Timely Tips to Trim the Family Tree | Ancestry

[@sammiq1946]

Thank you, thank you, thank you! Not only have I trimmed my tree from 8900 to 5400 (and am not finished), but I am having a wonderful time putting individuals into my tree and learning (!) about them. I now understand what you said about getting to know each individual and the entire family. It is a HUGE relief to me to know I don't have to look at those 24 hints waving at me from the "mother-in-law of the aunt of the brother-in-law of great grandmother". I feel much more in control and more calm in going about my daily genealogy work. I have to admit I am now spending 8 to 10 hours/day on my genealogy and have quilts and embroidery work kind of niggling in the back of my mind ... but I will get to them after this initial "newness" wears off a big. I might even decide to devote one morning or afternoon to those crafts. Ha! I learn so, so much from your videos ... Thank you again. sammi

[@frankhooper7871]

I agree 100% about including ancestors' descendants. For one thing, this is necessary to determine _how_ we're related to our DNA matches. And also, it can help in determining a female ancestor's maiden name: some times there are more than one possible marriages to choose from - one (or more) of the children might be given the maiden name as a second name [helpful corroboration]; and post-1837 (here in the UK), I've had to check GRO indices for each child to see common possibilities.

[@darlenesye1609]

Another excellent episode Christa. And I hear your comment about how large families can be. Interestingly enough, the largest of my ancestral families I have found so far is only eight children of my great grandparents. Only three who lived to be adults. For that reason family view works and not being necessitated to use pedigree view does not confuse me. I'm right alongside that lady who has only less than 300 people in her tree. On the other hand... I have included in my tree my ex-husband, his other two wives and the woman who had two children between myself and wife number two. I did that specifically to include my son's siblings. But I don't include in my family tree any of my ex-husband's relatives. If I were to include his family that's how my family tree could grow to be the gynormous kind of tree you're talking about. My mother-in-law being one of eighteen children, there is No Way I even want to consider managing that and I'm So happy that my tree remains manageable. I do know that my tree could grow expotentially if I add my grandfather's nieces and nephews.

[@wyospring8797]

I thoroughly agree with your tips--my only exception is I do add "in-laws" aunts and uncles marry sisters and brothers--so include the "in-laws" parents and with so many people in the families having the same names or marrying people with the same last name--I feel obligated to add the parents, to distinguish parentage and between brothers and husbands with the same names.

[@susiecanuck]

Thank you so much for your helpful tips on how to "trim" my family tree. I do get carried away with tracing too far back, for example, in a relationship that is through marriage. I suspect that most genealogists are also those fascinated with history. When I find a link to a famous and/or historical but distant relative, I run with that line and make comments in the notes. I guess I think that someone else might enjoy or be helped with my research as I have been. Because of your advice I will be more cautious of adding too much to the neglect of my direct ancestors. Thanks again for helping me stay focused. Your talks are most appreciated! Cheers from Canada, Sue Mansell Waterloo, Ontario

[@RichardMay1]

Nicely done. Crista, your educational videos are an absolute godsend. Thank you. I have struggled with how to share this information with my relatives. All have different needs/goals and I have finally decided that it is useless to try and tailor a family tree for each person. This decision may seem like common sense, but it has been an intellectual struggle.

[@Hurricaneintheroom]

I've been working on my family tree. It's very interesting. I usually go back until I can't continue because of roadblocks. I love the detective work involved. Making a tree to know who they are & where they come from but I also add what they died of so I can see if there are trends. What bothers me is being disrespected by people on Ancestry or even in your families. I have a ton of documents to support each person if I can find it. That includes paying researchers to research where I can't personally go to. My step mother decided she wanted to write a book and include my mother's background. It's a little researched line. She asked me if she could include & I said no. And she just went online to find my research, copied it, and didn't think anything was wrong. We got into a big fight. My aunt wanted to write a book on my mother's line and hers. She wanted all my research. Just give it to her. Sometimes genealogy can be difficult. I just do my own thing.

[@jo-annleake8198]

Crista - I find your videos very informative and they answer questions for me that I struggle with! I took the sugestion in genealogy to "start with what is out there first" in a very broad interpretation. Well, now I'm linked to all and sundry and am now painstakingly proving events in those relationships! I do focus on my central ancestral line, though, and it has sharpened my research focus and my skills! Thanks!

[@brysonhatfield9557]

I ALWAYS include the names of any in-laws (parents of any non-blood relative), you never know when they may pop up in your research, and become a blood relative, and in that case, prevents me from entering the data twice.

[@TravelingBibliophile]

Bryson Hatfield I am the same way, I have found several instances where my lines have crossed back & forth. I do that for the exact same reason I had put my Gr. Aunt’s husband (dad’s maternal aunt) on my tree and then when I moved further back I found out that he was the Gr. Nephew of my dad’s paternal grandmother so I had to go and correct this so I didn’t have them, my Gr. Aunt, and 1st cousins 1x removed (who are also my 3rd cousins 1 removed) .

[@shirleymackes7749]

To many people. I am 80 year old. We have 4 grown

[@virginiahall1194]

love it! So helpful. Thanks! I'm looking at all the videos I can before continuing my tree and thanks to your succinct insights, will hopefully have a well-shaped, researched and pertinent history to pass on.

[@customerservice4122]

Thank you for all your wonderful videos! I'm so glad I can watch back episodes and hope my comment still gets seen. I sometimes go off on a branch that is unrelated to me because I have a relative who asks me to do research on their ancestors. I love to do this for them but my tree now has several large branches that are technically not related to me. Maybe in the future, when asked, I should start a new tree right away for that person? Meanwhile, is there a way to disconnect a branch and move the whole thing into a new (separate) tree? Or should I just leave them? I don't get overwhelmed with these families (yet).

[@kargelr]

I decided early on to concentrate on direct ancestors. I include siblings if I can find them, and sibling spouses, which can help confirm things on censuses. I rarely find much useful in anything "downline". I do include the downline relatives I know, like my cousins' kids, etc. This allows me to show the tree at family gatherings and people can see where they fit.

[@kimhanks338]

Thank you. You gave me some great helpful hints: pedigree, how to disconnect, consider combining my trees... You do great work and I appreciate the brief videos...all that I can handle at 1 time

[@redf7209]

Basically the people i want in my tree are ancestors and people who share common ancestors with me. However there are good reasons for keeping in people and their families who are linked only by marriage. In the UK when looking at a name you will commonly find a lot of people in the vicinity with the same name and even similar key dates. This is because typically, a large family will have a common set of first names and each of their children will use the same set of names, in the same order for their kids and so on for a few generations, even possibly living in the same street. Working out who is who is often a matter of elimination rather than searching and often people will marry the siblings of their siblings spouse to make things more confusing. Knowing details of the spouse can help differentiate families in the census returns and Christian names in their family are sometimes clues too when linking a child of that family. Having done detailed work to do this 'elimination' its a shame to waste it, when it could help someone else, but its also my ground evidence for why i have identified my family the way i have. Secondly, Its not uncommon to find an ancestor within the wrong family in someone else's tree and suddenly they are linked to your tree, causing confusion to others too. Basically somebody has found a record and linked to it because there is not enough context for them to see it is the wrong person. For this reason, I like to build up enough people and data around the ancestor that it wont be picked up wrongly from my tree. This means parents and siblings of spouses are recorded well as I can. Thirdly, I have frequently found 'lost' people either living with or visiting distant relatives, children adopted by them or brought up with them. Fourthly sometimes knowing the people around your family will give you social insights that are relevant to your own, what circles are they moving in, what areas. I know that about 7/8 generations back a landed knighted family became linked in someway with mine for generations financially and i don't really know why yet so i follow up records of that family whenever i see them near mine. Lastly trying to link to a dna match tree is sometimes easier if you can see a common name that might only link via marriage because the dna line name is lost due to marriage change of name.

[@sharondcarlos]

Thank you for these tips! I, like you, have researched my ancestors as well as their descendants. I surprising how easily a tree can sprawl out of control. I've come to a point where I'm trimming my tree to remove random family members I might have accidentally saved and/or duplicate members. That being said, I was clicking on each person's profile to see how they are related. It looks like I may have to invest in FTM. It looks so much easier!

[@melissaunruh7517]

Thanks for the Video. It was informative. Just wondering if any one else has this problem... I have found in my own tree that the relationship calculator on the Ancestry is sometimes flawed, particularly if you have intermarried families where you are a direct descendant of more than one child of a set of parents but on different generation levels. The relationship calculator only gives one title no matter which pedigree you are looking at, when there are in fact 2 different titles according to the number of generations between the home person and the Great to how ever many degrees grandparents. i.e. A set of Grandparents in my tree that are calculated as 4th great grandparents for their son but should also be 5th for their daughter. They are always calculated as 4th and their daughter is most definitely my 4th so it isn't possible for her parents to be fourth as well.

[@mariecarty2422]

I also had a great-aunt living in Boston who had 3 children but sadly passed away a few days after giving birth to her 4th baby. Consequently my great aunts mother who was still living in Ireland paid to send over from Ireland a maiden cousin to help care for the children. And, they consequently married about 6 months later and had more children together. Last name Roach(e) and Leahy! Must have happened a lot back in the day.

[@eclharris]

One interesting tidbit....Benjamin was taught to read, a rarity among many colonial-era settlers, especially non-whites. But his grandmother had been a white former indentured servant, who had children with an African slave whom she -bought, freed, and married. According to the laws of MD a free mother ( post the Revolution meant that any child she gave birth to was considered free, regardless of the legal status of the father Without knowing that history until my adult years, I never connected it to the fact that our family were all readers. In the house that my parents built, before we were of school age, there were two floor-to-ceiling bookcases in the living-room filled with hardback books, fiction and non-fiction, including a full set of the Americana Encyclopedia and a library-size Webster's dictionary (with its own stand).

[@janecantrell4864]

I ALWAYS learn something new from you, Crista. This time, I learned that I could have a family view in Family Tree Maker. How that passed me by .. no answer! Anyway .... Thank you!

[@Rony2453]

I never realized what good the "relationship" section was. thanks.

[@susanpearson-creativefibro]

Some interesting ideas in this. The only thing I disagree with is the not including married in families. I have two reasons for this, the first is that I am UK based and the majority of my branches are like your exceptions when the family intermarries multiple times. Secondly, I don’t have children to leave a legacy for but my tree has provided help for both blood relatives and people who are related to a family branch who are in laws for me. Having said that if someone marries in with the surname Smith for instance I am not going to attempt to go beyond the parents and children if the Smith was the man. Thankfully I have lots of unusual names in my tree which makes the whole process more enjoyable.

[@leonedias3067]

Thank you Crista, your videos are very informative and helpful.

[@cookala]

Wonderful presentation, Crista. I only wish I had known to NOT include people not related to me to begin with but, as you said, we're all guilty of getting carried away at times...especially when ancestry.com makes it soooo easy to attach documentation. I will definitely have to go back and trim my tree.

[@Kim-un7vl]

I have 74K in my tree. I've gone as far as I can with my maternal tree. I am now doing my cousins and there husbands. Its so fun but it can be overwhelming, but I'm up to the task. I enjoy watching all you video's. I have so many grandparents, great-grandparents and so on. I found a grea-----t grandfather that was sheriff on London around 1527, but I am thinking that it was not the son but the father. Still investing that one. I also have people on my dads side that married people on my moms side. I had a person who was adopted and I am a 3 or 4th cousin on my mom side. All I could do is give him my 2nd and 3rd grandfather or grandmother. Not sure how else to help him.

[@johnlegan4104]

Crista, would you recommend one or two trees for married couples. I have both my tree & my wife's all included

[@richardewan2593]

I didn’t know about disconnecting a relationship, really useful tip thank you

[@hworth]

I also attempt to follow the descendents of all my ancestors for a few generation. I do include families of some spouses. Particularly, if there seems to be a possibility of connections among families. I also include family clusters even when I am not related to everyone. I have a group of families in 1800s Oxford County, Maine, who intermarried constantly. I am descended from three of the families and have siblings who married into the other two. I included everyone on all five families because there is so much intermarriage, it is the only way to keep all of the folks organized. I also include the ancestry of spouses of my closest relatives brothers-in-law, aunts and uncles, because I know that no one in their direct descent is working on these lines and I want to provide my nephews, nieces and cousins with a start on both sides if any of them ever get interested in genealogy. I know some of these connections from personal information, and I don't want it to be lost to the next generation.

[@frankhooper7871]

I mostly treat relatives of in-laws in the same way... with a few exceptions. When doing some research for a friend, I encountered a familiar name from *my* tree; it turned out that one of my 4th cousins is one of his 1st cousins, so I have included just the direct links between the two of us. Ancesty reports him as "nephew of wife of 3rd cousin 1x removed" :-)

[@eclharris]

44,000 at peak..and I'm African-American so that's a lot, but I've been at it since the late 1980's. My mom comes from a mixed-race family whose ancestry can be traced back to the 1790s in America, but she was given up for adoption at age 3. We (her kids) never knew she was adopted until she was almost 80. Then she finally decided to reveal what little she knew about the facts and circumstances of her adoption. Until then, we had never met a single relative on her side. To our knowledge,there were no close relatives or siblings in the adoptive family ( who lived in Little Rock) and she was far away from her Chicago and Maryland/Michigan/Ohio based- birth family, whose names were unknown to her until she was a teenager, a no real way in the 1920s to find out. (Sorry for the run-on sentence, but I'm operating only one cup of coffee). It turns out, her birth family was HUGE, and were free-African -American as early as the 1700s.Also, we got an information injection when we learned that Benjamin Banneker, the colonial astronomer and surveyor of Washington DC's boundaries when it became the federal city,was a 4th great-uncle. Who knew?

[@eclharris]

I'm now in the process of trimming, and glad to do it--in the interest of accuracy. My siblings and I have also taken DNA tests. That's where the real interesting stuff comes in. My current love interest is an African-American from NY who resides in Finland. Don't ask. The mother of his children is a Finn He was shocked, as was I, to learn that DNA indicates that I have a tiny bit of Finnish DNA. Interestingly, my Finnish ancestry is from the original native Finns--the Sami Indian tribe. Who knew!! I'm an Afro-Viking

[@paulamasterson4932]

Morning and thanks for another great video. I actually am wrestling with this question regarding my third great grandfather, John W Collins. I have researched hundreds of Collinses trying to track him down and have kept this info in my tree until I find him. I do not want to delete any of it (HOURS of work!!) until I make a connection. The relationship calculator properly shows no known relationship and these people do not show up in the pedigree - so my question is can I leave this research freely available until I can make a connection or will this cause problems for others? I assume they do not show up as related to me if I do not establish a connection? The same goes for others in my tree, such as neighbors, etc. They are not related but could be significant. Not sure what to do here ... :-(

[@Rony2453]

Thank you very much for this. I had many trees before I realized it was a mistake!

[@hummerrfun]

Thanks, I was feeling a bit guilty not putting my sister's husband's family in here, but now I feel better. I do have her spouse and children his parents but not the whole group. He does genealogy and has a huge tree ... He has a mammoth tree, which I have access to. But getting his tree and all the hints sounds overwhelming. Whew!

[@chrisbrown7077]

Excellent video!! I got a lot of great information. Thank you.

[@AncestryUS]

Hi, Chris. Thanks for you comment. We know it was a while ago, but we hope you continue to watch videos in our KZbin channel.

[@Ratchet4647]

What are the listed alternatives for spouse? It's a bit small and blurry there and I'm curious what they'd be.

[@kami6105]

This is very interesting I have always thought of when do you cut adding people. We are a blended family. Both my parents were married once before they meet and marry. My dad was a widower with 7 kids and my mom was a widow with one child. And then 8 more came of this union. I get frustrated when I find more info of inlaws than that of my actual blood family. I add the inlaws of each of my brothers and sister family then I get hints for those people and their children and then sometimes it keeps going on and on. And I begin to feel like I'm finding their tree and not my own. So when do I stop without hurting someone's feelings?

[@CristaCowan]

Hi Kami - That's a great question. I guess my question back to you is - Who are you building your family tree for? If it is for yourself and/or your children and grandchildren, maybe you don't need to include all of the inlaws families. But, if it is for your nieces and nephews, maybe it might be nice to include their other parent's family as well.

[@kami6105]

@@CristaCowan Thanks Crista for your response. I am making the tree for everyone in the family. The nieces and nephews and cousins too. They want me to make a book to be distributed to the whole family. It's just sometimes annoying when you can information on other family members more than you can find from the direct descendants. Thanks again.

[@TracyMinsterman]

Thank you so much, Crista. I have been struggling with where exactly to draw the line for who is in my tree. I did get carried away when I first joined Ancestry.com so I have a lot of pruning to do. This video helped me greatly.

[@stingray7611]

I am with you when it comes to getting 'click happy'. Still pruning.

[@arielmora2350]

I've been focusing on building the direct lines, but I added other siblings mainly for the purpose of clarifying the identity of the direct ancestor. I haven't wanted to spend time reviewing the info on those siblings, at least not in the forseeable future, but I wish I could easily shove those hints off to the side -- i.e. let Ancestry know that I will review them later. Is there any quick way to do this? I believe it would make it easier to see the hints for people I want to focus on.

[@debbieknepper7454]

My family tree had made someone a half sister and they are not it’s there true sister how do I fix it

[@Kelli_D.]

I am glad I came across the video, as I've been working on mine a lot lately and I'll get a hint and I don't recognize the name but with almost 6 thousand people I'm not going to recognize them all - and I end up looking at a Father in law, of a a sister in law of a blah blah blah - what ever it may read - and I sit here and wonder why in the world am I looking like them, and why are there to start with - they're no relation to me. But I've been on the fence about removing them. I know I don't need them there They're family of in laws - more or less. but then I feel if I remove them then someone else who was looking for them and are closer related to them may not find that info I had.. It's like a double ended sword - no I don't need them but If I remove them, then I feel I can't help someone who comes along later looking for them. Yet it makes for way too many people in my tree that really have no reason to be there.. - conflicting and confusing with my inner self :) And Ancestry needs to let us Delete more than one person at a time - if we know who we need deleted and there's 10 plus It should give us the option to remove several, by checking boxes or similar next to them to remove all at once. And they also need to not consider someone a spouse when they were never married Yes we can change it to " Partner" but it still shows up as Spouse then we have to add a note the person was never married. And do you or any viewers know how I can attempt to find a supposed adoption? It wasn't like the mother gave up the child type of adoption. My bio mother had my eldest sister I don't think she (bio mom) even knows who my sister's actual dad is to be honest, but story has it my bio dad adopted her - my sister was around 1 (if I recall) when my parents were married. However I can't find a single thing saying he legally adopted her. And I honestly think they just started using our last name with her since she was just a baby , and that's how he "adopted" her , just by using his last name with her on everything. I know of someone else who's done that and it's legal! The boy was born with his fathers last name - his grandmother has the original birth certificate to prove it His mother ran off with him when he was 2, he's only known his last name to be her maiden name it was his last name all through school, on the Birth Cert. he has, on his drivers license etc. When I found him and connected him and his dad together he looked into putting his name back the way it was when he was born - but it costs so much and has to go through courts- his mother never did any of that - just started using her last name - This is what makes me think perhaps this is how my parents did it with my sister since I can't find anything on him adopting her what so ever. Not even a court date or court hearing

[@AncestryUS]

Two people do not have to be spouses to have children together - not even in family trees. Once you add the children's father, just go into his profile on your Ancestry tree and click on EDIT | Edit Relationship. Then click the big X by the "spouse's" name. That will remove the spousal relationship between the two but keep both in the tree as the parents of the children. As for finding records about an adoption - the fastest way would be to contact the state vital records office and request a copy of her birth certificate. If it is the original birth certificate with the biological father's name on it (or no father's name on it) then it is likely that there was no formal adoption processed legally through the courts. If it is an amended birth certificate with your father listed as her father, then there was a formal adoption. You can then file through the court that handled the adoption for access to the paperwork.

[@jsbarto1]

Great video! I'm new to using the Ancestry.com online tree. It appears that the way your family pages look is different than what I am looking at when I am working on my tree. For example, I do not see where I can access the relationship calculator in the present interface. That is just one of the issues I am having. I have been working with the online tree for about two months--and I imported a GEDCOM in when I renewed my membership. Like I said, my screen looks nothing like yours. When I double click on one of my people, I see their facts page, and I can match and merge people as I add people to my tree. And, I can easily switch between family and pedigree view. So, are there ways I can change my tree page view so that it approximates what I would see in a family tree program? It looks like your online view looks quite similar to what I think Family Tree Maker looks like (I have been using Reunion for Mac for my genealogy almost since it came out). I just think I would find things a little easier if I could have the online tree look more like yours when you are demonstrating things. Thanks for reading my post and hopefully answering back!

[@AncestryUS]

We have made some changes to the Ancestry website since this video was recorded (almost 3 years ago). But, the basic functionality is the same. If you click on your tree name (top left when viewing your tree) and go to TREE SETTINGS, you will see (on the right) the home person in the tree and just below that Who You Are In This Tree. Make sure that is set to you. Now, on every profile page in your tree, just under the death date in the header, you will see the relationship to you. You can click on that relationship and it will show you the path. I have a few videos that walk through the new (year old now! ;-) ) site design that you might find helpful. Maybe start with this one: kzbin.info/www/bejne/hnfGo2yvlqtmnLc Hope that helps! (Crista)

[@FunManufacturer]

What about ex-spouses of family members? Do you include or exclude them?

[@betsysmorris]

This is so helpful. Years ago I created a large tree with both my family and my husband’s. He is now my ex-husband. I want to remove his family from my tree, but rather than deleting those people I’d like to move them into a new tree to preserve their information for my children. Is there a way to do this besides recreating each person individually? Thank you so much for all the assistance you provide in your wonderful videos.

[@AncestryUS]

Hi Betsy, thanks so much for stopping by! We're happy to hear that you found this video helpful and we would of course be happy to pass some tips on to you for getting these people situated in their own tree. You can copy information over from one tree to another which would remove the need for you to recreate each profile from scratch. We have linked some instructions on this below for you: support.ancestry.com/s/article/Copying-People-from-Trees?language=en_US We hope this helps!

[@betsysmorris]

@@AncestryUS This is exactly what I needed. You are so helpful. Thank you!!!

[@AncestryUS]

We are happy to help! Best of luck with your research.

[@Bill62901]

I have all my data online. My problem is that only the maiden name is shown. I go down my list of people and find Mary Smith. Later on elsewhere I find Mary Pinkerton. They are the same person but I can't tell that. Is there a way to display her name as Mary (Smith) Pinkerton?

[@trudyhamilton3162]

I really enjoyed this video. It will help me know when and where to manage my tree. Thank you very much'

[@bettyjanefelts]

Great video and very helpful!❤️🙏

[@purplepeace2188]

I've done quite an extensive tree on ancestry.com. I think I'm getting carried away though. I tend to include not only the children of my great great grand parents but sometimes the family of their spouses. My great great grandfather's brother married, had four children and died at 40. His widow married and emigrated to America with her children and new husband. At first I included the new family. Then deleted it thinking well he's not related to the family. However, I found that the first child of the original four children married the younger brother of their mother's second husband and they did have children and grandchildren. So the second husband's family and my family are conjoined in present generations in America.

[@mariecarty222]

Very helpful. Thank you so much!

[@LauriPlaysOfficial]

People actually put pets on their family trees???

[@tomfoley2277]

If you trim your tree of persons do the records that you may have attached to them get trimmed out also? if not - why? A column in the "list of people" with relationship to home person or "you" would be a terrific idea. Or if it showed "no relationship" that would help with sorting out orphaned persons. Did I hear you say that FTM has that option but not the website?

[@AncestryUS]

If you delete a person, the records attached to them get deleted also. FTM does have the ability to locate "floating" people in your family tree, yes. Online Ancestry trees do not currently have this capability.

[@zorrogash]

Ive done these things ,removing all those people,after i found a problem,good job comunicating,these things,i sometimes thought i was the only one doing and thinking in these paterns, i know now i am not.now thank you.

[@davismadeline]

I loved the pin on the Ancestry.com Pinterest page about researching your railroad ancestors. Could you do a video on the same subject? Thank you! :)

[@lindavincent6425]

Christa, once you have trimmed your tree of extraneous people in FTM, how do you prevent them from reappearing when you sync it with Ancestry.com? Thanks.

[@markkelly1948]

I too would like to know the answer to this question: when you sync, which tree (FTM or Ancestry) has precedence/governs?

[@jamjamjamjam25]

I feel the same way about intermarriage about my family in Newberry South Carolina!

[@loopycook]

My husband originally started our account. I have my own results and want to have my own tree on our account. Is there a way for my to "copy and paste" my family tree info with reentering everything? We want each to be able work and manage our trees separately.

[@AncestryUS]

Marilyn, It sounds like you're wanting to download the family tree your husband created and upload it into a separate tree for yourself? If this is correct, please visit these steps which show you how to download his tree and upload it as a new tree OR into a separate Ancestry account, if you have one: support.ancestry.com/s/article/Moving-your-family-tree-from-one-account-to-another-US-1460088590773-2547. Let us know if you have any further questions!

[@wheelgirl0830]

Christa, Suppose I want to find out where a disability started in our family where would I look that up?

[@MrDannyDetail]

Possibly you've got a bit further in answering this now, but just in case... Some census returns listed a disability for some individuals (in the UK at least) but usually using non-exact words that would seem inappropriate nowadays. In some instances you may also find hospital admission/discharge records for some of them, or note that they were a patient in a particular type of hospital (e.g. hospital for the blind etc) at the time of a census. To help narrow down the search a little you may wish to first read up on whether the disability is known to be genetic, and if so which genes have (or may have) the particular mutation (or mutations) that cause the disability. There are plenty of disabilities and illnesses passed down via the Y or X chromosome or the mitochondrial DNA, and if it was on one of these genes then it would help you a lot in narrowing things down because Y chromosomes go through the male line only, father to son, and mitochodrial dna passes, almost always unchanged, from mother to her children, whilst the X chromosome comes from either parent in a woman but has to be from the mother in a man. Another possibility is that the disability may be one that tends to be life shortening, so it may be possible to identify the ancestral families with noticably shorter life expectancies, or more infant or young adult mortalities, though of course both of these become more common the further back you go anyway due to poorer public health and so on. If a particular family is identified you could then order up a few death certificates and see what the cause of death was, which may at least be a vague description of the disability if the death was long enough ago that it wasn't yet fully known or understood by medical science.

[@martamima]

No, you did not say siblings of spouses - I was asking. Thanks for the answer - not sure I answer it the same way!

[@richardewan2593]

I include spouses of my ancestors and descendants in my tree but make a note of those peoples parents in the birth record.

[@jprestr]

I have included the spouses of my children and have traced their family for their information, also the spouse of my brother and a couple of cousins.

[@wilmakelley1959]

Krista, many times when I'm trying to merge duplicate people I will receive a message stating this person cannot be merged , because they are already related . What does this really mean , are they not the same person ? I have had computer problems at times when I had to reinstall my FTM program , and download my tree again from ancestry . This seems to create more duplicates .

[@AncestryUS]

Wilma, You should probably give Member Services a call and walk them through what is happening and the error you get. They should be able to help. You can reach them at 1-800-Ancestry. (Crista)

[@michaelcrone2333]

Good info

[@mikewolf6297]

I was wondering how you feel about adding wives of ancestors who you aren't descended from. for instance you are descended from this person's second wife, should you add wife 1 and wife 3

[@stingray7611]

I think you should add the 'other' wifes of a relative. You never know, those kids may have genealogical information about the family.

[@erees3929]

How / where do I buy Family Tree Maker for my pc?

[@AncestryUS]

www.mackiev.com/ftm/

[@SensaiMan]

Family Tree Maker doesn't work on my windows 10 computer. It just packed up and I lost all of my family tree 25000 and it was growing. I wa am really upset about this. One saving grace was that lucky for me that I had kept my tree on another computer that had broken down, eventually after two years I had the computer repaired and as that machine is windows XP. Do you have any advice as to how can I put Family Tree Maker on my windows 10 computer? Thanks for your video. I add anyone that's linked by marriage on my tree. Also, I thought that Family Tree Maker could only hold upto 2000 people? Assistance welcome. Kind regards.

[@AncestryUS]

What version of Family Tree Maker are you currently running? I run FTM 2017 on a Windows 10 computer and it works just fine. I also have more than 72,000 people in my tree so there is no limit that I am aware of. (~Crista)

[@SensaiMan]

Hi Crista, thank you very much for your reply, I have found the original disc, and it's version 2004 embarrassing! how can I get the new version? Can I download it for free or does it have a cost? Thanks for your time much appreciated. Kind regards, Andrew.

[@AncestryUS]

You can order the latest version of FTM here: www.mackiev.com/ftm/

[@jenniferdenham7054]

I have a question.. I did my tree and have had names come up that I have no clue how I’m related too . I have messaged one of them and they said they believe my dad is relegated to her moms mom . So if this is so then my “dad” is not my dad .... I’m at a lost , I don’t know what to do .

[@AncestryUS]

Jennifer - Are you asking about your DNA Matches or hints that are coming up in your online family tree?

[@jenniferdenham7054]

Dna matches

[@jenniferdenham7054]

Also do you have anyone you a dna specialist you could recommend to me ??

[@AncestryUS]

@@jenniferdenham7054 - Ancestry ProGenealogists could help you. www.progenealogists.com/

[@speterson9]

I created too many trees, and now that I'm entering the DNA world, I want to change that. What are your suggestions.

[@martamima]

SIBLINGS of spouses? (and if you include siblings, then you kind of need their parents....but again, sometimes this is where you find info you can't find anywhere else)

[@CristaCowan]

I didn't say siblings of spouses, did I? If I did, that wasn't what I meant. I include spouses but I don't research their families.

[@tammyporter7760]

hello as always this was great. I do have relatives that say " Wife of Uncle" would this be an Aunt or maybe an 2nd wife ????

[@AncestryUS]

Technically, the wife of your uncle is not a blood relative. But, colloquially we call her an aunt.

[@brysonhatfield8958]

I include the names of the in-laws because you never know if there is any inner marriage several generations back...

[@ed9492]

Genealogy's all in the genes. That being said, I'll take things as far as they go as long as they go as long as I know marriages and blood relationships. Unfortunately adoptees don't qualify unless they fit in some other way.

[@michaelsommers2356]

Or you can call it family history and expand the scope.

[@khamilton7537]

Hahahaha! It never occurred to me to include pets or other types of entities!!

[@Musikat92]

Mythological characters hahaha