#151 Life Partner?


Significant other?
LISP (Livin' in Sin Partner)?

I have gay and unmarried family, are there options? Or
is it just "married"?

Great program!


  • Phantomas

    Phantomas - 2003-12-21

    Logged In: YES

    Hi John...

    What about an engagement?

    In PHPGedView you can only add a husband or a wife.
    But there is no way to add an engagement event and link this
    event to another individual???

    To kuthu...
    I think there is no gedcom-fact to define a familiy that lives
    together but is not married, except they are engaged or
    married :-(

    I think this is from the view of genealogic roots. In Germany
    gays may marry and adopt children and also man and woman
    may live together and get children without being married.
    But I think in the eyes of genealogist this is not the "usual
    way" :-(

    bye, Kurt

  • John Finlay

    John Finlay - 2003-12-23

    Logged In: YES

    There is a major discussion going on in the genealogical
    community right now about this issue.

    There are some people who want to record relationships.
    They would like to be able to record that they play fetch with
    their neighbor's dog.

    There are others who only want to record strict genealogy
    bloodlines. So that an adopted child is not associated with
    her adopted family, only with her birth parents.

    This discussion has not yet been resolved in the genealogy
    community at large.

    My opinion lies somewhere in the middle. I have stong
    feelings against same-sex relationships and LISP
    relationships. I believe that they are morally wrong. But I will
    try to be objective in answering the question.

    IMHO I don't ever see the need to record all of the
    relationships that people have. But I do think that if a same-
    sex couple adopted a child and raised that child, that there
    might be a need to record that family group. And there is a
    definite need to record a LISP relationship if it produced
    children. If the family had no children, then I wouldn't record

    But the real limitation here is the GEDCOM format. Here is
    how I would record it in the GEDCOM. Whether your
    genealogy program can do this or not, I don't know, but there
    would be nothing in PGV that would stop you from doing this.

    You just create a family for them and instead of adding a
    marriage event, you could add a custom event or a note
    describing the relationship that you want. In countries that
    allow same-sex marriage, you could add the marriage fact
    and add a note that it is a same-sex marriage or you could
    create a custom same-sex marriage event.

    For the same-sex relationship:
    0 @F1@ FAM
    1 HUSB @I100@
    1 WIFE @I101@
    1 EVEN
    2 TYPE Same-Sex Marriage
    2 DATE 1 JAN 2003
    2 PLAC , , Germany
    1 CHIL @I102@

    For the LISP relationship
    0 @F1@ FAM
    1 HUSB @I100@
    1 WIFE @I101@
    1 NOTE Parents were never married.
    1 CHIL @I102@
    1 CHIL @I103@

    A family with just an engagement would look like this:
    0 @F1@ FAM
    1 HUSB @I100@
    1 WIFE @I101@
    1 EVEN
    2 TYPE Engagement
    2 DATE 28 FEB 1998
    2 PLAC Provo, Utah, Utah

    I hope this helps. I don't think that I need to do anything in
    PGV to support this. It should just work.

  • John Finlay

    John Finlay - 2003-12-23
    • priority: 5 --> 2
    • assigned_to: nobody --> yalnifj
    • status: open --> open-works-for-me
  • Jans

    Jans - 2004-02-12

    Logged In: YES

    Hi all,

    I think this is a very important issue.
    I was about to post my own RFE, but I saw this one, so here
    is the place to continue the discussion.

    In my opinion we have a program for a very broad public.
    The users are from all over the world, and everywhere are
    different rules (and laws).

    Like Germany, as Kurt said, in the Netherlands it is arranged
    by law that people of the same sex can get married (I think
    the Netherlands were the first again).

    John hit the nail on it's head by mentioning that people can
    adopt children and that there is a need to record that.

    One of my relatives has also married somebody of the same
    sex. I also solved it with a trick.

    The world is changing fast in many ways.
    I think it would not be good to close the eyes for the changes
    in the world.
    It's better to adapt them.

    I know John, that you made the program, and you said how
    you think about this subject.

    But, as mentioned before, the program is public now, and if
    there is a need to make some changes, we should consider
    that for one of the next releases.


  • John Finlay

    John Finlay - 2004-06-08

    Logged In: YES

    I think that PGV can handle this fine just the way it is. Does
    anyone have specific suggestion about how PGV should be
    changed to support this?


  • John Finlay

    John Finlay - 2004-07-06
    • status: open-works-for-me --> closed-works-for-me
  • John Finlay

    John Finlay - 2004-07-06

    Logged In: YES

    As no comments have been received on this issue for quite
    some time, I am going to close this RFE as I believe that PGV
    handles these issues very well. If there are any
    disagreements, then feel free to re-open this request and
    start the discussion again.


  • Laie Techie

    Laie Techie - 2005-05-15

    Logged In: YES

    The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints developed
    GEDCOM for its own purposes - that of performing vicarious
    ordinances for our kindred dead. Since the Church does not
    recognize same sex couples, these were purposefully left
    out. Since GEDCOM is a proprietary standard, there is
    nothing we can do about it.

    As far as non-married heterosexual couples, create a family
    without a marriage event _or_ put in the notes that this was
    a "common law couple".

    Since the family related tags force you to specify at most
    one husband and one wife, same sex couples cannot be
    represented by the current standard.

    There is some debate in the genealogical community about
    updating GEDCOM, possibly even converting to XML. A few
    options include allowing more than one husband or wife tag
    within a family, or even replacing "HUSB" and "WIFE" with


Get latest updates about Open Source Projects, Conferences and News.

Sign up for the SourceForge newsletter:

No, thanks