Can I stop non-biological grandparents from being in reports?

Question

My second great-grandfather (Breazeale-82) has an unknown biological father, but his mother married another man and he's listed as a non-biological father. In my family tree and ancestor reports, the non-biological father and his parents show up and it's driving me nuts, it's making my tree look more complete than it is!

Comments

I removed everyone of Lucinda Breazeale-67 children from Robert Scott. 

Answer 1

Donnie Blackstone is a wikitree superstar and a very nice person. Send him a polite note about disconnecting Robert Scott as father, but leaving him as Lucinda's husband since Robert did father children with her

Comments

stop starring me !!!!

---

Ok ok

---

Agreed, Donnie is an amazing contributor :)

Reading further into some of the posts here, I think this is just a feature that there's just no perfect way to implement. Non-biological parentage relationships are definitely handy and explain part of the story in the case of Samuel Breazeale in Robert Scott, but they maybe shouldn't show up in reports as ancestry.

---

Of course, I think Donnie is right. That Mr. Scott was the father of Lucinda's children. Regard his census, wherein he has children of his own, so obviously there was a first wife. And Lucinda may have been his long-time mistress. When his first wife died, he was able to finally marry Lucinda. I ask myself why would a man take on the care of so many children not his own ? Answer- they were his own.

---

I don' think the evidence supports that theory, the children on the 1850 Census are all Lucinda's. His age is listed there as 32 (although it varies across other Census records) so he's too young to be the father of those children.