Using Online Family Trees in Genealogical Research

Newspaper obituaries are excellent sources for genealogy research
Newspaper obituaries are excellent sources for genealogy research
An example of a privately published family tree
An example of a privately published family tree

Americans searching for their forebears as a hobby has grown remarkably in the past few decades, especially since the advent of personal computers in the 1980s. At the same time, there has been little growth in the number of genealogists who are considered scholars in the field.

Some are of the opinion that too much emphasis on scholarship “takes the fun out of genealogy”, according to Harry Macy, Jr. That might be a true statement, but hobbyists often forget (or don’t know) the problems caused by failure to document facts. This is especially true in our current world of online family trees. Just one undocumented relative placed on one twig of one online tree (in error) can start a ripple that turns into a tsunami.

More than 150 years ago, American genealogy was considered the equal of history, biography and other academic pursuits. Researchers were forced to use primary sources, because so few “compiled genealogies” had been published. This gradually changed as more and more hobbyists began to publish their own family trees, and these mid-1900s paperback books, usually done on a typewriter and stapled together, were often poorly documented.

“Professional” genealogists (who compiled other people’s trees for pay) during this time were not required to have any certain education, experience or ability in the field. Consequently, the resulting genealogies were sometimes accurate and sometimes imaginative. Many people paid good money to be told that they were kin to Daniel Boone or King Henry VI when that relationship could not actually be proven. Since there are now hundreds of these volumes sitting on shelves in libraries all across the country, they are used and/or copied as authoritative references, when in fact they are part fact and part whimsy.

In spite of some attempts to rectify this situation, the number of recognized scholars in the field of genealogy has remained small. Hobbyists are posting their unsourced family trees at online sites in record numbers. Management at ancestry.com has posted the following disclaimer on its “Public Member Trees” search page:

“We take all tree data "as is" and cannot guarantee the completeness, accuracy, or timeliness of the information contained in this database. We regret we cannot assist you in your personal research or prevent duplication of data. Our goal is to provide this user-contributed data to aid you in finding and/or correcting your family information.”

It is undoubtedly in the best interest of all genealogists, both professional and amateur, to see an improvement in the level of genealogical work. This can be achieved only if all researchers can be inspired to compile their trees in a more scholarly manner, citing original source documents whenever possible and paying close attention to details.


More by this Author


Comments 2 comments

moonlake profile image

moonlake 5 years ago from America

You are so right. I get so mad when I see someone take my grandfather's picture and put it on the wrong person and then when I let them know it is wrong they won't change it. I also suspect that many people who ask questions about my family members are paid genealogists not doing the research they should be doing.

I have a cousin that I know has the wrong great-great-grandparents on our family tree and no matter what I say to her she won't listen. Members in our family have her tree and it is so wrong.

Great hub gave you an vote up.


K. Burns Darling profile image

K. Burns Darling 5 years ago from Orange County, California

I am not a professional, but every bit of my online tree is documented, or it remains on my private tree until I can document it. I have a cousin who has had my grandmother's name wrong for eons, and no matter how many times I have shown him proof of that, he continues to ignore me. His wrong listing of her name all boils down to the 1920 census, and there is a mistake on the census, but I have put in the correction with Ancestry, (Which is where he got his information) and there are a zillion other sources that name her correctly. It is very frustrating.

I use other's trees has hints, but always go back and research it myself, it only takes a little extra time to ensure that it is correct.

Great hub! Voted up and useful

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working