|
|
|
|
Gamma
Customers
GenoPro version: 3.0.1.4
Last Login: Thursday, May 19, 2022
Posts: 11,
Visits: 200
|
(Apologies in advance for the long question.) I'm having trouble figuring out how to arrange part of a family tree while following genogram rules. The situation: - 1st-born has 2 girls (A & B)
- 2nd-born has 2 boys (C & D)
- A weds E (unrelated), then D (cousin)
- C weds F (unrelated), then A (cousin)
I've drawn up several possible solutions, and all of them have problems. See the image below:  TREE 1. Genogram rule #1 ( husband left/wife right) isn't easily doable for the cousin spouses, because the fathers follow rule #4 ( siblings left-to-right by age). I positioned the non-related spouses correctly though. PROBLEM: Can't decipher marriage orders for A & C, as spouses bracket them, rather than being in order to one side. TREE 2. I simply added number labels to the previous tree for clarification. PROBLEM: I tend to put marriage age here, if I have it, so the spot's not always free. TREE 3. Everyone positioned as in previous two trees, but I've tiered the marriage lines to show order. PROBLEM: It seems space-wasty? But decipherable, I guess. TREE 4. Reverse rule #1, just for the cousins and their spouses (i.e. put wives at left). PROBLEM: The inconsistency bothers me. All other wives are on right. But it works. TREE 5. Ignore genogram rule #4 (sibling order) for the fathers instead. PROBLEM: Again, it works, but the inconsistency bugs me. TREE 6. Just for amusement's sake, I followed all rules (wife at right, birth order, spouses in order). PROBLEM: Such a mess! I had to, like, loop-de-loop the older daughter, and do a lot of line-crossing. So! I guess my question is, which of the above trees (or none, I suppose) is most correct, following genogram rules. (And common sense rules. Because tree 6. Urgh.) (ETA: Have I even posted this in the right place? Not sure it's a 'technical support question'? Sorry if not. Feel free to delete and I'll repost... somewhere else.)
Tags:
Edited: Wednesday, October 31, 2018 by
Tibbie
|
|
|
|
|
Administrators
Customers
Important Contributors
FamilyTrees.GenoPro.com
GenoPro version: 3.1.0.1
Last Login: 3 hours ago
Posts: 3,337,
Visits: 25,588
|
One solution is to create hyperlinks for Beth and Dave. These can be emphasised as being the same person with an 'Associate With' Social Relationship.
'lego audio video erro ergo disco' or "I read, I listen, I watch, I make mistakes, therefore I learn"
|
|
|
|
|
Customers
Important Contributors
FamilyTrees.GenoPro.com
GenoPro version: 3.1.0.1
Last Login: 6 hours ago
Posts: 1,576,
Visits: 31,220
|
Not sure about genogram rules but I would try this. If you simplify the family structure by combining the two horizontal lines I find the picture easier to see. Secondly by arranging in date order on vertical scale it is helpful in understanding the history. Finally if you use GenoPrp hyperlink (Select A and press key H) then you get this
|
|
|
|
|
Gamma
Customers
GenoPro version: 3.0.1.4
Last Login: Thursday, May 19, 2022
Posts: 11,
Visits: 200
|
You both suggested hyperlinks, which I hadn't considered. It's an interesting solution, but strikes me as only compounding the space-wasty concerns of tree 3, but on the horizontal instead of the vertical. It also feels unnecessary to add a hyperlink for an individual that's literally just a few people over.
@genome, social relationship lines are something I hadn't looked into before. I don't think it's the solution I need though. They look a little cluttered there. (That said, how did you set it to "Social Relationship: Associate with Same Person"? I could not figure that last part out.) @appleshaw, your diagram's a bit confused on the 'who married who' score, but I get where you're going with it. Tier the individuals as well as the marriage lines, yes? Unfortunately, I'm the sort of OCD that creates ladder-type shapes by contorting the line tool, just so I can move it around the tree and make sure everything is spaced exactly the same. Yeah. So my reaction to individuals not lining up was, um, kinda 'eek!'? And okay, wow, I just read over all I'd written, and don't I sound ungrateful? I really do appreciate the responses! Also, the hyperlink thing... While I probably wouldn't use it for individuals already so close together, for those further apart I would. I actually have a couple other similar instances of cousins marrying (girl on left, boy on right), but the branch point is much further back so they're really far apart. In that case, I think hyperlinks are the ideal solution. Much better than a messy line crossing the tree, cutting through other lines. So thanks a bunch for the suggestion! (Still pondering the ideal solution to my original question, if anyone else wants to throw in a vote or an idea.)
|
|
|
|
|
Administrators
Customers
Important Contributors
FamilyTrees.GenoPro.com
GenoPro version: 3.1.0.1
Last Login: 3 hours ago
Posts: 3,337,
Visits: 25,588
|
The best I can come up with is this by manipulating the pedigree links to the second partnerships BTW, the Social Relationship was simply 
'lego audio video erro ergo disco' or "I read, I listen, I watch, I make mistakes, therefore I learn"
|