Nellie Victoria Searson

[HappyEarl]

Inspired by all the recent adverts for Ancestry, I just wanted to express that it’s not always families wanting to know each other.
My great grandma Nellie Victoria Searson - had a child in her teens in 1914 (my grandma) and adopted her.
When I traced her family via ancestry - they cut contact and did not want to know.
I’m writing this as I believe some people wsnt to ignore children who are adopted existance because it resurfaces issues or trauma,
But sadly that leaves a hole in many peoples identity.
I’m posting this, hoping that someone will help us answer so many questions left with no response.

I have to say if someone contacted me about a family member we potentially had in common over 100 years ago I wouldn’t necessarily want to be in contact with them either - to me it’s so long ago as to be pretty much irrelevant other than possibly of vague historical interest. And I’d wonder about someone’s motive for wanting to establish such a distant current family connection.

Just trying to give you one possible reason why. (No, I’m not related to the named person afaik)

Fair enough - we don’t have any motives though. Just identity curiosity.

I wouldn't show any interest tbh.
My SiL contacted a man in Australia who was apparently some cousin and he was very abusive to her.

I wouldn’t be interested in having contact either. Too long ago, too distant.

Not sure why you felt it necessary to provide a name on here?

If someone contacted me about some random relative from a century ago and were wanting to delve into my business to satisfy their “identity curiosity” I’d say no too.

The fact you’ve started a thread using the woman’s name suggests you’re not simply curious. You do know that it’s possible she’ll be identified. So out of order

I'd think it was some dodgy debt company or a scammer probably.

There are some very underhanded detective companies out there who'll stop at nothing to trace people.

My dad was adopted in the 1940s. He has always been very clear that he did not and does not want to find out anything about his birth family. He has no animosity around being adopted but for him, he is nothing to do with them and he doesn't have any curiosity about the circumstances. Not everyone wants a Long Lost Family situation.

Another who wouldn’t be interested- I would’ve expected this to be the default to be honest?

OP, you are being very manipulative and disrespectful by posting this thread. I suggest you ask MN to take it down.

This woman is no longer alive and there would be very little you could find out about her. Her living relatives have no obligation to tell you anything.

The fact you’ve started a thread using the woman’s name suggests you’re not simply curious. You do know that it’s possible she’ll be identified. So out of order

It's the OP's great grandmother's name. She was most likely born before 1900, if she gave birth in 1914. I doubt she cares.

I think its true that many people aren't interested in family history and long lost distant relatives. Fair enough.

But it's weird that they are on Ancestry - the website that is entirely about family history and facilitates connecting with DNA matches!

But the living relatives care.

Is this the same person as 12 years ago?

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/amibeingunreasonable/1818213-Anybody-with-a-surname-Searson

I presume the relatives have their details on ancestry.com so I can understand why you are puzzled about them not being interested in sharing information. However, they're probably just interested in seeing the family tree on the internet rather than being in touch with potential relatives. I'd just leave it op.