Starting the New Year off right
So here we are on the first Sunday of 2015, and The Legal Genealogist stops to take stock on the DNA side of genealogy. What am I doing right, what am I doing wrong, and what could I be doing better in 2015?
And judging from reader comments and complaints, there are five New Year’s Resolutions we can all make that would benefit us all as genetic genealogists.
Resolution Number 5:
I will not send bulk emails to every single solitary person I match insisting that they “tell me how we’re related.”
It’s probably the single biggest complaint I see from people trying to get a handle on their DNA results — to understand the various tests and what they mean: that they get inundated by emails from people who haven’t done their homework about their own tests or even their own families and who now want you to tell them exactly how the two of you are related.
Oh, and send the documentation.
Free.
And, of course, the email is sent to every single solitary person who even remotely matches the sender, with all of the email addresses included, and somebody who doesn’t understand what’s about to happen goes ahead and writes a “why are you sending me this” email — and hits Reply All.
Not the way to make friends and influence people.
Yes, I resolve to do as good a job as I can of contacting my matches in 2015, but let’s all be smart about those contacts:
• Prioritize the contacts. Go after the immediate and close relatives first. Nail down the second and third cousins, even as many fourth cousins as possible, before starting on the speculative or distant cousins.
• Contact cousins one by one. You owe it to your cousins, and to yourself, to get to know them and to work with them one at a time. It’ll help you keep your research straight. It’ll protect your privacy and theirs. It avoids email flame wars and those appalling Reply All emails that always seem to end with the one person you really do need to hear from taking herself out of the conversation out of frustration.
• Don’t ask unless you’ll share. Nothing will turn a cousin contact more sour more quickly than asking for information when you’re not willing to share your own. Want to see my family tree? Show me yours. Which leads into the next point…
• Prepare files to share. A six-generation chart of your ancestors is an absolute minimum. You can download a form that you can type your data into from the Mid-Continental Public Library. Even better, find out how to use your genealogy program to produce an ahnentafel report — the kind of genealogy report that starts with you, then adds your parents, then adds their parents and so forth back through the generations1 — and make sure you include where your people lived, not just what their names were.
Resolution Number 4:
I will take ethnicity estimates not merely with a grain of salt but with the whole darned salt lick.2
If I had a nickel for every question I get about these blasted ethnicity estimates, I’d be rich. Filthy rich even. “Why does AncestryDNA say I’m 31% Scandinavian when I have no known Scandinavian ancestors at all?” “Why doesn’t the test show Native American when my great great great grandmother was Lakota Sioux?” “Why are my ethnicity results different from my sister’s?”
Folks, seriously, they’re called estimates for a reason. The term I’ve used before is cocktail party conversation pieces.3 And frankly, the term I’d be more inclined to use these days is WAGs — a lovely American acronym that means “wild-assed guesses.”4
Understand that what these estimates do is take the DNA of living people — us, the test takers — and they compare it to the DNA of other living people — people whose parents and grandparents and, sometimes, even great grandparents all come from one geographic area. Then they try to extrapolate backwards into time to estimate (or guess) what the population of, say, Ireland or Egypt looked like 500 or 1,000 years ago. Nobody is out there running around, digging up 500- or 1,000-year-old bones, extracting DNA for us to compare our own DNA to.
Please… read up on the limits of ethnicity estimates. And then put that aside in favor of all the things DNA tests really can do for genealogy.
Resolution Number 3:
I will try to be patient and understanding when my matches don’t get back to me as quickly as I might like … or at all.
This one is my personal hot-button item because patience is not my long suit. I’m one of the people who prays for patience and ends the prayer with: “And I want it right now!!” And I still struggle with the notion that somebody would pay for a genetic genealogy test and then not want to share information about the genealogy we both share.
This is particularly acute for me since I have two matches out there on 23andMe right now that are absolutely driving me wild: a second-cousin-level match from April 2014 and a first-cousin-level match from July — neither of whom has responded to invitations to share information.
So I have to keep reminding myself that there may be very good reasons why a DNA match doesn’t respond to requests for information. The match’s reasons for testing may be very different from my own, and family issues or concerns that person has that I can’t begin to understand. Periodically re-reading Roberta Estes’ powerful post, “No (DNA) Bullying,”5 is a good way to keep grounded here.
And that leads in to a broader resolution overall.
Resolution Number 2:
I will take my ethical obligations as a genetic genealogist seriously.
The simple reality is that tracing our family history — doing genealogy — means exposing family secrets. The child born before the marriage. The prison term. The “loathsome disease.” The time in the asylum. As genealogists we see it all. Adding DNA to the mix of tools we use as genealogists just makes it easier and faster to shine a light on the secrets.
But because it is easier and faster, because it tests living people and doesn’t merely look at records from past generations, it can affect living people. So we need to be mindful of our particular ethical obligations as genealogists in general — and as genetic genealogists in particular.
A great place to start is the National Genealogical Society’s Genealogical Standards and Guidelines, most particularly its “Standards For Sharing Information With Others”. The guidance provided here can keep us on the ethical straight and narrow for all of our genealogical work — and reminds us of our obligations to protect the rights of others as living private individuals.
Resolution Number 1:
I will not delay in getting that older member of the family tested.
Goes without saying, doesn’t it? How many of us bid a sad farewell to a loved one in 2014? How many of us will have to bid farewell to someone we love in 2015? How many of us ourselves will not be here to ring in the New Year of 2016?
Particularly when it comes to autosomal DNA — the kind we inherit from both parents that changes and mixes and recombines from generation to generation6 — DNA is a finite resource. The amount of DNA passed down from an ancestor through autosomal DNA drops dramatically with every generation until, after only a few generations, there may not be enough from that ancestor to be detectable. (Which, by the way, explains a lot of those weird ethnicity estimates, particularly when something you expect to see isn’t in the results.)
With autosomal DNA, then, getting a grandparent to test is better than getting a parent to test, and getting a parent to test is better than testing yourself. Every generation further back that we can test means a more complete database — and more and better matches.
So the number one priority resolution for 2015 has to be not to lose that genetic legacy. Let’s get our oldest generations tested.
SOURCES
- See “Ahnentafel,” Encyclopedia of Genealogy (http://www.eogen.com/ : accessed 3 Jan 2015). ↩
- City dwellers may not be familiar with salt licks. They are blocks of salt set out for cattle, horses and other animals to lick. It’s a way to get essential minerals into the animals’ diet. “What is a Salt Lick?” WiseGeek (http://www.wisegeek.com/ : accessed 3 Jan 2015). Think a grain of salt on steroids. ↩
- Judy G. Russell, “Those pesky percentages,” The Legal Genealogist, posted 27 Oct 2013 (https://www.legalgenealogist.com/blog : accessed 3 Jan 2015). ↩
- InternetSlang (http://www.internetslang.com : accessed 3 Jan 2015), “WAG.” ↩
- Roberta Estes, “No (DNA) Bullying,” DNAeXplained, posted 15 May 2013 (http://dna-explained.com/ : accessed 3 Jan 2015). ↩
- ISOGG Wiki (http://www.isogg.org/wiki), “Autosomal DNA,” rev. 31 Dec 2014. ↩
What I wish is that when people email me, they tell me what username/kit ID they are matching and what their username/kit ID is and where they saw the match. I manage several kits, and have test results on FTDNA and GEDMATCH. I don’t have time to try to figure these things out.
Yep, with more than 20 kits that I administer, that’s a problem for me too.
So the number one priority resolution for 2015 has to be not to lose that genetic legacy. Let’s get our oldest generations tested.”
I AM the oldest generation….the Matriarch of my family. I do the DNA testing and charting, etc. And I don’t waste time with small insignificant “matches”. Every time a site decides to “IMPROVE” or “UPGRADE” itself, I lose precious time, because it’s harder for elderly people, no matter how smart they are, to adapt to even minor changes sometimes. Nobody seems to be able to get this through their heads. My ancestors were here in early 1600….I’ve tried to join projects that would help me prove ancestors and been turned down, because I’m asking for autosomal matching. If everything is about Y-DNA and surnames, we’ll never get anywhere. It’s time that especially the FTDNA people make their projects multi-dna projects.
It may be that new projects geared to autosomal results need to be formed — but this is a whole different kettle of fish from YDNA or mtDNA and I imagine (from managing my own small Family Finder project) that the workload would get overwhelming very very quickly for an administrator.
Amen sister!
Love this post, Judy! I have designated 2015 as my year to learn more about genetic genealogy.
I’ve upgraded my husband and father’s Y-DNA tests to a higher level of markers (unfortunately, maternal uncle’s upgrade will have to wait for now) and ordered autosomal kits for previously untested (older) family members. So Resolution #1 is checked.
Now if I could only get that second cousin, once removed to agree to test, I might be able to get through my longest standing brick wall. I’m desperate to get my hands on his autosomal and Y-DNA! What was resolution #3? Ah, that’s right, patience!
Good for you, Emma. Except that patience this. Can’t do that one very well…
Good post Judy! DNA is a weakness for me so every bit helps. I do respond to all requests but it never goes anywhere after that. I am hoping in 2015 to learn more.
You don’t exactly have an easy surname to research, my friend! And your family has been here so long, and you have so many admixture elements, that you probably match everybody! So it’ll be harder for you to do — but may pay off eventually.
Resolution 1b: To be sure to show appreciation to the fine folks like Judy who take the time to share their wisdom and insights with folks far behind them on the learning curve. Thank you, thank you, thank you!
Just over a year ago I received my first autosomal test results, and 2014 was a big year of learning for me. I pick up bits and pieces from each article written, and I am to a point where I can help pass along a bit to others new to genetic genealogy.
We live in such interesting times to be having conversations like these. Today I write from China, where I have lived for the past 13+ years . . . imagine what our ancestors would think of the ability to connect in such ways!
Happy 2015 to one and all!
And a very Happy New Year to you and yours, Craig!
Hi Judy,
I have one uncle who is 83 and he is the last of that entire generation. He is remarkably intelligent, but his privacy is very important to him. He doesn’t use social networks. I haven’t yet approached him about getting his DNA tested (I would pay and manage it), but I know that he would not want his genetic info in a database. I think he’d complain to his wife and children (my cousins) about it and they’d probably agree with him about privacy violation.
A few years ago he sent many emails describing growing up, military stories, just priceless stories that I hope to compile. When I told him that I hoped to compile them, he stopped with the stories, or maybe he got tired of it.
We live very far from each other.
What reasons have you used in the past to get folks to agree to test? Some people think this genealogy stuff is a lot of fluff and just aren’t into it.
Thanks, I am willing to ask my uncle once, but need some convincing reason(s).
Terry Sweetman
Terry, several things come to mind. First, sitting down with your uncle is the best way to go — and have the test kit there with you. Second, you can explain to him how his DNA is so much more valuable for genetic genealogy than yours is because of recombination. Third, you can explain that this is a fundamentally different kind of DNA analysis than is used for identification (as in the police TV shows). That kind of DNA testing is designed to look at ways that we are absolutely unique. Our kind of DNA testing is designed to look at ways that we are related to one another. So it’s not even useful for most of the things people are afraid of when they think to themselves that they don’t want the government to have their DNA. (Not to mention the fact that nobody could prove chain of custody to use it against them anyway!) You can explain how the test can be entered into the database using a pseudonym or initials, using your email address and contact information to protect his privacy. And you could tell him that it really is the one and only legacy you’d ever ask for from him.
Brilliant, thanks for the ammo (reasons) and definitely worth a try.
Good lucky, Terry!
Judy – There’s a lot of great information in here. After the DC conference, I contacted a large group of matches, but I used a mail merge email so each went only to one address. Biggest lesson learned: provide the kit number! I’m hoping to sit down with a multitude of results in the next few weeks and work through who to contact about finding those common ancestors. Keep up the good work and don’t wear yourself out! -Seema
Making sure to reference the kit number is vitally important — lots of us manage kits for our relatives, and when somebody emails to say “we’re a match” I often have no clue who the person is really a match for!
Would getting my mother to take family finder help me exclude our mutual matches and find my fathers family? I have no one to do a Y test for me. She’s 94 and I never even thought how valuable getting her tested could be. Guess I’m a little slow.
Absolutely it would help. Anybody you both matched would likely be kin on your mother’s side and not your father’s side. Not impossible for there to be some overlap, of course, especially if your ancestors ended up being kin at some point. But if there’s no kin marriage in recent generations you can safely put anyone you and your mother match aside and concentrate on your closest matches who do not match your mother.
I think what you are looking for is called phasing.
And back to the ethnicity estimates. I am troubled by the ethnicity claims made on the PBS program “Finding Your Roots.” They seem to portray these estimates as absolutes, even letting the guests know they are part Ashkenazi (when it was something like .07 or .7% -something I would ignore) – I think that was in the recent episode that had DNA in the title. They talk about advancements in tests as though the ethnicity issue is now solved.
It disappoints me in Gates and wondered what you thought of their portrayal of ethnicity from atDNA on that program.
Carolyn
Henry Louis Gates is a great ambassador for both genealogy and for DNA… but yes, it’s an overstatement to say we can be sure of those ethnicity estimates. To put it mildly.