General Chat

n
Just so that the people on the 'Biological Father' thread can see what I mean. ;)

I did once get given access to a tree (the person wasn't related, I think) on here to I went to browse it and was stunned to find that the tree builder (a person old enough to have grandchildren) had put in their occupation, wedding dates, birth date, full name etc and the same information for their partner and all of their (living) children.

I also saw another tree (think I was related in this instance) where somebody had included in the notes section the names of the schools and colleges their teenagers attended. It was quite unnerving as, if some person that way inclined was given access to that particular tree, there is nothing in theory stopping them lurking outside the schools. (Maybe this is paranoia from me but I have seen detailed enough trees on here that practically make that situation possible.)

Somebody was saying, people probably don't realise how much information is accessible, and out of interest I once looked up a friend from school (knowing how many siblings they had) and traced their ancestry to the 1851 census, I think (just to see if it was possible). And all I knew to start with was the names of siblings of this person. (Not that I would do anything with the stuff I found, but it was quite amazing as an exercise just to see how far I could get back.)

The Data Act ,,is used out of context on here,

The Data Protection Act has its limits where family history is concerned and havin a living person named in your tree is not acting out of those Acts,,what is covered is their personal life,

Anything that can be got from public access is not Data Protected,,,,

What you are not allowed to do is *publish*personal information about another person without their prior permission ,and that information coveres such things as,,,,Earnings,Banking details,or anything which takes place in their private life unless its in the public intrest to know,,ie the Freedom of the Press are excluded from this in parts,

That was the point I put to them Gwynne. There are very valid reasons why some people 'disappear' and it's not for us or GR to sniff them out and throw them to the wolves.

I do think that a lot of people who post on trying to find for living relatives are under the impression it's a Missing Persons site.

GR will remove the names of living people from trees so I fail to understand why they allow them on the message boards.

Some people don't want to be found or contacted and we should respect their privacy by not giving full details on message boards that can be read all around the world.

Gwynne

Good reply Claire. I'll remember that if I come across any threads looking for youngsters. It's very dodgy ground.

I have told people they need permission to put living people on their tree & had the answer "but they know I'm doing my tree & they haven't said no!"

I've seen people post threads looking for lookups on toddlers, get the info & promptly add to their tree. I've reported this action to GR who's reply said they would NOT be taking any action.

If someone asks for a lookup on a minor, my reply is standard "ask the family"

As you will see from this thread if it's your first reading there are a lot of people who have grave concerns regarding helping to trace living people via GR. There have been several suggestions on here that maybe GR could give better guidelines for people looking for parents, siblings etc. I even reported a post of MINE so that I could put these suggestions to them.
Well 14 days later and absolutely no response from GR is forthcoming! Should I be surprised?

I agree, Sally! This is an important Thread to nudge. People need to be so wary these days.

Lindy xxx

There is nothing in the Data Protection Act which specifically prevents details of living persons being published on the internet or anywhere else for that matter.

The Act is all about the 'fair' use of personal data and imposes rules around the manner in which organisations who hold personal data on their systems manage, control and allow access to it. Confidentiality is a factor, but not specifically mentioned in the Act.

I have not heard of any case being brought against a private individual, although I am not saying this could not happen the likelihood of this happening is remote.

Anyone who gives permission for their personal data to be used in a particular way is automatically exempted from the provisions of the act, but the converse does not necessarily apply, so even if permission hasn't been granted, it doesn't mean the law has been breached.

Information published for recreational or research purposes is also exempt, so it is likely that genealogical data falls into this category.

I thought under the Data Protection Act you could not put details of any living person on the Internet without their permission. So it seems to me that if you are trying to find a living person you do not have their permission to put their details on the Internet. Therfore if GR allow this they are contravening the Data Protection Act.
Please correct me if I am wrong.

n
Because I think this is important enough to nudge back up the board so that everyone can see it before it disappears into the mists.

Yes, I agree with you there Sally
Julia in Derbyshire

There seem to be more and more of them to me Julia. Someone said they think that people have the wrong idea about GR and as maggie said it's a genealogical site, but some use it as a missing/lost persons site.

I've watched the boards today, and people are still making these kind of posts. More importanly, well meaning people are pointing them in the right direction. Someone was asking about people born in 1946/8. Just a bit close to home, I think.
Julia in Derbyshire

I can mever understand people who have their near relatives /children on a public tree. I am well aware of who my siblings are and who my children/grandchildren are, so no need to have them on. I'm on, but my surname is ***, same for my mum.
I realise some people are searching for lost siblings/parents, but this is a genealogical site, not a missing persons site.

P.S. Of my original 95 John Smiths, 12 are 5 years old or younger.

Lindy xxx

Sorry, Budge, but according to the GR rules, to put living people on your tree, you must have their permission. Then, once the living people have given their permission, you can opt to use the 120 year block.

But this block does not apply when using "Search Trees" at the top of the page. This is obvious when you see the number of little children who are posted and cannot possibly understand what their "permission" is for. Or, of course, the tree owner has not asked for the necessary permission.

Lindy xxx

hi maggie, what you proved is soo what this thread is about, no one can stop someone finding another person/s details, if they are determined too and it doesnt help with all the info around us ready to find at a click of a button, its the reasons behind the looking that sometimes have to be questioned.....
an old saying, not everything that glitters is gold.....
take care,
kaz xxxx

Just broaching on the Tree thing,,,,,,,,,

Some then scream blue murder---**My tree has been stolen,,they have me my husband ,and my children on their tree now.*** !!!

Question is,,,,,,,,,Why have your nearest and dearest living family displayed on your tree in the first place then give access for it to be viewed by any joe blog,?!!!

Electorals or sites that do this are not illegal.

If someone wants to find another person it can be done,but even if no electoral gives results,often persuers will back track to last known area and can be given leads, this happened to someone I know,they kept intouch with past friends persuer got information from them and went to the new living place,so not all blame should be laid to happenings on here.but should be used as a very wise word of caution.