This was just raised in a family history forum I frequent, but the thread was closed because it was going beyond the scope of the group.
Transgender folk, how do you want to be listed in the family tree?
As a cisgender person and a genealogist, my immediate reaction was: record name/gender the individual presents as and lives by, and in notes or alternate name field record birth name.
A transgender person commented that its called a deadname for a reason and they would be horrified to be recorded this way.
I’m torn. Respecting others is paramount, but accurate documentation is also a core component of genealogy. There are many records that might be created early in a person’s life under their deadname that would be inaccessible to future researchers if they didn’t know about that name. Does life begin at transition?
Individuals can change their own birth certificate, but will still appear under their deadname on younger sibling’s birth certificates in areas where that information is recorded. Censuses, school records, old newspapers, passenger lists, possibly even death certificates of their parents may all contain that information and are unlikely to be retroactively corrected. The name could and probably still be out there for future genealogists to find, but without context of who this person truly is.
I do not publicly share details of living individuals without permission so I’m less concerned about the safety aspect someone raised. If you did publicly share your tree without redacting that information, that would possibly be an additional thing to think about… but if you’re doing that, you’re probably not too concerned about feelings of the people in your tree anyway.
I’m sure people can be horrified at genealogical research discovering illegitimate children, adoptions, and criminals in a family tree as well, how are those issues handled?
I don’t have a dog in this fight but I seem to have several trans friends and relatives. They can be very sensitive to any implication that their identity is somehow illegitimate.
Personally I believe it should be handled the same as any other name change, through a note. There may need to have a new field added for “gender assigned at birth.”
My cousin, the family genaeologist is upset by people having babies without being married, not changing surnames on marriage and changing one’s name for the hell of it but only because it makes it hard to keep track of ancestry. I do wonder a little at his priorities
I go by a name that I have chosen, which I think of as my real name, as opposed to my birth name. I dislike my birth forename and rejected it from the age of 11 (though it took a while for bureaucracy to catch up and even longer for my parents). Nonetheless I’m a bit shocked at the idea of a “deadname”. It seems to imply a rejection of the person’s previous life rather than a moving on. I’m open to being educated but do all trans people feel this way?
If I saw that my g-something-grandparents were listed as “Ignatius and Jonathan” I’d wonder if the next generation was adopted or what. If they were listed as “Ignatius and Jonathan (born Eve)”, there would still be a possibility of adoption but the possibility of the next generation having been made the old fashioned way would be clear.
My software allows other names to be recorded, so you can have a main name, and a list of other names the person was known by, with room for notes.
Where the deadname concept is tricky is it may not permit the linking of records that contain the name assigned at birth. Electoral roll entries that prove places of residence would be an example. The deadname could be on other people’s records, such as a parent’s death certificate, a younger sibling’s birth certificate, or any relative’s newspaper obituary.
I’ve been thinking of that a lot. My mom did our genealogy. She got some special software for it and printed up books for everyone. That was years before I came out with the trans. My mom is sweet and calls me by my new name, but I want to persuade her to at least update my real (current) name into it. Sinking the deadname into the Marianas Trench is, as you noted, much desired. This is the frontier of social change, things still being figured out. All I know is get that deadname the hell away from me.
I’ve also been wondering what it’s like for trans people to have their DNA tested for ancestry. Trans men would have to cadge a MtDNA sample from Dad or Bro (if possible, which it may not be, because many family members are very cruel to their trans ones and often cut off all contact). A trans woman would not have that problem but she might be asked who gave her MtDNA sample. It would be nice if such adjustments didn’t throw them into confusion. The DNA testers may have worked out a solution to such questions by now, though I wouldn’t count on it.
My aunt was transgendered and she was the family historian/geneologist before she passed. In fact, I inherited all of her geneology work. When she passed, we made sure her obit and grave marker and everything listed only her female name and we made zero mention of her deadname anywhere. But that presented the very issue you’re talking about. As I was updating my ancestry.com tree, I realized that, in 100 years, people will be like, “Well what happened to Dan and why can’t we find any evidence of Evelyn before her early to mid-30s?” So I made a special note. I had her original birth certificate and her military records and then the obit listing this woman who, to those who are unfamiliar or will be in a few generations, had no obvious connection to the ex-Army intelligence guy. I just placed a note about roughly when she transitioned and left it at that. Everyone currently living in my family is well aware, but I was thinking of generations ahead – mostly because I was having trouble with some Civil War ancestors who have some really circuitous histories.
Autosomal DNA testing is the most common (and most useful) for family history and can be on samples provided by any gender. Most of the big companies primarily offer autosomal testing.
MtDNA is less useful because it changes too infrequently. It’s no use because able to identify every person who shares a common ancestor from back further than records go. Autosomal gives you up to about 8 generations, which is far easier to link to your paper trail.
I am a non-trans amateur genealogist and family historian. Also, as an adult, I legally changed my first and middle names because I detested the name I was given at birth.
To me, genealogy is about facts, not about feelings. I’ve contacted numerous distant relatives to get the details of their lineage, and I’ve had some very strange demands in return. One person stated that she refused to be in my tree (like she could prevent that) unless I put a comment on her grandfather’s entry that he was an evil SOB.
My cousin’s son stated that he didn’t want to be in the tree if his mother’s fourth husband was shown. That demand I complied with. I agreed that #4 was just a waste of space.
My rule about names is that I show the full legal name and any nicknames. If you had a name change, your previous name is listed as an alternate. I enforce this rule for myself, even though I never want to see or hear my birth name again. Ancestry.com records alternate names, but you have to make an effort to actually see them.
In my family tree, your sex is whatever you want it to be. AFAIK, ancestry.com doesn’t provide an “alternate sex” option.
This was a really big part of my concern. I try to leave enough documentation for genealogists of the future so they can make sense of what I know about my ancestors and my current family members.
And does leaving the name behind mean leaving the achievements behind? Caitlyn Jenner is not a great example because she’s so famous that both names are linked, but her sporting achievements date back to the earlier part of her life. A less conspicuous Olympian might have moved on to another name, but they can’t retroactively change the record books. Does the family historian omit documents relating to those sporting achievements, perhaps just summarising in notes, or do they attach copies of the articles and records of the day?
Genealogy is history. Respecting the feelings of people who are still alive is all well and good, but there is also an obligation to future generations that accurate information is passed down. If a name has been changed, the present name can be listed, but former name(s) should also be included in the record so they can be linked to other records.
My father had a cousin who had a child out of wedlock when that was considered a great disgrace. My mother wanted to leave that out of the family tree for that reason. I thought that it should be included, especially since the person in question was long deceased.
My great-grandfather was born about five months after his parents’ wedding. The fact is obvious from the date of their wedding and his birth date, but I wouldn’t consider it reasonable to obscure it.
Sure, I appreciate the issue of facts. As a transgender historian I sometimes face radicals who flame me over noting the pre-transition names of persons in my historical write-ups.
You’re going to offend the vast majority of transgender persons who are still extant, or those close to them, if you deadname or misgender them. So while facts are facts, just accept that you are not going to be their most favorite person ever again.
In my own family tree I list my legal name and current gender, and have in the notes that I transitioned and my dead name. But then I’m a special sort of activist who is OK with deadnaming themselves to make a point.
A question was asked about past accomplishments. That was one reason I didn’t go stealth after transition. Thanks to my intersex condition I “pass” more than 99% of the time, often without any makeup or even wearing “boy” clothes. But unless I was willing to walk away from a successful career, my technical papers, books, and research, I had to transition in public. So I still have about 50 or so tech papers and a few books that have my dead name on them. Every once in a while I come across them in literature searches, and it hurts. But I move on.
I started using it 25 years ago and back then you could only link male/female individuals as couples, but for many years now it has had no restrictions on linking people of any sex as a couple. Relationships are assumed to be marriage unless a “Never Married” event is added; then printed reports will say “partnered” rather than “married”. Children can be attached to couples or individuals, and can have multiple sets of parents defined. Sex can be defined as M/F/?.
A child’s birth certificate is the kind of thing I was thinking of. Do American birth records indicate siblings? Spanish birth records kept in the Civil Records office don’t, but each married couple has a “family book” (official, it’s not like a family Bible) where the Civil Records office records the marriage, any births and deaths, and if applicable divorce or separation.
A birth certificate might indicate if it was a multiple birth and what order the child came out in, or if the mother has given birth in the past (and possibly whether she’s ever had a stillbirth, or if any of the prior children have since died). But I’ve never seen one with names or anything like that.
My birth certificate (New York, 1981) has a spot for “number of children born of this pregnancy” and “number of this child in order of birth.” But there is no space for information about any such hypothetical siblings; they would all have their own birth certificates.
