BCG Skillbuilding at NGS 2026
Thomas W. Jones, PhD, CG®, CGG®, FASG, FUGA, FNGS
“Lessons from Documenting Misattributed Parentage by Proving a Negative”
Please welcome guest blogger - Sally Dean Hamblen, CG®
This fascinating lecture began with something all-too familiar to us today. A misattributed parental assignment for a pair of 18th century North Carolina twins that began in 1887, spread gradually at first, then took off in on-line trees and published genealogies. Subsequent genealogists did not examine the original source. A “maybe” son of someone became a “son of” without any facts to back it up. Thirty-eight DAR applications were successful using this wrong connection.
Jones knew the attribution was wrong and set about proving it. The probate file of the supposed father was clear. The men in question were not mentioned in his very detailed will, which went so far as to name his grandchildren. A timeline revealed that the purported father was not present at the right time or place and could not be the twins’ father. The 1790 census matched the children in the will, with no extras.
The original error was found in an early genealogy and traced forward to the present day. This is an essential task to perform when faced with such an entrenched error. Jones determined the history of the misattribution and tested its accuracy. The misattribution had spread out to many trees-but the roots were rotten. Jones summarized his points in twelve “lessons learned,” among which was : “Look everywhere and trust nothing” The Genealogical Proof Standard instructs us to test all sources and to resolve conflicts. Indeed, “If conflicting evidence is not resolved, a credible conclusion is not possible.”
“Proving a negative” is just as important as proving a positive. Jones wrote about this case in:
Thomas W. Jones, PhD,CG, CGG, FASG,“ History of a Genealogical Error: The Misattributed Parentage of Atlanta Pioneers, Meredith and Merrell Collier” National Genealogical Society Quarterly 113 (June 2025):103-116.
Testing other genealogists’ hypotheses for accuracy allows us to either agree or disagree with their findings. Standard 11 reminds us that “[research] plans begin with analyzing starting-point information for accuracy.” When the starting point information is wrong, we go back and start over with the proven facts.
For reference, see: Board for Certification of Genealogists, Genealogy Standards 2nd revised edition, (Nashville: Ancestry, 2021), 2 and 12.
The words Certified Genealogist, Certified Genealogical Lecturer, and Certified Genetic Genealogist, and their acronyms CG, CGL, and CGG, are registered trademarks of the Board for Certification of Genealogists®. These marks are used under license by board certificants after periodic evaluation.