The privacy regulations

[LorraineJ]

Can anyone explain to me how this works in practice.

As I understood it, it seemed to be practice on any family tree software for someone born within the last 90 years, without there being a date of death given, that there details would not be there for the world to see on the internet. I thought that if someone in your family was invited, would they when have access to all information you have on your tree and would they have access to information that was not published to the internet?

On Genes Reunited, on some trees I have been able to follow information to the present day and on other trees people have been hidden. Why is this, do Genes Reunited do the hiding for you on living relatives, unless you have to opt out.

I must admit that I am so glad my cousin put two and two together on Ancestry and thought I probably was his cousin and contacted me as we had common ancestors, but I am a bit bothered about just how far some systems go to maintain privacy.

[Olde Crone Holden]

I'm not up to date with GR but at one time you could opt to hide living relatives in your tree.

This only hides them in your TREE - they are still available to anyone who does a name search on the site, so they can find your tree, contact you and ask you for more info.


Tribal Pages does not show any person born in the last 120 years who does not have a date of death, in their SEARCH options. Depending on the level of privacy you choose on your tree, they will either not show at all to a viewer, or they will show only as a name.

OC

[Cloggie]

Ancestry is also similar. You can hide living individuals in a Private Tree, and you can also choose whether your tree is searchable or not.

[Uncle John]

I wonder if this privacy issue is something the new owners of GR will tackle quickly. They will at least understand the principles and the concerns.

[Mary from Italy]

GR doesn't automatically hide anyone - names are only hidden, as OC says, if the tree owner opts to hide living people.

FTF also hides people born less than 100 years ago in the Gedcom database, unless a date of death is entered.

I must it admit it can be useful to find living people on sites like GR, but it's actually against their Terms and Conditions to include living people in a tree without their permission.

The privacy issue is an important one, in view of the risk of identity theft. The UK is one of the most lax countries as regards BMDs, which you can obtain almost up to the present day. This would be impossible in Australia, for example, unless you produce documents proving that you're the person concerned or the next of kin.

In your own family tree program it's up to you who you hide - you can opt to hide living people, but you don't have to.

I have two copies of my tree, one of which (which I don't put online) has living people in it.

[Olde Crone Holden]

Like many others, I have two trees - one is offline and private, the other is sanitised and does not include any living people, nor any clues to their existence.

It starts with my grandparents - all dead - and I reckon anyone connected to me will recognise those names.

Unfortunately you can't do this on GR - you have to start the tree with yourself, so I got round that by putting "LIVING LIVING", for the names which HAD to be included for continuity.

My stance is now "If you don't put it on the internet then it cannot be misused". Maybe I miss a few contacts, but that does seem a small price to pay.

I echo Uncle John's hopes that FMP will vigorously tackle the issues of privacy on GR and that they will be a bit more pro-active in removing posts about living people, particularly the ones which give grisly details of the past antics of a third party.

OC