1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Only registered members can see all the forums - if you've received an invitation to join (it'll be on your My Summary page) please register NOW!

  3. If you're looking for the LostCousins site please click the logo in the top left corner - these forums are for existing LostCousins members only.
  4. This is the LostCousins Forum. If you were looking for the LostCousins website simply click the logo at the top left.
  5. It's easier than ever before to check your entries from the 1881 Census - more details here

DNA being put to good use

Discussion in 'DNA Questions and Answers' started by At home in NZ, Dec 9, 2022.

  1. An article from the New Zealand Herald about an adoptee finding her birth father and what he was.
     
    • Thanks! Thanks! x 3
  2. peter

    peter Administrator Staff Member

    Great story - but not necessarily completely accurate, since there was no Stanley Thomas Taylor born in Liverpool at the right time. He might possibly be:

    TAYLOR, STANLEY THOMAS
    GRO Reference: 1930 M Quarter in MANCHESTER NORTH Volume 08D Page 888
     
  3. Not all people born in Liverpool are registered in the Liverpool registration district. I was born in a suburb of Liverpool but you won’t find me registered as Liverpool.

    I have found the deportation voyage for Stanley T Taylor birth date 17.2.30 his address in the UK was West Didsbury, I don’t need to look that up, it’s a suburb of Manchester.

    I believe this is his death record and this his burial both lead back to the birth registration you have quoted.
     
  4. peter

    peter Administrator Staff Member

    I don't think any experienced researcher is going to assume that someone born in Liverpool will necessarily have been registered in Liverpool RD - that's the sort of error that only beginners make. In 1930 more Liverpudlian births were registered in West Derby RD than in Liverpool RD.
    Yes, I also found that passenger list entry - definitely no need to look up where Didsbury is because it's shown in the passenger list as Manchester 20.

    But given the newspaper has the wrong birthplace and the wrong age, and describes the name as 'very common', which it isn't, can we be sure of anything in the article?
     
  5. I know it's dangerous to do so but I am assuming the wrong birthplace has come from a 1939 register entry because the address is 1.1miles from the 'home of John Lennon' which is mentioned in the article.
    I could spend all day researching this guy but I don't want to give that amount of time to somebody I have no link to.
    The information in the article appears to have come from what the librarian found out, who was possibly not an Ancestry user at the time, plus what other researchers have cobbled together in Ancestry trees.
    I have thought all along that if trees are wrong then the DNA is also wrong. I do not want to get into further discussion about the merits of DNA or otherwise. However I still think it was put to good use in helping the librarian to find her father.
     
  6. peter

    peter Administrator Staff Member

    The DNA can't be wrong, but someone might draw the wrong conclusions if they're relying on faulty evidence. The danger is that someone who is not an experienced family historian will select records based on their availability rather than on their relevance - that's why so many dubious trees show connections to the aristocracy (they are more likely to have left evidence for us to find).

    What we don't know from the newspaper article is how much of the information originated from, or was confirmed by, the cousins that the adoptee found from her father's side. The key point is that there are sufficient obvious errors in the article that we cannot take anything at face value.
     

Share This Page