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
do you find
Profile | Posted by | Options | Post Date |
---|---|---|---|
|
Maggie 'O the Mainland | Report | 1 Jan 2008 07:06 |
My main family in my tree had 6 children in total. Two died at young age, a third died at about 12, the eldest female never married, the youngest did with no children that I have found, and the only other was a male who married and emmigrated, only problem with all that is that we are of the line that emmigrated so its an uphill battle to trace the family back in the UK. |
|||
|
Nickydownsouth | Report | 1 Jan 2008 01:19 |
Margaret,I think in those days people would have had the same gynaecological problems that couples face today, if it wasn`t for IVF and other such breakthroughs, there would be alot of people today with no children, my gr grandfather was married for 20 years and had no children, he then married a woman 20 years younger and went on and had 8 children,so not wanting to apportion blame, but obviously he was more than capable of fathering children, and probably his first wife had problems. I read somewhere that 1 in 10 couples has trouble conceiving, and thats today, not long ago, yet in these cases alot of them could probably have children with a different partner easily, thats probably why some of your relatives didn`t have children.....it simply didn`t happen... and there was no medical intervention available to make it happen. |
|||
Researching: |
|||
|
MaryfromItaly | Report | 31 Dec 2007 21:11 |
I've found that some lines of my family have been extremely prolific, others have been practically barren, and in others nearly everyone either married very late or didn't marry at all. |
|||
|
Laura | Report | 31 Dec 2007 19:49 |
Out of five children (my grandpa being one) only 2 had children, they were born in the 1910s and 1920s. |
|||
|
Margaretfinch | Report | 31 Dec 2007 19:06 |
Hi Margaret yes my mother was an only child her mother also was an only child and looking at my dads sisters it seems that one sister had one child the other did not have any. and the one sister that did have one she also went on to just have one child it does not make for a very large tree. |
|||
Researching: |
|||
|
Margaret | Report | 31 Dec 2007 18:19 |
Margaret, |
|||
|
Margaretfinch | Report | 31 Dec 2007 17:14 |
Do you find many couples just having the one or in fact no children at all which seems to happen in my family. I found a couple married in 1919 had a child in 1920 and have searched and trawled births in the hopes they might have had a son but no such luck. |
|||
Researching: |