Comments on: Using DNA To Trace Michelle Obama’s Past

By: Lena Smith

Lena Smith — Wed, 10 Oct 2012 01:11:13 +0000

Looking for husbands father’s ancestry

By: Nancy Siddons-Daniels

Nancy Siddons-Daniels — Thu, 16 Aug 2012 23:51:04 +0000

I am rather taken aback by the comments regarding Nick Cifuentes’ posting of “Using DNA To Trace Michelle Obama’s Past.” It is quite apparent that the majority of comments came from people who have not read Rachel Swarns’ book “American Tapestry.” I have read the book, and while I initially expected to find fault with it, I was actually very pleased and appreciative of the way Ms. Swarns handled the subject matter, the history, the documentation, and the story. She is a wonderful writer, capable of taking raw stats and research and creating a story that helps people understand the very complex issues of whites and blacks during the highly volatile years of slavery – even up to present day. This is NOT a story about DNA, it is a story about understanding our history better in regard to the subject of slavery and the treatment of blacks throughout U.S. history. I learned a great deal, as well as garnered helpful research tips on researching genealogy for Americans of African descent.

I totally relate and agree with Evelyn (#13); nothing takes the place of documentation, i.e., vital records, birth/marriage/death certificates, land records, etc. It is important that lineage organizations maintain strict guidelines on the subject; however, DNA testing can and will indicate whether a person is related to another person genetically, even if they are separated by many generations. If it did not, then our criminal investigation forces and our legal system, which use DNA testing for paternity cases, immigration issues, adoption questions, etc., wouldn’t have a legal leg to stand on. DNA is accurate, it is not junk. It is not for all cases, but it can certainly offer a great deal of information regarding familial relationships, genetic diseases, forensics, ethnicity, etc.

People need to understand that “American Tapestry” does not tout DNA testing over research and documentation. The “Notes” and “Bibliography” section of the book are huge with document resources. In fact, the subject of DNA testing is only mentioned a handful of times in regard to “Skip” Gates’ involvement with genealogy reality TV shows that use DNA testing, and also the fact that both the white and black descendants of the Shields were tested.

For blacks in this country, especially those whose ancestors were slaves, there is little or no formal documentation of their ancestors. Ms. Swarns, using historical references, news articles, state and federal statistics, etc., created a possible and even probable reality for an entire group of disenfranchised people for whom there are no records available.

Ms. Swarns is no slouch; she is a New York Times reporter. She made it very clear in her writing that she was presenting a general reality based on documented historical facts. She was always careful to make it clear that she was describing the situation of the day, not necessarily the specific situation of Michelle Obama’s individual ancestors. For the descendants of people who spent their lives in servitude, even a little insight may mitigate for the fact that they will never know for sure what their ancestors went through. “American Tapestry” does give a glimpse of what it MIGHT have been like for people who lived a lifetime of slavery. In some cases, that is the only information many descendants will ever have about their ancestors.

I will be posting a book review of “American Tapestry” on http://www.RecordClick.com, and hope that you all will keep an open mind to genealogy DNA testing, bearing in mind that it is a tried and tested research method used by law enforcement agencies.

Ancestry.com should be commended for their many avenues of genealogy research – offering alternative research resources to help solve different genealogy projects. To dismiss any one of them is taking a tool out of your genealogy research toolbox.

By: Margaret Adams

Margaret Adams — Tue, 31 Jul 2012 19:50:29 +0000

In the 10+ years that I have been researching my family history, I cannot fathom any reputable, professional genealogist making the assumptions this person has without documentation. This must be the same guy that was on CNN this morning touting the President’s historic slave ties, all due to DNA testing with little documentation. As anyone who has looked at past history, we cannot judge by current PC standards what happened 100, 200 or 300 years ago. Passing this junk genealogy off as “gospel” serves no useful purpose other than to hawk this guy’s book! I’m really disappointed that ancestry has sunk so low to get new subscribers.

By: Evelyn

Evelyn — Tue, 31 Jul 2012 18:05:07 +0000

Re: #11 – you are correct. As a former Registrar for several lineage societies, I know that proper documentation is essential for acceptance. The databases in Salt Lake City, while helpful, are not acceptable because they are user supplied and not usually supported by proper documentation. Current so-called DNA evidence is based on what you are not, rather than what you are. Ancestry.com’s main usefulness lies in its extensive library of resources that are reproduced from original sources. The Family Trees on the website are seldom documented. I suspect that if true DNA testing were done on remains of ancestors – assuming you can find their remains – there would be many children who would not be their fathers’ children. But there is no way to test that, so other methods of documentation must suffice. And it is only a surmise – based on context, surrounding evidence, consistency, etc. Tracing 11 generations of acceptable and well-supported documentation for a person is extremely difficult these days, even for people whose ancestors wrote everything down. In this particular case, I sincerely doubt that much was documented.

By: Bobbie

Bobbie — Tue, 31 Jul 2012 17:11:13 +0000

I want to take the opportunity to apologize to the black race (also any other race) and ask their forgiveness for the pain and suffering that they endured at the hands of my ancestors.

By: Steve Stevens

Steve Stevens — Tue, 31 Jul 2012 16:44:34 +0000

I just read an article in my local newspaper that Ancestry reserachers also did DNA research on Obama and found him to ba a direct descendent of “the first slave in America.” And now we have the miraculous story of Michele being part white also. I sure wish I had these researchers working on my family, I can’t get past the 1830′s for most.

Come on, what kind of stuff are you trying to hand the public? No bonified organization would ever accept this lousy research for any application of membership for we ordinary people and you all are touting it as a wonderful discovery. I have lost all respect for Ancestry and if it weren’t for their fantastic resources (when used correctly and with due diligence)I would cancel my membership.

Bet this never sees the light!

#9 let’s see Ancestry do Obama and Davis’ DNA instead and publish that data!

Steve Stevens

By: MsWinston

MsWinston — Tue, 24 Jul 2012 13:37:32 +0000

#8 What does your comment have to do with this interesting article?

By: Tony Knight

Tony Knight — Sun, 22 Jul 2012 05:39:18 +0000

I watched a very interesting episode of the US version of Who Do You Think You Are about an African American, footballer who was also DNA tested. The results showed just over 80% African heritage if I remember correctly and I think the DNA researcher said that it was the highest she had ever seen.

By: Richard Wayne Hanshaw

Richard Wayne Hanshaw — Sun, 22 Jul 2012 04:12:23 +0000

I’m Just glad her and her Berry Santoro are not in my family

By: chocolateice

chocolateice — Thu, 19 Jul 2012 16:56:09 +0000

My great-great grandfather was a Shield from North Carolina.