Further Adventures in the Mary Ellen Frost Rawlins saga

Adventures in Family Tree

Further Adventures in the Mary Ellen Frost Rawlins saga

Chapter 1

In our last episode we ended with the statement; We now await the response from the people at support. They usually are pretty quick about responding, but we have now corrected the records and have done everything that we can do with this case.

They responded with the following;

Note
3/7/13
3:28 PM:

Problem: Patron had merged three individuals. When all was said and done, the result showed his ancestor needed temple ordinances, which had been completed. The individuals he merged all had the same vital information and name. PID's of those merged are LZFB-8RG KVGX-VKQ L8SH-ZW5 He would like the completed ordinance dates and locations restore to his ancestor Mary Ellen Frost LZFB-8RG.

Email
3/7/13
3:22 PM:

Dear Brother Gee,

Thank you for contacting FamilySearch regarding your ancestor Mary Ellen Frost. We have forwarded your request to restore the temple ordinances to this person. You will receive an email with the disposition of this case. Your case number is 2992528.

Sincerely,

FamilySearch
Patron and Partner Services
support@familysearch.org

Email
3/8/13
1:10 PM:

Dear Laurence Gee:
RE Mary Ellen Frost Rawlins LZFB-8CX
Thank you for contacting FamilySearch Support. The ordinances for Mary Ellen Frost Rawlins now show on FamilySearch . Thank you for bringing this to our attention.
Best wishes to you as you continue your quest for your ancestors.

Yours sincerely,
Family Search Data Administration

----------------------
(CaseID:2992528)
----------------------

They are really pretty good about responding quickly and resolving the issue so I looked at the record and found to my dismay that they had undone all the work and the record was back to Mary Evaline Frost with two husbands.  I wrote them the following response;

Email
3/8/13
2:31 PM:

Subject: Re: Missing ordinances

You just undid everything that it took me two hours to accomplish. Please
read the following document.

Click Here for the
Link. (They do not allow links to documents or attachments in e-mails as a security issue, but I sent it to them anyway.)

Read especially pages 8-20.

Mary Evaline Frost was not he wife of Joseph Sharp Rawlins. She is
listed as having the same ordinance dates as Mary Ellen Frost who was
married to Joseph Sharp Rawlins. I doubt that they are the same, but I will
not argue the fact because I am not familiar with Mary Evaline Frost and
her genealogy.

In the children of the marriage on Family Tree of Mary Evaline Frost and
Joseph Sharp Rawlins there are 8 children listed. These were not the
children of this marriage since it never occurred in the first place.
There were only three children of the marriage of Joseph Sharp Rawlins and
Mary Ellen Frost.

Perhaps it might be well for you to call me to go through this process.

My cell phone number is 801-631-9868. I am always available except on
Sunday from 10:30 to 2:30 and on Wednesday from 9:00 to 4:30 when I am in
the temple.

They responded;

Email
3/12/13
11:54 AM:

Dear Laurence Gee:

There are a number of ways we take care of records in order to accomplish what you desired in that you wanted the ordinances to show for Mary Ellen Frost Rawlins. We certainly did not mean to undo what you had accomplished in Family Tree. While both new FamilySearch and Family Tree are running, there will be issues such as this occurring.

The record for Joseph Sharp Rawlins no longer lists Mary Evaline Frost as a spouse. If there are children associated to Joseph Sharp Rawlins and Mary Ellen Frost, you may correct that issue in Family Tree.

Sincerely,

FamilySearch Data Administration
----------------------
(CaseID:2992528)

I did go to the record and found the record incorrect in that the name was Mary Evaline Frost, which I changed to Mary Ellen Frost.  The rest of the data was intact.  There were, however, children that did not belong.

For the child Orson Rawlins, I deleted the relationship.

For the child J.R. Rawlins, I wrote the following in the discussions on his record:

From the history of Mary Frost Rawlins: Description From the history of the mother Mary Ellen Frost Rawlins we read: Mary Ellen and Joseph Rawlins were the parents of three children; Their oldest daughter, Nancy Jane, was very helpful to her parents. She was married in 1859 to Robert Marion Kerr, and moved to Cache Valley where they became the parents of nine children. She died September 18, 1928, at the age of 83. Helen, who was a baby when her parents left to come west with the pioneers died at the age of thirteen, while her mother was visiting Nancy Jane at the birth of her first child. In the Mormon overland Trail record she is listed as Mary Ellen Rawlins. Further research will be done to document this child, but it is my contention that this child was never born to these parents. The inaccurate dates and places of birth would substantiate that assumption as well as the late sealing dates.

For the Child Julia Rawlins, I wrote:

Description From the history of the mother Mary Ellen Frost Rawlins we read: Mary Ellen and Joseph Rawlins were the parents of three children; Their oldest daughter, Nancy Jane, was very helpful to her parents. She was married in 1859 to Robert Marion Kerr, and moved to Cache Valley where they became the parents of nine children. She died September 18, 1928, at the age of 83. Helen, who was a baby when her parents left to come west with the pioneers died at the age of thirteen, while her mother was visiting Nancy Jane at the birth of her first child. In the Mormon overland Trail record she is listed as Mary Ellen Rawlins. Further research will be done to document this record, but for the meantime we will stick with the name that is found in a contemporary record. There are probably other contemporary records, which will document her name to be Mary Ellen rather than Helen. This history does not document this child as a member of the family, The fact that the sealing to parents was done in 1993 further mitigates against the assumption that she was a child of these parents.

Thus we find the record almost correct.  I think that I will leave this as such until I find out to whom Julia and J.R. belong.