Jump to content


Photo

Showing multiple marriage events in a Family Group Sheet


  • Please log in to reply
35 replies to this topic

#21 History Hunter

History Hunter

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 79 posts

Posted 21 April 2020 - 07:00 PM

Renee;
I’ve tried to have more than one marriage fact for the same couple and found it will not show the second fact in the Group Sheet. If you have it working, please detail how you did it. This is a big issue for couples that had to be married a second time in the Catholic Church.

#22 Renee Zamora

Renee Zamora

    Advanced Member

  • Admin
  • PipPipPip
  • 8779 posts

Posted 22 April 2020 - 07:20 AM

I only added a second marriage fact and it showed. Check that your second one isn't marked private. 


Renee
RootsMagic

#23 Rick Landrum

Rick Landrum

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 498 posts

Posted 22 April 2020 - 07:54 AM

Rick, you will need separate family group sheets, one for each family he made with different spouses. 

Thanks Renee,

That's what my testing showed. For my purposes, when using Publisher, I have started using an Individual Summary instead of a Family Group sheet. It provides enough detail for most of my family member readers.  Example, male ancestor was married three times. By selecting IS it shows all three marriages, all children, and details for the ancestor. If I had used FGS the husbands data would have been repeated three times.

Rick


RickL


#24 History Hunter

History Hunter

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 79 posts

Posted 23 April 2020 - 06:10 PM

Renee;

I checked that none of the private check-boxes are checked, but still can't get the second marriage to print in the Family Group Sheet. Any ideas?



#25 kbens0n

kbens0n

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3493 posts

Posted 24 April 2020 - 05:29 AM

Renee;

I checked that none of the private check-boxes are checked, but still can't get the second marriage to print in the Family Group Sheet. Any ideas?

 

Reports->Family Group Sheet->In Report Settings click the Reset button


---
--- "GENEALOGY, n. An account of one's descent from an ancestor who did not particularly care to trace his own." - Ambrose Bierce
--- "The trouble ain't what people don't know, it's what they know that ain't so." - Josh Billings
---Ô¿Ô---
K e V i N


#26 History Hunter

History Hunter

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 79 posts

Posted 24 April 2020 - 06:07 AM

Thanks, everyone. I think I found the reason that the marriages weren't showing up in some reports.

Logically, as it turns out, only the first marriage of a child shows in the Family Group Sheet for their parent family.

I say "logically", because after the initial marriage, they have started a new family group.

However; for the child's family (after the first marriage), all the marriages show in their Family Group Sheet.

 

Learning...always learning...



#27 Jerry Bryan

Jerry Bryan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3978 posts

Posted 24 April 2020 - 08:17 AM

Logically, as it turns out, only the first marriage of a child shows in the Family Group Sheet for their parent family.

I say "logically", because after the initial marriage, they have started a new family group.

However; for the child's family (after the first marriage), all the marriages show in their Family Group Sheet.

 

I'm not quite sure I understand. My maternal grandfather was married three times (no divorces, death of wives). If I start an FGS with him, all three of his marriages appear, but only the children from one of the marriages and only the individual details about the wife from that marriage. To get all his families I have to make three FGS reports, one with each wife. But each of his three FGS reports still shows all three of his marriages. This seems like the correct behavior.

If I make an FGS starting with my grandfather's father, then when my grandfather is listed as a child in the FGS, it still lists all three of his marriages.

How would I run my FGS reports differently to see the effect you are seeing of missing marriages?

 

Jerry



#28 History Hunter

History Hunter

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 79 posts

Posted 24 April 2020 - 10:00 AM

To see all the marriages for a given person, it is simplest to highlight their name on the pedigree chart and then go to the toolbar and run the family group sheet report. If one highlights them as a member in a family, only the first marriage will appear in the family group sheet.

Let me know if this makes sense to you, jerry.



#29 Jim Byram

Jim Byram

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 97 posts

Posted 24 April 2020 - 10:27 AM

Jerry,

 

I can replicate this.

 

The conditions are...

1) The person you are looking at should be a _child_ in the FGS.

2) The person that you are looking at should have two (or more) marriages to the _same_ person.

 

In that case, only one of those marriages to the same person shows in the child entry.

 

Jim



#30 Jerry Bryan

Jerry Bryan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3978 posts

Posted 24 April 2020 - 11:18 AM

I can replicate this.

 

The conditions are...

1) The person you are looking at should be a _child_ in the FGS.

2) The person that you are looking at should have two (or more) marriages to the _same_ person.

 

In that case, only one of those marriages to the same person shows in the child entry.

 

Ah, yes. I can replicate this now. I wasn't fully grasping that in the FGS you have to be in the child position AND you have to have two marriages to the same person in order for this problem to manifest. Under those conditions you can see the problem. I hope this is fixed in RM8 (or maybe in RM8.1 - I would hate to have fixing this kind of minor problem hold up the release of RM8.0).

I knew I had several people in my database who had multiple marriages to the same person, but I found it curiously difficult - essentially impossible - to find such  people from the RM user interface. There may be a way to do so and I just haven't yet figured it out. If there is a way to find such people from the RM user interface, please let me know. In the meantime, I created the following very trivial SQLite to find such people.

 

Jerry

-- multiple_marriages_same_spouse.sql   Jerry Bryan, 4/24/2020
-- Identify individuals who have multiple marriages to the same spouse.
-- Marriage events are those for which EventTable.EventType = 300

SELECT multiple_marriages.*
FROM ( 
          SELECT E.OwnerID, FT.FatherID, FT.MotherID, COUNT(FT.FatherID) AS NumF, COUNT(FT.MotherID) AS NumM
          FROM (SELECT EE.* FROM EventTable AS EE WHERE EE.EventType = 300) AS E      
                   JOIN         
                FamilyTable AS FT ON FT.FamilyID = E.OwnerID
          GROUP BY E.OwnerID
     )
 
 AS multiple_marriages WHERE NumF > 1 OR NumM > 1;


#31 Renee Zamora

Renee Zamora

    Advanced Member

  • Admin
  • PipPipPip
  • 8779 posts

Posted 24 April 2020 - 05:46 PM

There is only one condition where you will see all the marriage dates for the same couple. That is when they are listed as the parents on the Family Group Sheet. The other spouses for them will only display the marriage fact marked primary.

 

For the children make sure in the Family Group Sheet report settings that you have the box "Spouses of each child" checked. Only the primary marriage fact for each spouse will appear in the report for a child. If you want to see a child's other marriage dates for the same spouse you need to create a family group sheet for them. 


Renee
RootsMagic

#32 Jerry Bryan

Jerry Bryan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3978 posts

Posted 24 April 2020 - 08:07 PM

There is only one condition where you will see all the marriage dates for the same couple. That is when they are listed as the parents on the Family Group Sheet. The other spouses for them will only display the marriage fact marked primary.

 

Only the primary marriage fact for each spouse will appear in the report for a child.

 

Broken as designed? Surely not. Surely this is an actual bug, not a feature?

 

Jerry



#33 KFN

KFN

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 338 posts

Posted 25 April 2020 - 06:05 AM

One of the issues with multiple marriage dates for a couple is the rule set for “Family Record” events.  This is the same issue for events like birth and death on individuals.  Birth and death are “singular” events, individuals generally have only one of these events and therefore any addition birth/death events associated with the individual are considered “alternate” or secondary.  

 

When I’m in research mode on an individual I create multiple birth/death events as I find them marking one as the best, but keeping the others as documentation for later review and critique by others.

 

The same could be argued for family based marriage dates, in general (obviously not in reality) couples only officially marry once and therefore any additional marriage dates could be seen as alternate dates either as (civil marriages vs religious) or vow renewals rather than second marriages.

 

To solve this problem you have two potential solutions, either has pro/con.

 

1). Create a second family unit for the remarried couple, this way each unit has the ability to have two primary marriage dates.  I would not connect children to the second family unit for clarity of when the child was born to what family unit.

 

2). Create a custom family fact titled, Marriage2 or Religious Marriage or Civil Marriage or Vow Renewal, That can be differentiated from the first event between this couple.  This way only one family record is generated but the new event can be made primary.



#34 Jerry Bryan

Jerry Bryan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3978 posts

Posted 25 April 2020 - 09:14 AM

Birth and death are “singular” events, individuals generally have only one of these events and therefore any addition birth/death events associated with the individual are considered “alternate” or secondary.  

 

When I’m in research mode on an individual I create multiple birth/death events as I find them marking one as the best, but keeping the others as documentation for later review and critique by others.

 

The same could be argued for family based marriage dates, in general (obviously not in reality) couples only officially marry once and therefore any additional marriage dates could be seen as alternate dates either as (civil marriages vs religious) or vow renewals rather than second marriages.

 

I don't see vow renewals as second marriages, whereas I do view a remarriage after a divorce as a second marriage. In any case, I'm quite delighted with your use of the term "singular events". I think the term captures very succinctly the root cause of a number of problems in the various data models for genealogy, and in some cases in the functionality of RM. For example, RM often does not deal very well with events that are not inherently singular such as census. Searching, marking, and unmarking don't do well with such events, nor does People View. For example, you can't display multiple census events for a person in People View, and a search for a census event in Texas in 1860 often produces very strange results because a person could have an 1860 census event not in Texas and an 1870 event that is in Texas.

 

On the other hand, there are data elements that may seem inherently singular which perhaps really aren't. Birth can be this way as when there is conflicting evidence about a person's birth date and when there is no clear reason to prefer one of the pieces of evidence over the other. I even have a man in my database whose own affidavit in his application for a Revolutionary War pension says that he was born "on either 5 Mar 1761 or 5 Mar 1762", and that he himself didn't know which date was correct. This results in a non-singular birthdate from a single piece of evidence. Genealogy software is not very fond of "either 5 Mar 1761 or 5 Mar 1762" as a valid birth date and genealogy software is not very fond of multiple birth dates that are co-equal rather than being primary and secondary. I really think that such events need to be co-equal rather than primary and secondary or primary and alternate.

 

Another inherently singular data element that is perhaps becoming tricky to record is sex for transgender people. I won't belabor the point except to point out that there are even people who are born with physical characteristics of both sexes due to a genetic variation where they have extra X or Y chromosomes.

But the data element in genealogy that I more and more think should not be so singular is a person's name. I run into numerous, numerous cases where a person really has more than one different name that I don't think should be labeled as primary and alternate. I think that when there are co-equal but different names that the data models of genealogy and the support of names in genealogy software should not reduce us to one primary name with other options being alternate or secondary.

I'll use my mother and her three sisters as examples. First of all, all four of them are middle name people. And for all four of them, after they were married their name became "middle_name maiden_surname married_surname". My mother and her two younger sisters are still living, so I will give real data for my mother's oldest sister. Her birth name was Eva Lucille Peters and was known as Lucille. She married Audie Paris Wright. Thereafter, she became known as Lucille Peters Wright and signed her name as Lucille P. Wright. The three other sisters all did exactly the same thing. We are talking about Lucille's name on her driver's license, her name on her Social Security card, her name on checking accounts, etc. This was very much a real and legal and official name, not some alternate or secondary name. And yet her birth name was obviously Eva Lucille Peters, which also was very much a real and legal and official name, not some alternate or secondary name. So in my view, her name was not a singular event, nor should it be treated as such. There are many other good and valid reasons for multiple and non-singular names which I won't write about. But my point is that genealogy should fully and enthusiastically support the concept. It shouldn't force some of the names to be alternate or secondary when they really aren't. Having a primary name and an alternate name in RM or in GEDCOM is not the same thing has having two primary names. And RM8.1 (if not RM8.0) should display all non-singular marriages in a Family Group Sheet. There shouldn't be a design feature that suppresses the non-singular marriages when the person is in the child's position in a Family Group Sheet.

 

Jerry



#35 KFN

KFN

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 338 posts

Posted 25 April 2020 - 10:03 AM

Jerry,

 

Family historians are all about recording vow renewals as a marriage event and I've seen them do this for both religious reasons so they can be married in their church as well as acknowledging their continued love or so the kids/grandkids can enjoy the event.

 

Im always seeing new ways that family historians diverge from genealogy in their recording methods and I always need to regard their vision as different but just as valid as mine!



#36 John_of_Ross_County

John_of_Ross_County

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 699 posts

Posted 25 April 2020 - 12:11 PM

For another variation, my father was James Kenneth B[….].  His variation on the middle name person was his first initial and middle name.

So he signed J. Kenneth B. and was sometimes known as Kenny.  I record his name as J[ames] Kenneth B. using the portion in [ ] to indicate that portion that he did not use.