[Solved] unmarried couples

[drumthumper]

New to Heredis, can someone tell me how to show a couple are 'unmarried'. Marriage Relationships do not show 'unmarried' or 'this couple did not marry'

[mike-en]

Here ...

[drumthumper]

Thank for your reply, I have tried unknown status but when I go to Reports: Illustrated Books it says that couple where married date unknown. Maybe I'm not explaining myself properly. A man has a relationship with a women and a child is produced, (they did not live together and did not marry) how do I show that in my Family Tree. I'm using a PC not Mac

[mike-en]

I leave that to BSD to answer ...

[drumthumper]

Thanks Mike, In the marriage event I have change it to This Couple Did Not Marry. Still shows couple as married in Illustrated Books report, but Family Group report say's (Marriage, This Couple Did Not Marry). So I'm making progress. Have contact BSD as you suggested Thanks for you support

[christinebsd]

"Cohabitee" status should suit the situation, I think.

[drumthumper]

thank for response I don't think cohabitee works. In Help Files it says unmarried button is in Marriage Status but it's not there I'm using PC version. What ever I use in Marriage Status it still says in Reports that couple married. All I what to do is show that a couple never married and show that in reports. If I don't do a Marriage Event for couple, In reports it says they Married but date is unknown.

[christinebsd]

Indeed, there is a drafting problem about the "cohabitee" status. I note this problem ...

[billdog]

Further to this thread, in the Mac version (I haven't checked if the Windows version is the same but it probably is) where a sexual partnership results in a child, then in in Heredis that partner is defined as a Spouse.

Even if identified as a Cohabitee or Unknown Status then in Family or Data views they will be defined as Spouses.

The normal dictionary definition of Spouse implies a marital relationship - but other sources, including Wikipedia, have a broader, looser definition.

If a man were to have children by several women to whom he was not married or be married and also be having children by his wife, then to call all these other sexual partners Spouses too, I think, is misleading.

Would Partners be better?

What do others think? Any thoughts or suggestions?

[bristolian]

I have just come across this problem of definition in my tree too. I think "partner" would be acceptable, but would this be reflected in reports etc.?