Is this DNA evidence enough to change my grandpa, and what shall I do about poor grandma

Question

When I got my DNA results from ancestry I was a bit surprised I had no matches for my maternal grandfather, but I thought some would turn up. Meanwhile I had a very strong match group of complete strangers from an area of the country I had never been to and had no links with. I put them together into an extended family and followed the branches down to the 1911 census, guess what, one of them was living right across the road from my mother's family the year after she was born, and living in the exact same house which our family bought from them the following year, the family home to a whole generation. I have lots of medium matches to my maternal grandmother's family from descendants of cousins who my mother actually knew, but I have even stronger matches to the family across the road. They are my strongest match group on Ancestry, 6 out of my top 10 matches. The mother was one of four sisters and I have descendant matches to all of them, plus some descendants of cousins of the couple. Two matches are my strongest ones on Ancestry, 109 and 106 cm. I still don't have any matches for my grandfather, and not for lack of trying. I have been researching his very interesting family for over 50 years and have a huge tree, it was my main interest in geneaology, so I was a bit put out to say the least!

There was only one man under the age of 80 in the house across the road, and he was an office worker the same age as my grandma's sister, who was a typist and was known in the family as "the flighty one"! For various other reasons I think she was the mother of the baby and my grandma and grandpa adopted her secretly to hush up the scandal. I will never have any documentary evidence, the birth certificate shows my grandpa as the father. I have changed my grandpa to non-biological, but do I have enough information to show myself on my tree as granddaughter to the man across the road? Everyone who knew these people is dead now except for myself and my brother. My mother who died 9 years ago was an only child, her aunt (probable mother) died in 1942, and the man across the road died in 1946. He had another daughter but she died childless a few years ago. Also, if I leave my grandma as the mother, I don't want it to look like grandma did the dirty on grandpa! But I don't have any actual evidence, other than circumstantial, that my great aunt is the real mother either. The DNA connection for both of them to that family would be the same anyway, I presume.

All advice gratefully received.

Comments

 Yeah, well, that's the sort of surprises that can show up with DNA testing. Eh.  

There's nothing there to prevent the development of both the the bio grandfather and the non-bio grandfather lines.  It doesn't sound like there's anyone around who would get "excited" about it. 

Be sure to note in both files (bio-gdfa and non-bio-gdfa) that this remains to be "proven" but based on the DNA, ... etc. And you need not speculate about auntie or her sister, since as is said, there's no proof of who was the actual bio-mother. They're sisters so the DNA would NOT help sort it out with mtDNA I think. And it doesn't sound much like you'd be able to dig out any adoption legal papers.  I think most future researchers could "read between the lines".  

AND if that's the worst secret you uncover, consider yourself blessed. LOL 

---

Thanks Susan, that is very helpful.

---

Susan's comment should be best answer, if it were an answer.

---

It sounds like you have fairly solidly established that the man you knew to be your grandfather was not your mother's biological father, so making that update seems logical.

With regard to your mother's biological maternity, you are correct that without additional descendants of either that you would be unable to determine the difference from the DNA as both would have the same ancestry.

I've run into this twice when determining biological fathers of adoptees, that it was possible to state with certainty their grandparents, but impossible to resolve which of the 2 brothers in each family was the biological father.

However, unless your mother was an unwitnessed home birth, her birth certificate would list the correct biological mother, and if it was a home birth, that would be listed on the certificate.  I believe that would be your indication, and you should be able to obtain an official copy if you don't have one.  And if you confirm that the grandmother you knew is the biological, don't assume that she was running around on your grandfather.  Even back then people had alternative relationships ( and sought out means to overcome infertility issues.  Given that your mother was the only child of what sounds like a long and happy marriage, I would be more likely to believe that she had Grandpa's blessing, however it happened.

---

I agree Eddie, I would have starred it!

---

Thanks Cora. There is no witness on the birth certificate. It is England, 1910, I don’t think they had them? It was a home birth, and whichever sister had the baby, she would likely have her sister there with her I would think. So I will just have to accept that I can’t go any further on that one.

Do you have an opinion on the value of the DNA evidence for the father?  I have read the help on this and it says that Wikitree works on biological relationships. But if I read people right, they are saying that I should not add the father even as uncertain? Thanks

---

Lynn,

I'd need to see what your matches look like to be certain of the father, however, if you have matches that trace back to his ancestors on both his maternal and paternal sides, then you can be certain that your lineage is thru that family, and I would update accordingly.

My user id on ancestry is ceec11 if you want to send me an invitation to view what you have there.

---

I take it that the "flighty" great aunt (possible biological grandmother) never married and/or had children who could be tested?

---

 IF he's correct about this, that there were two full sibling sisters living across from the Y-DNA father (identified, pretty much) then the mtDNA will not be helpful -- in that one sister -- the possible bio mother was unmarried and the other sister -- the possible adoptive mother was married w/no children, which is the scenario he contemplates 

---

 ADDENDA -- that's the kink in mtDNA and Y-DNA 

When a man has issue by two sisters full or half, the sisters will have similar DNA portrait 

When a woman has issue by two brother full or half, the brothers will have similar DNA portrait 

Makes it a really intense search for records to sort out which parent goes with which child  

---

Thanks all for the input! The great aunt never married or had any other children and my official grandma never had any other children either. They were full sisters. I think I will just have to accept there are some things we will never know. I think I will not make notes on either of their profiles, and will go back and have a think about what to put on the father's, if anything.

Thanks all for the help.

Answer 1

Your security setting makes it impossible to look and see if any help is likely.

Answer 2

I would write it up on the profile under a Research note but leave out the speculation. As you say there is more than one explanation.

Answer 3

We are unable to help you unless you change the privacy of your profile to at least "private with public tree" at the very least.  I usually use Private with puiblic bio and public tree.

Comments

OK I have changed it as suggested to public tree.

---

Here is the putative grandfather

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Wood-30618

Answer 4

Can anyone say why my question has been red flagged? Is it a privacy issue? I was careful not to name names but people have said they cannot answer without the tree details. Should I take off the link to the putative father? He died  over 70 years ago and the answers seem to say I should put it on his profile anyway. Sorry, so many questions!

Comments

Lynn, there isn't any good reason for flagging a discussion like this in a genealogy forum.  Hopefully a leader or moderator will come along and clear it.  Some people just don't understand the use of the flag, and some occasionally hit the command by accident when they're trying to do something else.  I wouldn't worry about it.

Answer 5

Clearly your official grandma named the wrong father when she signed your mother's birth cert.  Obvious questions are unavoidable.

You say "For various other reasons I think [her sister] was the mother of the baby".  You have information in your head which implies that those obvious questions may well have an unusual answer - your grandma was also fibbing about being the mother of the child she was registering.  That information will never go on record unless you record it.

Life is lived the way it's lived.  Official records can't cope and official morality can't cope.  Your mother was never told the truth about her origins, by people with the best of intentions, as they saw it.  But that's all part of the complex reality of relationships that genealogy tries to bring out.

Comments

Totally agree. You really should record what you know on the profiles, rather than let non-facts take hold.