Someone's birth father related to me according to DNA
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You don't know what other information this new cousin has found. You can tell him about your second cousin (that you both match) and it might help him to dig further. Or contact the second cousin and give the 2nd cousin the name of the new cousin. Giving him access to your tree, showing where you and the 2nd cousin are on the tree could be very helpful to him.
You don't know what other information this new cousin has found. You can tell him about your second cousin (that you both match) and it might help him to dig further. Or contact the second cousin and give the 2nd cousin the name of the new cousin. Giving him access to your tree, showing where you and the 2nd cousin are on the tree could be very helpful to him.
I offered him access to my tree but got no response from him. If he looks in 23&Me he will see the other cousins who are related to us both. I can see them. There is no one who is very much related to me except the second cousin I found--and she is very, very young and she doesn't do genealogy. I told him about the family that she and I have in common and gave him a long list of surnames from that family going well back into the 19th C.
He has his father's name. It somewhat resembled that of my paternal gt grandfather back in England so I spent yesterday looking for a child who was on the census with them. At the end of the day I learned that the kid in question had died at age seven. I did it because he was rather insistent that 23&Me was saying that we had to be related on my paternal side, even though, if you read it, it doesn't actually say that. It actually says that the common relative is not on my mother's direct maternal line; it doesn't say the person isn't on my mother's side of the family.
I have looked on Ancestry trees for his father's name and looked in birth records for the date and place but found nothing. I think he should try Ancestry DNA with people who are more into genealogy than the people who are on 23&Me. Familysearch.org might be helpful too. I told him his father's family generally came from New England and even possibly from some of those who went on up to Quebec, but there's only so much I can do. Hopefully, he will find someone who is much more closely related to him.
I am wondering if he is just starting to look and thinks this will be easy. That just because someone has a similar last name, it MUST be his relative. Anyone who's done genealogy knows how that goes. If he writes back again, I'll suggest Familysearch.org as well as Ancestry. It's going to take time and patience for him and I hope he finds his family and his past some day.
Aren't almost all people whose families have lived in England since 1950 basically at least sixth cousins to each other? In other words, anything more than a third cousin, is basically as related to you as the average person you see on the street that is of the same ethnicity as you, meaning, not very!
Aren't almost all people whose families have lived in England since 1950 basically at least sixth cousins to each other? In other words, anything more than a third cousin, is basically as related to you as the average person you see on the street that is of the same ethnicity as you, meaning, not very!
No. There is not that much endogamy in England. Small towns might have high levels of endogamy but the entire country? Nope.
Aren't almost all people whose families have lived in England since 1950 basically at least sixth cousins to each other? In other words, anything more than a third cousin, is basically as related to you as the average person you see on the street that is of the same ethnicity as you, meaning, not very!
You are speaking about I see in endogamous small communities usually because they live on an island or an isolated mountainous community places with a small founding population that has been relatively endogamous for hundreds of years. You will see 6th and 7th cousins sometimes estimated as 3r-4th cousins because there is a considerable amount of pedigree collapse.
The Polynesians are the most endogamous genetic populations I've noticed the last wave of Native Hawaiians probably started arriving 900 years ago and although isolated for hundred of years they are sometimes estimated as 3rd cousins with some of the Maori from New Zealand.
You are speaking about I see in endogamous small communities usually because they live on an island or an isolated mountainous community places with a small founding population that has been relatively endogamous for hundreds of years. You will see 6th and 7th cousins sometimes estimated as 3r-4th cousins because there is a considerable amount of pedigree collapse.
The Polynesians are the most endogamous genetic populations I've noticed the last wave of Native Hawaiians probably started arriving 900 years ago and although isolated for hundred of years they are sometimes estimated as 3rd cousins with some of the Maori from New Zealand.
My understanding is that the old saying "Once you hit about 6th cousins, you are no more closely related than two strangers" is in reference to the fact that most 6th cousins no longer share DNA segments long enough to be considered matches. That said, you can very much match a 6th cousins through DNA tests.
Endogamy cuts both ways. On one hand, if a person finds out they are related to individuals within an endogamous community, you can be nearly sure they have at least one ancestor from that community. The down side is that unless you are rocking a 2nd cousin relationship or closer with any certain individual in the cluster, finding the common ancestor(s) can get really hard. As you say, trying to define relationships doesn't work in the same way because of pedigree collapse.
My understanding is that the old saying "Once you hit about 6th cousins, you are no more closely related than two strangers" is in reference to the fact that most 6th cousins no longer share DNA segments long enough to be considered matches. That said, you can very much match a 6th cousins through DNA tests.
Endogamy cuts both ways. On one hand, if a person finds out they are related to individuals within an endogamous community, you can be nearly sure they have at least one ancestor from that community. The down side is that unless you are rocking a 2nd cousin relationship or closer with any certain individual in the cluster, finding the common ancestor(s) can get really hard. As you say, trying to define relationships doesn't work in the same way because of pedigree collapse.
You can match further back than 6th cousins I've done it with 7cM-8cM segments that lead to a common ancestor in the 1500's. I've also done it with a 1cM segment the common ancestor was in the 1600's I recognized the surnames. The grandmother shared an 8cM segment with one of my parents.
You can match further back than 6th cousins I've done it with 7cM-8cM segments that lead to a common ancestor in the 1500's. I've also done it with a 1cM segment the common ancestor was in the 1600's I recognized the surnames. The grandmother shared an 8cM segment with one of my parents.
Oh, I believe it. I match some cousins more distant than that as well...........but endogamy comes into play. I have a handful of colonial era ancestors that appear multiple times on my family tree. One late 17th couple is there either 4 or 5 times. Not surprisingly, I match a many of their known descendants.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.