Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Natural Child

Expand Messages
  • Charles W Aubin
    Please note that your reply will now only go to the original sender Natural child is usually always taken to mean a child is illegitimate. Sharon Hi Sharon:
    Message 1 of 3 , Oct 29, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Please note that your reply will now only go to
      the original sender


      'Natural' child is usually always taken to mean a
      child is illegitimate.

      Sharon

      Hi Sharon:
      I am sorry I disagree with you. When you say the natural parents or
      natural child you mean the child is the child of those two parents. You
      may have a natural mother and a step-father for instance Not
      necessarily illegitimate, but in this particular case they would be.
      Just my thoughts Charlie


      http://www.afhs.ab.ca

      http://www.family-roots.ca
    • Sharon
      Please note that your reply will now only go to the original sender Perhaps, but in my years of being on the genealogy lists, what I ve been hearing is it
      Message 2 of 3 , Oct 29, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Please note that your reply will now only go to
        the original sender


        Perhaps, but in my years of being on the genealogy
        lists, what I've been hearing is it usually refers to
        illegitimacy.

        Sharon
        --- Charles W Aubin <cwaubin1@...> wrote:
        >
        > Hi Sharon:
        > I am sorry I disagree with you. When you say
        > the natural parents or
        > natural child you mean the child is the child of
        > those two parents. You
        > may have a natural mother and a step-father for
        > instance Not
        > necessarily illegitimate, but in this particular
        > case they would be.
        > Just my thoughts Charlie







        __________________________________________________________
        Find your next car at http://autos.yahoo.ca
        http://www.afhs.ab.ca

        http://www.family-roots.ca
      • Xenia Stanford
        Please note that your reply will now only go to the original sender To interpret the meaning of natural child you need to know the location and date for the
        Message 3 of 3 , Oct 30, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          Please note that your reply will now only go to
          the original sender


          To interpret the meaning of "natural child" you need to know the location
          and date for the record and understand the terminology used by the
          record-makers of a particular type of record.

          Originally the term was used in describing a family formally, where one
          could have a natural (birth) child of the father, a natural (birth) child of
          the mother, a natural child to both and/or an adopted child of either or
          both. A natural child of the father but not of the mother was a stepchild to
          the wife/mother of the family and vice versa. Also on records some children
          were described as "grandchild", another relationship to the head of
          household (e.g. niece, nephew...) or "stray" (if not a direct familial
          link).

          Since many women came to a marriage with children born outside of that
          particular marriage (some from a previous marriage or often not from a
          marriage at all), this became used synonymously with illegitimate child -
          since the child was not the child of the husband either as natural, step or
          adopted. Of course, many of these children were born to unwed mothers and
          the term became so "muddied" that it became "recognized" as a child born out
          of wedlock. Because of this, today the tendency is to use "birth child" or
          use "birth" to indicate the natural relationship, just as we say "birth
          mother". The other euphemism used to indicate child by birth in common
          vernacular was "real child" or "real parent" but this was never accepted
          formally or legally because all children are real and all parents are real.
          Their relationship, however, can be a direct familial link or not.

          Since the term "natural" was used in inheritances in some countries at
          various times (and in some still are) to separate those who would directly
          inherit while those who were not related by birth were not considered to be
          legitimate heirs. Again the term became muddied because a "natural" child of
          one parent would not necessarily be an heir, particularly to a throne, to
          the other parent (usually a father). In fact, in some records illegitimacy
          was indicated as an "unnatural child" of the person whose estate was in
          question, while the "natural child" would be a legitimate heir of that
          person.

          Also in many records, such as baptisms or birth registrations, a child was
          listed as the child of the legitimate marriage of ... (father) and ...
          (mother) or in the case where the mother only was known as the "natural
          child" of ... (mother). Since very few fathers would step up to the plate
          and have their illegitimate children baptised without listing the name of
          the mother but many women were in this situation where they presented the
          child for baptism or registration but did not name the father, the term
          "natural child" became what was considered a sullied term.

          So it is important to know context to determine the exact meaning. One may
          conclude if it was used in the informal sense in the past few centuries, it
          could mean illegitimate, but in a formal document, such as a census record
          or church record, it may not.

          For example in Australia on most 20th century census records, "natural
          child" is used as the broader sense, i.e. opposite of "adopted" or
          "step-child". This is also true in other countries, states/provinces at
          different periods. "Base born" used to be a term generally used as a true
          indication of illegitimacy and of course from that came the term "bastard".
          Now we just say illegitimate.

          The most recent example where I ran across the situation where it would have
          been a mistake to regard the term "natural" as meaning illegitimate was a
          family in which all 5 children were baptized on the same day. They were all
          listed as the "natural children" of the mother but only 2 were listed as the
          "natural children" of her, then, current husband. The other 3 were listed
          with the natural father as the woman's previous mate. The date and place in
          question was 18th century Quebec. Yet in this same century and location,
          many children who were born out of wedlock are indicated as enfant
          "naturel(le)" of ... (mother) and of ... (father). Again the definition of
          birth as well as legitimacy are in these cases expressed by the one word.

          So my advice is to interpret carefully for each situation by verifying
          family relationships through additional records rather than jumping to an
          immediate conclusion.

          Xenia Stanford (president@...)
          A.G.E. Ancestree Genealogical Enterprises
          Local genealogy book sales, professional research & writing:
          http://www.knowmap.com/age/
          Column: "Nos Racines Francaise" http://globalgenealogy.com/globalgazette
          Scrapbooking & preservation techniques
          Phone: (403) 295-3490; Fax: (403) 274-0564




          -----Original Message-----
          From: owner-dist-gen@...
          [mailto:owner-dist-gen@...]On Behalf Of Sharon
          Sent: October 29, 2005 7:00 PM
          To: dist-gen
          Subject: Re: Natural Child


          Please note that your reply will now only go to
          the original sender


          Perhaps, but in my years of being on the genealogy
          lists, what I've been hearing is it usually refers to
          illegitimacy.

          Sharon
          --- Charles W Aubin <cwaubin1@...> wrote:
          >
          > Hi Sharon:
          > I am sorry I disagree with you. When you say
          > the natural parents or
          > natural child you mean the child is the child of
          > those two parents. You
          > may have a natural mother and a step-father for
          > instance Not
          > necessarily illegitimate, but in this particular
          > case they would be.
          > Just my thoughts Charlie







          __________________________________________________________
          Find your next car at http://autos.yahoo.ca
          http://www.afhs.ab.ca

          http://www.family-roots.ca
          --
          No virus found in this incoming message.
          Checked by AVG Free Edition.
          Version: 7.1.361 / Virus Database: 267.12.6/151 - Release Date: 28/10/2005

          --
          No virus found in this outgoing message.
          Checked by AVG Free Edition.
          Version: 7.1.361 / Virus Database: 267.12.6/151 - Release Date: 28/10/2005

          http://www.afhs.ab.ca

          http://www.family-roots.ca
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.