Genealogy Chat
Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!
- The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
- You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
- And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
- The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.
Quick Search
Single word search
Icons
- New posts
- No new posts
- Thread closed
- Stickied, new posts
- Stickied, no new posts
Was it likely for a couple to be childless all the
Profile | Posted by | Options | Post Date |
---|---|---|---|
|
An Olde Crone | Report | 27 Jun 2006 12:48 |
I have a couple in the early 1700s, who had a total of 18 children (and there may be more, I keep finding another one). Only three survived to adulthood and only one, my ancestor, managed to produce any children. I have often pondered this, because both came from extremely fertile families, who seemed to have no problem producing children who died of old age after producing 12 or more of their own. Only one has a cause of death entered in the PR - smallpox, although this poor woman buried six children around this time. I remember a neighbour, in the very early 1960s, who tragically lost her only daughter in a fire. They had been married 10 years before this child came along which must have made it even more devastating. The following year, this lady, in her mid-forties, gave birth to twin boys. My mother told me darkly, many years later, that it was A.I.D (Artificial Insemination by a Donor, for those young ones among you who think I mean Aids!). A friend who is a medical receptionist told me of a couple (no names) who turned up about 20 years ago, distressed that they had no children after 7 years of marriage. Examination quickly revealed that the wife was still a virgin. Both had led sheltered lives and somehow did not know what they had to do! OC |
|||
|
Glen In Tinsel Knickers | Report | 27 Jun 2006 12:53 |
It is quite possible that they never had children,or as previously said they may have had children and lost them very young. I link to another tree and found a couple had 9 children (not one of my direct lines) however a descendant claims that the couple only had three children,because 'only three appear in the census'. I have the birth,baptism and death/burial details for each of the children,the deceased children wouldn't appear in the census due to birth and death dates,but apparently the descendant still claims that i am incorrect. So yes they could be childless,but the census isn't the be all and end all of the search. Glen |
|||
|
fraserbooks | Report | 27 Jun 2006 20:24 |
OT but reading old crone's story reminds me of some work I did a few years on an elderly person's ward in a local hospital. One very elderly man had in red on his notes WARNING AIDS RISk. There were several ribald comments from members of staff wondering how he could have contracted aids. However when we asked his G.P. he explained that he meant he was allergic to antinflamatory drugs such as aspirin. |