have a profile on FS for any particular still-living person. I don't have a profile for my father's unmarried sister, for example, because she doesn't have any relationships that can't be attached to my father's profile instead. I have her birthdate and such in my offline tree, just like for my mother and her sisters.
When a beloved great-grandmother passes, her descendants can each mark-and-merge their profiles for her, individually, as they get the news. (Mark-and-merge: mark deceased, then merge into the version from whichever cousin acted on the news first.)
0 -
Julia,
The "System" is already aware of every living person in the shared tree, so no privacy breach there. Notifying only me that my living profile may be deceased and showing me the deceased person is still not a privacy breach. So I'm not advocating any privacy breach and break of trust.
I recognize that someone may be mistaken or ill-intentioned, which is why I acknowledged "letting others make a correction if the person has in fact not died". This is a procedure that already exists in the system.
Every person who signs onto FS and accesses the shared tree has a living profile. That's a lot more than a few people. Also, many young users of FS must add their living parents and grandparents in order to access their ancestors in the shared tree. That would also be true for their siblings. So there really are good reasons to have many duplicate still-living people in the shared tree.
Because of strong privacy measures, I personally use the memories area to create a family album for both my living and deceased family members. This provides me a great deal of viewing pleasure whenever I access my family tree. In the past I've submitted suggestions for making a joint family sign on so that my immediate family both near and far may all access the same information and view of the family tree.
Bottom-line: I agree that your recommended approach does have merit; but, I'm recommending a more effective approach to limit or eliminate more duplicates in the system.
Thank you for your feedback,
Larry
1 -
Larry
I am just another 'lowly' User/Patron ...
[ And, I happen to be a Member of the Church ... ]
Further to what 'Julie' has already proffered, regarding "Privacy" ...
Please be aware that, for, MANY; Many, many, Users/Patrons who are not members of the Church; and, for some, Users/Patrons who are Members of the Church, that they DO NOT (want to) include the "Living" individuals/persons from their immediate family, in "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch', unless it is absolutely necessary.
Whereas, for, MANY; Many, many, Users/Patrons, who are Members of the Church, our "Ancestral" Lines in "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch', were prepopulated with our "Living" immediate family members; and, as such, MANY "Duplicates" of each family member were created by the "System" (in 2014).
There is a long-standing DEBATE, as to whether or not, "Living" individuals/persons should/need to be included in "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch'.
Personally, I suggest that that DEBDATE is 'mute'; as, "Living" individuals/persons EXIST in "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch'; and, it a matter of personal choice; especially, for those Users/Patrons who are not members of the Church; as to, whether or not, they include the "Living" individuals/persons from their immediate family, in "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch'.
Whereas ...
On the other hand ...
IF, one wants to use "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch', to allow OTHER Relatives, to 'Connect' together in the existing "Ancestral" Lines, in "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch'; THEN, each Relative WILL have to ADD "All" the necessary "Living" individuals/persons in "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch', that connect them together, to enable such 'Connections'.
Now ...
All that Said ...
Back to your matter; as, a WHOLE ...
[ 1 ]
How to Resolve Duplicate Living Profiles for Someone Who Has Died
Short Answer: There is NO simple resolve.
It is truly a matter, of respective Users/Patrons, to "Find" the (FIRST) instance (and, additional instances), of when an individual/person, is recorded as being/becoming "Deceased", in "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch'; and, subsequently "Merging"/"Combining" their "Duplicate" version into that (FIRST) instance (and, additional instances) of the "Deceased".
And, for Members of the Church, it is a matter of the 'Clerk', of their Ward/Branch, of the Church, marking the Member's, Church Membership record as being "Deceased"; then, that Member's record in "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch' WILL be VISIBLE to ALL Users/Patrons.
But, I would hope, that ALL other (Member) Users/Patrons, who "Merge"/"Combine" their "Duplicate" version, would do so, so as/that, their "Duplicate" version, is NOT the "Surviving" individual/person - in other words, the "Surviving" individual/person be that of the Member, from their Church Membership record.
[ 2 ]
When they die, how do we consolidate all their duplicate profiles since you can't merge a living profile with a deceased profile, or even see the the living profile if you didn't create the profile
Short Answer: There is NO simple way to consolidate such.
Once again, it is truly a matter, of respective Users/Patrons, doing their 'Due Diligence', "Finding" the (FIRST) instance (and, additional instances), of when an individual/person, is recorded as being/becoming "Deceased", in "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch'; and, subsequently "Merging"/"Combining" their "Duplicate" version into that (FIRST) instance (and, additional instances) of the "Deceased".
[ 3 ]
Given that the system administrator can send all of us messages, let's take advantage of that capability.
Short Answer: NO, way too complicate; and, time consuming ...
Please be aware that:
▬ 'FamilySearch' was created by the Church.
▬ The Church (and, 'FamilySearch') is NOT a "Commercial' Website - 'FamilySearch' is FREE to ALL.
▬ There are MANY competing priorities in "Family Tree" (and, the OTHER Parts) of 'FamilySearch'
▬ There is "Very" LIMITED resources (eg. 'Funds') available to 'FamilySearch'
Such MAY be possible, to some degree, for User/Patrons, who ARE Members of the Church; as, in 2014, when "Private Spaces" were created, in "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch', MANY of the "Living" DUPLIACTES of OURSELVES were created (eg. At least. x6 "Duplicates" of the "Living" ME - one for my Wife and each of our Children; but, in fact, MANY more; because, of our OTHER "Living" Family members connections.)
Whereas, for Users/Patrons who are NOT members of the Church, such would most likely not be possible.
Besides, I would NOT want 'FamilySearch' spending their "Very" LIMITED resources on doing such.
[ 4 ]
All well and good in theory; but, not so easy in practice ...
.
As an aside ...
On another note ...
The ONLY real thing that I want to see implemented is that, for those of us who are "Living", who are Members of the Church, is that WHEN we die; and, our Membership record of the Church, is marked as "Deceased", by the 'Clerk', of our Ward/Branch, of the Church; then, that Record in "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch' can be the ONLY "Surviving" Record; and, all OTHER "Living" DUPLICATE version of ourselves are subservient to that of the one from our Membership record of the Church.
In fact, I wish such was the case now.
I have 'seen' far too many Records, from Membership records of the Church, lost (ie. NOT the "Surviving" Record) being consumed (ie. "Merged"/"Combined") into OTHER "Living" DUPLICATE versions. by OTHER Users/Patrons - that should NOT happen.
.
Just my thoughts.
Brett
0 -
Hi @Larry Nerge. You share an interesting and common concern about duplicate records in family tree that are created by individuals who may not have been made aware that someone they entered as a living person is now deceased. Since we each focus on our own pedigree, we do have control over the records we have created for living family members, and it makes sense that many users create only those living records that are a bridge to their deceased ancestors since there are many personal software programs that sync with Family Tree so that you can keep a personal program with all of your living relatives is you choose to do so.
Since we change living records to deceased to connect to other deceased ancestors, even if there are other living records in the system, there is really no reason to worry about what others have added to their Private Spaces. Our concern is making certain we change our living records to deceased when necessary which will often allow the system to recognize duplication so that it can be eliminated.
While it would be wonderful to be able to share ID numbers so that duplicate living records would not be needed in many instances, in our complicated society, protecting privacy is important.
Please understand that it is not the goal of FamilySearch administrators to intervene to provide users with any information that has been entered by another user, but is our desire that our users will collaborate with one another to improve the information in Family Tree.
We appreciate all of the comments that have been made by others, and hope some of the comments have been helpful.
1 -
CDBurk,
It seems that I was misunderstood when I stated the following, "That is, when I change a living profile to deceased, the system could: 1) use the profile information to identify possible living duplicates, and 2) send a message to the "creators" that this person may now be deceased and show the unique identifier of the deceased person. With this system "heads up", each creator may change their living profile to deceased and do a merger of the deceased profiles."
What I'm trying to say is no one should be given the unique ids of the living person who is now deceased. Instead, the system would inform the creator of the living person now deceased that this profile may need to be switched to deceased and also provide the creator the unique id of the now deceased person.
Larry
0 -
Thanks for your additional clarification, Larry. Unfortunately, our mandate as representatives of the FamilySearch programs and features include not sharing any information that has been provided by our users, even if it would be helpful to other users. We are legally liable for anything that is shared through our administration processes, and in this complex World it is not very likely that we will even be allowed to share other ID numbers, especially since we are a volunteer organization and do not have funds to do research to prove that what a user has entered into Family Tree is correct. Many users are still entering information without sources even though our terms indicate that as a user, you are responsible for everything you enter.
Your idea is noteworthy, and I am hopeful that others will consider what you suggest, but I wanted to be sure that you understood that legally, we do not share what others have entered.
0 -
My comment will appear to be negative but --- Why do I care if there are other living profiles of a person whom I have marked as deceased? These profiles are hidden from me and everyone except the person who created them. If they are linked properly (except for those will still living parents) my deceased record should appear next to others living records which should be enough to encourage them to mark their record as deceased an merge. I am sure there are many living profiles that will never be marked as deceased as we have Grandparents entering living grandchildren and the grandparent will died long before the grandchildren -- no one will every see these living records. (that is another issue with tagged memories that might be of greater concern). In my mind the original suggestion is just not worth the effort of the developers and programmers to even consider.
2 -
Downvote.
Those users know someone has passed and choose not to merge the PID into the public tree.
0 -
gasmodels,
I appreciate your comments. Here are my thoughts on "Why do I care if there are other living profiles of a person whom I have marked as deceased?". These "hidden" profiles may contain comments, relationships, sources and memories that would be a blessing to all of us who knew the recently deceased.
CDBurk,
I find your comment "Unfortunately, our mandate as representatives of the FamilySearch programs and features include not sharing any information that has been provided by our users, even if it would be helpful to other users" to be confusing. I frequently receive red exclamation hints in Research Help for various family member profiles. These hints show me possible duplicates provide by other users. What I'm recommending seems in a small way to be similar. I'm certainly not asking anybody to share information on the living or do anything that would be illegal.
Overall,
While my recommendation may seem trivial or not worthy, please take a closer look at all the new functions added to FamilySearch this past year. Some of these changes have been just for the fun of it. So priorities are in a constant state of flux and I think all of us should be encouraged when we are brave enough to speak up.
Thanks for responding,
Larry
0 -
Larry
ALL suggested enhancements, CAN; and SHOULD, be expressed ...
Your suggest enhancement is certainly not trial; and, is worth considering.
To be honest, I think your suggested enhancement has merit.
And ...
'Yes', "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch', is CONSTANTLY, "Evolving", "Changing" ... almost, each; and, very day.
Brett
ps: NOT that "Everyone" appreciates ALL the "Changes" ...
pps: Remember ▬ NOT every suggested enhancement can be implemented, for various reasons ...
(1) There are MANY competing priorities in "Family Tree" (and, the OTHER Parts) of 'FamilySearch'.
(2) There is "Very" LIMITED resources (eg. 'Funds') available to 'FamilySearch'
.
0
