Who I am: Liberty University edition

This is one in a series of posts on the search for my biological family.

I was adopted soon after birth and have known from the earliest memories of that fact. I was always curious about my biological family but I really didn't have any way to find out who they were. That changed a little over three years ago as I began a new search for my biological parents based on some potentially new information.

I started with a blog post that included just about everything that I knew at the time. That post included some notes (probably from a caseworker) that were given to my adopted parents. At the time I had no idea how accurate or potentially valuable these notes would be. In 1975, these notes may have been considered non-identifying information but that probably would not be the case today.

Besides the notes, the two best potential sources of information for me were DNA testing (which had become relatively inexpensive) and a new law in Pennsylvania that would allow adoptees to have a copy of their original birth certificate (my official birth certificate has my adopted parents listed).

The DNA tests I took were very helpful and included information on relatedness, ethnicity,  and paternity. Unfortunately, because I did not know what I was looking for, the DNA tests by themselves did not give me what I needed. At this point, with the assistance of friends for whom I will be forever grateful, I hired an investigator who was able to take all the disparate pieces of evidence and find my birth mother.

I eventually connected with my birth mother online and we have chatted quite a bit but have not met yet. Through information she provided, I was eventually able to locate my birth father and we have since met. Identifying your birth parents is an emotional roller coaster. Some people find out that their birth parents have passed. Others find that their birth parents don't want anything to do with them. Others meet and have a bad experience. I have to admit that I have been very lucky.

The best sources of information in finding my biological family and filling out the family tree came from Ancestry.com. The best resources on Ancestry are available through a paid subscription. Other sites of particular interest are FindAGrave.com (which is integrated into Ancestry but also available as a standalone site), and Newspapers.com (another paid site associated with Ancestry). Finally, digital scans of many old newspapers are available through the Proquest Historical Newspapers database which is available in many academic libraries such as the Jerry Falwell Library (and the source of Video DB forum 6). The family of my biological father lived in Baltimore for many years so the Baltimore Sun was a key resource for me. In sum, if you already know a lot about your family, you may be able to find good resources in print via libraries or a particular historical society. But for me and my investigator, the best resources were all online.

For DNA testing, I used a combination of Ancestry and FamilyTreeDNA.com. These tests are usually less than $100. To be sure, many people have ethical concerns about sharing their DNA with a private company so if you have those concerns, be sure to read the terms of service before you decide. If you're in a position like me, the potential benefits outweighed the costs.

Finding my birth parents is something that has taken me virtually all of my life. For many years I made no progress because the information I needed was not available. The proliferation of genealogy information online and the availability of inexpensive DNA tests has made the process much easier. And just to tie up a few loose threads: I did eventually get a copy of my original birth certificate. Only my mother's name was on it, but I had already located her by them. But for many others, this law is a crucial step for adoptees in finding their birth parents. And those original notes from the caseworker? Although I could not have known at the time, they were dead-on accurate.

References

Ancestry.com

FamilyTreeDNA.com

FindAGrave.com

Newspapers.com

Proquest Historical Newspapers

Who I am: Ancestry.com and Geographic Granularity

This is one in a series of posts on the search for my biological family.

So, this is really cool. AncestryDNA just released another update to their analysis which provides considerable more geographic granularity. In my case, they've broken down Ireland into 92 (!) smaller regions, and placed my origins into North Roscommon, which is a smaller area in County Roscommon centered around the small town of Elphin. Ancestry will then link you to DNA matches who are also from that small region. In my case, there are 124 matches (and several that match my birth surname). Add to this the fact that a number of historical records show that my ancestral family is from this very region.

Who I am: Meeting my birth father

This is one in a series of posts on the search for my biological family.

In a previous update, I had mentioned that I had (finally) identified both my birth mother and birth father. I have since reached out to my birth mother and we have chatted some online. It remains to be seen if we will meet, but I hope that we will eventually.

She also helped to identify my birth father. I reached out to him, and he responded. We talked on the phone several times, and eventually met in Baltimore a few months ago. I also found out that he was engaged to be married; and that I was invited to attend the wedding. How cool!!!

Fast-forward to this weekend: My family attended the wedding in Baltimore at the Sagamore Pendry Hotel:

It was an amazing weekend. We had a great time, and I was able to meet many new relatives that I never knew about!

Who I am: What's in a name, revisited

This is one in a series of posts on the search for my biological family.

A short update to my previous post about my curiously official lack of a middle name.

Maryland refused to put my middle name on my driver's license because, well, I have no middle name on my social security card.

Now that I've moved back to Pennsylvania, I had to apply for a driver's license again. And despite not having a middle name on my social security card, and though I'm pretty sure I did not even put my middle name on my driver's license application, Pennsylvania has seen it fit to put my middle name back on my driver's license. Go figure.

Who I am: DNA testing and ethnicity (FamilyTreeDNA update)

This is one in a series of posts on the search for my biological family.

In a previous post, I reviewed how DNA testing revealed my ethnic background. Since then, FamilyTreeDNA has updated its MyOrigins analysis. It's not clear exactly what they did, but I assume it had something to do with updating its reference population. My numbers changed, a little bit. Here are the new (left) and old (right):

The website notes that "[a] trace percentage indicates a very small amount of shared DNA in common with the coresponding population. In some cases this minor percentage could be attributed to background noise." So it's not clear if if actually have any ancestry from the trace regions, but it is possible. Now, here are FamilyTreeDNA and Ancestry side by side:

What is going on here? To be clear, this is the same DNA test, done at Ancestry and the results uploaded to FamilyTreeDNA. Again, these differences are almost certainly do to different reference populations. Still, it's a bit frustrating, don't you think? Aside from Iberia, which appears on both tests, the trace regions don't necessarily match up. Scandinavia went from 5-8% to disappearing. Still, these are very small numbers. That 32% from Western Europe on the Ancestry test just completely disappears at FamilyTreeDNA. Another mystery to figure out...

Who I am: Filling out the family tree

This is one in a series of posts on the search for my biological family.

It's been a little while since I posted about my genealogical search, but not for want of activity. In fact, considering how slow my search had been over the years, we've been moving at warp speed the last month or so, even if it's still slower than I want.

First things first: with the help of an investigator (and especially with the help of many of you, who generously supported my effort financially), about a month ago, I was able to identify and locate my birth mother. Once I identified her, it was just a matter of time to start branching out my maternal ancestors. I'm sure I'll be able to fill you in on more details in the future, but it's been a pretty fascinating search thus far. In a couple of cases, I have ancestors that arrived in North America as early as the mid-1600s as part of the Great Migration. I also have direct ancestors that participated in the Revolutionary War (time to start working on the SAR application...), frontier pioneers, and abolitionists that supported the Underground Railroad. So far, I'm just scratching the surface. There is much more research to be done.

It's also worth nothing that the search for direct ancestors has also provided some very practical information: my grandfather, and his father, both died of heart attacks. So while the "trivia" of genealogy is very cool, the information is very useful from a health and genetics standpoint.

Second, with the help of my birth mother (who I have started to communicate with), she has helped me to identify my birth father. I'm just beginning to reach out to him, and my research efforts on my paternal side have just begun within the last few days. So I don't really know much beyond some specific details about my birth father (if you want to help with this research effort, especially if you have resources beyond the usual free sources, drop me a line). But hopefully he will respond to my search and we'll see how it goes from there.

So far, so good...

Who I am: DNA testing

Are you considering a DNA test? If so, would you consider using my affiliate link for Family Tree DNA?

https://affiliate.familytreedna.com/idevaffiliate.php?id=1753

Thank you very much!

Who I am: DNA testing and paternity (part 3)

This is one in a series of posts on the search for my biological family.

My previous Y-DNA test was a 37-marker test, and showed 179 possible matches. I recently paid for the upgrade to the 67-marker test, and just got the results back this morning. According to this test, I have 22 possible matches, but at a genetic distance of 4-7. What this means is that none of the people I match are particularly close. For example, at a genetic distance of 4, the probability that I share a common ancestor with a particular person only reaches beyond 50% at seven generations.

Some of the more common surnames that appeared on the 37-marker test have disappeared. Some are still there, but again, the larger genetic distances does not give me much confidence in the results. Also, there are fewer results because fewer people have done 67-marker (or 111-marker) tests.

Even before getting back these most recent results, I had considered it likely that I would eventually pay for the 111-marker test. But now you can perhaps see, as I do, why this would probably be a waste of time. The test would surely give me fewer results, but they would all be at considerable genetic distances (7+) and unlikely to give me any useful information. What these tests results have demonstrated is that no one who is genetically close to me has taken a DNA test with any of these companies, so no amount of further testing by me is going to uncover anything.

Back to square one...

Who I am: New PA law allows adoptees access to birth records

My mom sent me a link to this article. It's a big deal:

A new state law removes a legal hurdle for adult adoptees trying to learn their true identity and family medical histories.

The law, approved in early November and fully taking effect in one year, enables individuals who are 18 and over and were adopted as children to apply for a copy of their original birth certificate from the state Health Department.

As the article indicates, it may be up to a year before the law is fully implemented, but at that point I will have access to my original birth certificate.

In the 20+ years (off and on) that I have been searching for my birth parents, this is potentially the biggest development of all. Wow.

Who I am: DNA testing and paternity (part 2)

This is one in a series of posts on the search for my biological family.

As I explained in a previous post, the second DNA test that I did was a Y-DNA test to match other males with a most common recent ancestor (MCRA). My Y-DNA test was a 37-marker test, and showed 179 possible matches. Ideally (assuming a high confidence test and males who consistently pass their surname), a Y-DNA test would match you to other individuals with a single surname and a single MCRA. Ideally, this would tell me my biological surname. As you can tell from the multiple surnames among the results, the 37-marker test is simply not precise enough to answer my question. As a result, I recently upgraded my test to a 67-marker test. The results should come back sooner  (~two weeks) because they can do the test with the previous sample I provided. And if the 67-marker test still doesn't provide enough precision, there is a final 111-marker test--but I'd like to avoid those costs if I can.

Who I am: What's in a name?

This is one in a series of posts on the search for my biological family.

I want to take a short detour from DNA and genealogy to discuss what is simple to most people, but surprisingly less so for me: my name.

My original birth certificate would ordinarily have my birth name, and the names of my biological parents. As an adoptee, I am not entitled to it (presumably for these reasons). As a result, the birth certificate I do have is re-issued with my adopted name. This is well enough for all the identification reasons someone would need their birth certificate for, but it's not particularly helpful for my search.

When I took my birth certificate to get my Maryland driver's license some years ago, the DMV clerk pointed out to me that my birth certificate had no middle name. Now, ever since I was adopted, I have used James as a middle name. It's one my birth parents gave me. Nonetheless, it's not on my birth certificate, and (because of that) it's not on my driver's license. But it is on my passport (which, presumably, I needed my birth certificate or driver's license to obtain).

That's a long-winded way of wondering: I have been using a middle name for nearly 4 decades. What is my name? Do I even have a legal middle name?

I took a test this morning and had to register without my middle name because the test registration had to match my driver's license. Apparently, the force of using my given middle name for 40 years is not good enough for some things.

Whether I have a middle name or not doesn't seem to have ever caused me any problems. If I need a middle name, I have my passport. Otherwise, I don't appear to actually have one. Nonetheless, one would think that your name is fundamental to who you are. For me? Not so much, apparently.

Who I am: Revisiting my original notes

This is one in a series of posts on the search for my biological family.

When I made my original post, I came across some older, more detailed notes about my biological family. You can see them here. As I looked at the notes with fresh eyes, I realized some things I had noticed before, but didn't necessarily follow up on.

For example, consider that my maternal grandmother died at age 22 of pneumonia. Yikes. And why I don't know when she was born, I can estimate it do to my birth mother's age when I was born. Since my birth mother was ~20 when I was born in 1975 (and thus born ~1955), I am guessing that my maternal grandmother was born ~1935 (+/-3) and died in 1957 (+/-3). Now, that's still a very large group of people, but it's something, right? Maybe that, combined with some other bits and pieces, will yield another clue. Of course, I also have to more or less assume that these notes are accurate, since I have nothing else to go on. They seem to be notes that my adopted family were given, possibly by a social worker.

I searched the Social Security Death Index for anyone with the surname Knapp who was born in 1935 (+/-5) and died in 1957 (+/-5), anywhere in the United States. Just two results: Larry and Norton. Both males. So, assuming the information about my maternal grandmother was accurate, she was probably not a Knapp--at least not when she died.

If you take the surname out of the search, you get 20,982 results. If you narrow +/-5 to +/-2, you get 3.633. Still a lot, but more manageable. And while the Social Security Death Index does not classify gender, you can infer most from the names. Unfortunately, though, many of the records do not have a last residence so further narrowing by state is not possible, even if we knew she lived in Pennsylvania (possible, but no real evidence to be sure). And then there's the not-so-obvious: If her name wasn't Knapp, how would I even know that I was looking at the correct result? I could very easily scroll right past the records I'm looking for without even knowing it.

Now, it gets interesting...

I also took another look at the Lehigh University Epitome yearbooks. Knowing that my birth father was listed as a 19-year old sophomore (presumably at the time I was born, in November 1975), this suggests he would graduate in 1978 (presuming he graduated on-time, and at all). Here is where it gets at least somewhat interesting. I looked at the 1978 Epitome for the most common names on my Y-DNA test results. The most common name was McHargue (with some variations as McCard). In fact, there is a 1978 Lehigh graduate with the surname McCard. He's still alive; and I found him on Facebook and LinkedIn. Still, the information I have is not exactly bullet-proof as I explained in my last post. Possible? Yes? Certain? No. It's not something that, without more, I'd feel comfortable going to him about. "Excuse me sir, did you happen to father a child while you were a student at Lehigh?" I'm not there yet. And--just to be clear--despite that you might feel as if you're helping--please do not take it upon yourself to reach out. If I get further information, I'd like to do it on my own terms.

Who I am: DNA testing and paternity

This is one in a series of posts on the search for my biological family.

The second DNA test that I did was a Y-DNA test. You can examine the more specific details here, but the idea of a Y-DNA test is to match other males with a most common recent ancestor (MCRA). Ideally (assuming a high confidence test and males who consistently pass their surname), a Y-DNA test would match you to other individuals with a single surname and a single MCRA. Ideally, this would tell me my biological surname. If it were only that simple.

My Y-DNA test was a 37-marker test. This is a decent entry-level Y-DNA test, but other higher resolution tests are available at 67 and 111 markers (they are also considerably more expensive). My results showed 179 matches. Some or even many of these are not likely to be definitive--it is unlikely, for example, that I share a MCRA with three males with three different surnames! Still, the list of most common surnames shows some interesting results:

McHarg/McHargue/McChargue/McCard (14)

Gallagher (10)

Carnes/Carney (6)
McAmis/McCamis/McCammish (5)

McGee (5)

Campbell (4), Hughes (4), McKee (4)

Clancey/Clancy (3), Coyne (3), Douglas/Douglass (3), Flannery (3), Manley/Mannelly/Munnelly (3)

Remember how I explained in my ethnicity post that I was Scotch-Irish? Yeah, I think these surnames confirm that!

Second, the first group almost all have the same MCRA (Alexander McHargue, born 1711 in Argyle, Renfrewshire, Scotland; died April 4, 1789, in Paxton Township, Dunphin, Pennsylvania, USA). Is this my MCRA? Possible, but not with enough certainty to really know.

Here's what the test tells me: At 37 markers, I match an unknown McHargue (unfortunately, his profile is set to private) on 35 of 37 markers (a genetic distance of 2). I also match an unknown Carney (unfortunately, his profile is also set to private) on 35 of 37 markers (again, a genetic distance of 2). As you can imagine, I probably only share a MCRA with one of these guys. My guess is to lean toward McHargue, but only because the name is far more common on my list of surnames. Obviously, just based upon numbers, Gallagher, McGee, and a few other names are certainly possible. Only time (and more research!) will tell.

In my next post, I'll revisit my original adoption notes with a twist. Remember that my biological father was supposedly a 19-year old sophomore at Lehigh University? Yeah, it's about that. Until next time...

Who I am: DNA testing and ethnicity

This is one in a series of posts on the search for my biological family.

The last decade has seen the proliferation of DNA testing. In addition to becoming more sophisticated, it has also become less expensive. Although I did not expect that DNA testing would be the answer to the question of who I am, I thought it might help. And it turns out, it has.

The first DNA test that I did was an autosomal DNA test via Ancestry.com. This is as simple as spitting some saliva in a small tube and sending it back. The Ancestry DNA test would tell me two things of some significance: first, an ethnicity estimate. Ancestry estimates your genetic ethnicity by comparing your DNA to the DNA of other people who are native to a region. The AncestryDNA reference panel (version 2.0) contains 3,000 DNA samples from people in 26 global regions. Second, the results will show me other people (Ancestry.com members) that I am related to, with some measure of how closely related. I'll cover DNA relatives in the next post.

Keep in mind that most people have some idea where they are from, from their parents (incidentally, even if you think you know where you're from, you might be surprised by the results you get--so consider it!). I had no idea. Here's what Ancestry told me about my ethnicity:

Keep in mind here that these are genetic regions. "Ireland" here is not just the country of Ireland, but also includes Scotland and Wales (and is distinct from "Great Britain"), primarily because the Scottish and Irish intermingled quite a bit. Either way, the big takeaway from this test it is estimated that I am about half Scottish/Irish.

One of the cool things about the Ancestry.com DNA test (and of most such tests) is that you can download the raw results and upload them to other genealogy sites. In this way, you can compare your results against different samples and match other users who might not be on Ancestry.com. Here is my ethnicity estimate from FamilyTreeDNA:

You can see here that this comparison shows a much stronger link to the British Isles (and when you drill down, specifically Ireland).

Finally, there is a very cool site called GEDmatch.com. This site also allows you to upload raw DNA test results and match them against other profiles (as well as many other cool tools which I will address in later posts). Specifically, GEDmatch has a series of tools called "Admixture" which are  similar to the ethnicity estimates. Here are the results of my DNA test against the Eurogenes project:

Although this project uses different labels, you can see it seems largely consistent with the other results. Still, there are some interesting variations. Specifically, 3% South Asian and 1% American Indian definitely stood out for me. It's difficult to know much of this is a matter of estimates. Nonetheless, it's interesting to say the least.

So, now I know that I'm largely Scottish/Irish, with perhaps some very interesting small bits from here and there. Shit, I'm downright cosmopolitan.

In my next post, I'll talk about DNA testing and relatedness to other people.

Who I am: DNA testing and relatedness

This is one in a series of posts on the search for my biological family.

In this post, I will look at DNA testing as it results to matching me to other people who have also done DNA tests. I will assume you know the basics of how DNA works. The more DNA you match, the closer you are to that person. Conversely, less DNA means a more distant relationship. And unless you know specifically the relationship that a person shares with you, it is difficult to determine that from DNA alone.

First, consider this table as a general idea of how much shared DNA means in terms of a relationship:

Approximate amount of shared DNA (in centimorgans)	Possible relationship
3,475	Parent, child, or identical twin
2,400—2,800	Full sibling (including fraternal twins)
1,450—2,050	Grandparent, aunt, uncle, half—sibling
680—1,150	1st cousin, great—grandparent
200—620	2nd cousin
90—180	3rd cousin
20—85	4th cousin
6—20	Distant cousin: 5th cousin — 8th cousins

Let's take a look at my results from Ancestry.com. My top match is a woman who shares 455 centimorgans shared across 22 DNA segments. Ancestry characterizes  this relationship as a 1st-2nd cousin. If I knew the specific relationship that we share, I could confirm the accuracy--but I don't. And most unfortunately, this woman was also adopted. She does a little about her birth family, but not enough to be helpful to me. Because she is about a generation older than me, I suspect that we are first cousins once removed--that is--one of my great grandparents is also her grandparent. Since neither of us know who that might be, it's not a lot to go on.

I have a lot of other matches on Ancestry--147 total, in fact. However, only a handful are even characterized as 3rd cousins. Most are 4th cousins or more distant than that.

On FamilyTreeDNA, my closest match shares only 127 centimorgans. I contacted this man, who just happens to be a chemistry professor at the University of Maryland. We've been in contact for a while now, and he's been very interested in helping me. This is great. However, he too knows that we have little to go on. So we're still moving very slowly.  FamilyTreeDNA also matches me with over 1,000 people--many more than Ancestry--but again, most of these are fairly distant matches. There's always a chance that someone knows something, so I do try to contact my top matches. But most people don't know much beyond their first cousins.

Lastly, GEDmatch.com shows over 1,000 matches that share at least 10 centimorgans. Here again, though, the closest match has a genetic distance of 4.0. Not terribly helpful.

You might be thinking--can't I generate a massive family tree using all of these people and find where they match? In theory, yes. In reality, it's not that simple. Most genealogy sites publicly share family trees, but limit what most users can see to those members who have died. As a result, the most useful matches are generally people who are alive not available on those trees. Some people will publicly post more, but it's really hit or miss.

In a future post, I'll talk about the second DNA test I took, the Y-DNA test.

Who I am: An introduction

I have known for as long as I can remember that I was adopted. My adopted family never kept this from me, and always answered whatever questions I had (to the extent that they knew the answers, of course). I was brought home from the hospital with my adopted family just days after birth as a foster child, and was adopted a few years later. My adopted family is all I have ever known.

Despite general curiosity about my biological family, I never dwelled upon it too much, and besides, there wasn't much to know. My adopted parents were given a little bit of information (presumably from a social worker), but I never knew how much stock to put in this. On top of that, until recently, Pennsylvania had very restrictive adoption laws. I was not (and, as far as I can tell, still not) entitled to my original birth certificate. And until the last few years, there was no way to find out any additional information.

Over the years I have spent some time here and there looking into what little information I had. For example, my birth mother's surname was supposed to be Knapp. Well, was that her maiden name? Or her married name? Was she even married? My birth father was perhaps a student at Lehigh University. I paged through years of Epitome, the student yearbook, looking for a familiar name or face. Nothing. I posted something on Facebook, asking friends to share it. Hoping it would go viral. Perhaps millions of Facebook users would see it, and someone would recognize what little information I had. Still nothing.

Within the last few months, I decided to press the issue more aggressively. I want to answer the age-old question: Who am I? Perhaps I will someday have the opportunity to meet my birth parents, or meet biological siblings. Perhaps not. But I want to know as much as I can. I will document that search here. This is the entirety of what I knew as I began my search:

Birth name: Michael

Adopted name: Michael J. Schearer

Birthday: November 28, 1975

Birth place: Reading, PA

County of adoption: Berks County, Pennsylvania

Birth mother: Unknown. Last name may have been Knapp

Birth father: Unknown. May have been a student at Lehigh University

Other ancestry/heritage: Unknown.

EDIT: I found some more detailed notes that I recorded a few years ago!

When I was born, my placement agreement with my foster parents referred to me as "Michael King." Other documents from this period also refer to me by that name. My adopted parents believe that "King" was a name given to me by the hospital.

When I was adopted (late 1977-early 1978), my adoption agreement with my adopted parents referred to me as "Michael Knapp." Other documents from this period also refer to me by that name. My adopted parents believe that "Knapp" was probably my birth mother's name. I don't have any other information to verify this, though.

Mother: 5'5 1/2", light brown hair, blue green eyes, fair to medium skin, nice complexion, wears glasses (myopia), good general health, head childhood diseases, one year of business school. 20 years old.

Father: 6'2" 185 lbs., brown hair, brown eyes, medium skin, right handed, good general health, at college presently (Lehigh). Sophomore, 19 years old.

I'm not sure if this college information is as of 1975 when I was born, or 1978 when notes were made. I've looked through Lehigh University yearbooks from 1977-1981 in the hopes that I might simply recognize someone that looks like me, but I haven't had any luck so far.

Maternal grandmother: blind due to measles and whooping cough. Died at age 22 of pneumonia.

Since my birth mother was ~20 when I was born in 1975 (and thus born ~1955), I am guessing that my maternal grandmother was born ~1935 (+/-3) and died in 1957 (+/-3).

Maternal grandfather: blind due to a hunting accident. Died at 52 of a heart attack.

Maternal great-grandparents were living and in good health at time of placement (~1975).

In upcoming posts, I'll address some of the more recent steps I have taken, including the Pennsylvania Adoption Information Registry, DNA testing, and more. 

There is no roadmap, and the destination is unclear. But I invite you to come along for the ride.