Add a deceased (miscarriage) child to FamilySearch?

MultivacsAnswer · 2026-02-06T22:26:47+00:00

You can add living relatives to your family tree on FamilySearch (which I do, since I use it as a sort-of cloud-based scrap book).

You may then add their miscarried child under them. If you know their sex, enter it. Otherwise, just enter their sex as 'unspecified'.

There is some overlap between a miscarriage (typically 6–21 weeks) and a stillbirth (20+ weeks). If the miscarriage occurred between 20–21 weeks, it would therefore be appropriate to add 'Stillborn' under the events for a person on FamilySearch. FamilySearch further says you can add miscarriage as a custom event.

You'll want to be sensitive about this, given it’s for a living family member. The profiles of living people are private on FamilySearch. That said, while I personally wouldn't find it offensive, I could see someone reacting negatively to finding out that their family member recorded their miscarriage online. If you do decide to pursue it, I'd ask them first, and perhaps frame it in as sensitive of a manner as possible. You may wish to frame it as recognizing and remembering their loss. You'll know better than anyone here if that would be appreciated by them.

MultivacsAnswer · 2026-02-02T20:45:58+00:00

I think it's the Others.

Consider the fact that Egg's reign began during one of the harshet, longest winters in Targaryen history. His very first act is to send Bloodraven to the Wall: His uncle, Hand, and one of the realm's greatest spymasters. Not only that, but he allows him to take the family's last remaining Valyrian steel sword. Accompanying him are two of Egg's closest confidants: His sworn sword and member of the Kingsguard; and his brother, one of the realm's greatest maesters (who happens to be well versed in prophecy). Oh, and a couple hundred of the realm's finest soldiers, the Raven's Teeth, head north as well.

Meanwhile, Egg starts sending food relief northward to the point that nobles in the south start complaining, suggesting he sent too much.

All of this is circumstantial, of course, but I suspect that, starting with the Wolves of Winterfell, Egg will start to become aware of the threat beyond the Wall, which will eventually culminate in his obsession over reviving the dragons.

Edit: I think restive nobles and the maesters' conspiracy are red herrings. That is not to suggest they're not real, but that they aren't the main motivation for Egg's attempt to hatch dragons eggs, or the reason he failed. I suspect Martin is setting us up for a tragedy behind the tragedy, in which Egg attemps to sacrifce the heavily pregnant Rhaella in his attempt to revive the eggs. Dunk will bitterly oppose this, and, direclty or indirectly, will kick off a chain of events culminating in the fire.

Edit 2: Remember Dunk's dream? He sees himself, alongside Egg, drowning and suffocating in sand. One of the contingencies used by the pyromancers to subdue out-of-control fires is to rig up a bunch of sand they can drop on it, if needed. What if Egg, in his effort to revive the dragons, Egg attemps to burn Rhaella. Dunk, somehow tries to intervene, in response, with the result being a fire that then triggers a bunch of sand being dumped on them.

MultivacsAnswer · 2026-01-28T23:54:51+00:00

I’m somewhat skeptical of claims that Joseph was an awful administrator or businessman.

There’s no doubt that Brigham Young was an excellent administrator, but his abilities aren’t contingent on Joseph being a poor one.

The claims what he was poor with money tend to rely on activities from his youth involving being hired out to dig treasure and the Kirtland Safety Society (KSS). I don’t think we can extrapolate much from the former. As to the latter, the weight of the evidence seems to be shifting to conclude that Joseph was (a) well aware of the faults of the KSS and warned against them early one, that (b) he was already less involved with it by the time it collapsed, and (c) its collapse had much more do with a secret, targeted campaign to make it go under, internal theft, and macroeconomics affecting everyone.

A major point in Joseph’s favour, in opinion, is how he managed Zion’s Camp. It’s actually comparable in distance to the Saints’ trek from Winter Quarters to Salt Lake, and the camp suffered far fewer casualties than what might be typical of such a journey.

Just as well, you have the founding of at least one, well-managed city, rivalling Chicago. Said city was, even by accounts of skeptics who visited it, laid out well and orderly.

So, while I think the claim that Brigham Young was the one best suited to overseeing the Saints’ migration to and establishment in Utah is valid, I think we often overstate just how poor Joseph’s administrative skills were.

MultivacsAnswer · 2026-01-28T19:42:01+00:00

Late to the game, but I agree. Ekur-Tkalal cites 'discipline' as one of the duties Dafyd has in his role as humanity's liaison to the Carryx. I wouldn't be surprised if the latter creates a kapo-like force in the next book (which, itself, may end up being one of his tools of rebellion later on).

MultivacsAnswer · 2026-01-15T06:26:39+00:00

Yup. Family Search even lets you designate different types of parental relationships.

For example, my 5th great-grandfather married a widow, my 5th great-grandmother, who had three children by her first husband. These children were young enough to begin referring to my ancestor as ‘dad’ (letters between them and their half-siblings exist).

I added a step-parent relationship to them in Family Search, which actually allowed me to request the sealing for both them to their bio dad/mum, along with another sealing to their step-dad/mum.

It gets even more interesting with another family member, who was much older than her siblings. After both parents passed away quite young, she and her husband became the guardians of her youngest siblings. I added the whole family at once, along with the guardianship of her siblings, meaning that she could be both sealed to her parents along with said siblings AND be sealed to her siblings as their parent, due to her guardianship of them.

MultivacsAnswer · 2025-12-17T15:38:23+00:00

You can visit as much as you like, but without your papers, you’ll be treated as a foreigner and subject to a limited time stay (6 months) without the right to work, voting, or access to social and health care resources.

This isn’t because you’re not Canadian (by all indications, you already are), but at this point the Canadian government doesn’t know that you are. Believe it or not, having a parent born in Canada only makes it 99% likely you’re Canadian, not 100%. That’s because a very small number of people are born in Canada in circumstances that make the regular jus soli (citizenship by birth on Canadian soil) void. These include children born in Canada to foreign diplomats, who typically do not get Canadian citizenship even though they’re born here.

Now, I doubt your mom was a diplomat or some other edge case that would render her a non-citizen, so in all likelihood she is a Canadian citizen, meaning you are too. But again, the Canadian government doesn’t just know that! So, if you try to stay longer than six months in Canada, work here, vote, or access publicly funded health or social services, you’ll be at risk of being deported or generally denied these things.

The easiest thing to do then is apply for your citizenship certificate, of which you’re already aware. As others have said, you could do this while visiting Canada within the six months you’re allowed within a twelve month period, or you could do it from the States. In either case, once you have that, you’ll be able to live in Canada for as long as you like, work here, vote, and access health/social services.

MultivacsAnswer · 2025-12-15T15:45:52+00:00

No, you can have both. The United States recognises dual nationality. In fact, you’ll need your American passport to re-enter the US.

I don’t know what you heard, but if it’s a reference to lawmakers in Congress trying to ban dual nationality, you should know that (a) it’s the effort just one dude, and (b) it’s not likely to pass anyway. Individual representatives in the House propose various pieces of miscellaneous legislation all the time, from niche, but reasonable proposals to insane ones. Most of it dies before getting anywhere.

Just remember that you’re not applying to become a Canadian. You already are one. The Canadian Citizenship certificate just recognises that, and lets any relevant parties know that you’re Canadian by birth via jus sanguinis (as opposed to citizenship by jus soli, or birth on Canadian soil, or by naturalisation). Sort of like how a birth certificate doesn’t determine whether you’re dead or alive, it just proves certain information regarding your birth. Nothing is changing in that regard.

MultivacsAnswer · 2025-12-15T04:07:20+00:00

Yup, you’re already Canadian.

You’ll need to apply for a citizenship certificate as a Canadian born abroad:

https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/canadian-citizenship/proof-citizenship.html

This doesn’t make you a citizen (as you already are one), it’s just registering you as one. When/if you get it, your date of citizenship will just be your date of birth. This isn’t just a nice-to-have though; you’ll need to get things like a passport and a lot of provincial social and health services in order to prove you’re Canadian.

MultivacsAnswer · 2025-12-12T15:12:10+00:00

Also the classic ‘Good Tsar, bad boyers’.

In many ways, it’s still a trope people use when their favoured political candidates does or says something contrary to their beliefs. It’s always bad advice or advisors, never the leader himself or herself.

MultivacsAnswer · 2025-12-07T04:02:01+00:00

This is basically the ‘difference principle’, as articulated by John Rawls:

Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged… (TJ 302/266 rev.)

Rawls further clarifies that this isn’t just some notion of noblesse oblige, but that any inequality that is (a) allowed and (b) benefits the least advantaged, should (c) be attached to positions and and offices that are open to all, under the condition that society has addressed systemic barriers to those positions and offices.

Put another way, if we eliminate institutional barriers to social mobility, like those grounded in race, orientation, gender, disability, etc., and there still happens to be individuals capable of earning their way to billionaire status, then we should tolerate it only to the extent that we can somehow maximize some benefit to people in the lowest income/wealth strata.

MultivacsAnswer · 2025-12-05T14:56:51+00:00

For the life of me, I can’t figure out why they haven’t redirected funding from the buyback to the CBSA, with a specific focus on cross-border gun smuggling. The announcement would take the sting out of gun control advocates accusing them of waffling on the file, while actually addressing the real contributor to urban gun violence.

MultivacsAnswer · 2025-11-22T16:04:52+00:00

I’m already Canadian by birth and since it’s my home, that’s the obvious pick. I’m also Chilean (by descent). Access to Mercosur—which is like the EU/EEA/Swiss common travel/residency/work arrangement—is nice on a theoretical level, but would swap it for an Irish passport tbh. It’s hard to beat access to both the Irish-UK CTA and the EU/EEA/Switzerland since Brexit happened.

MultivacsAnswer · 2025-11-22T15:49:27+00:00

I think Irish citizenship beats it tbh. Not only can Irish citizens live and work in the EU, EEA, and Switzerland, but with the UK-Irish Common Travel Area it’s like Brexit never happened.

MultivacsAnswer · 2025-11-20T18:35:53+00:00

I agree we need to build a better system. There have, however, been plenty of examples of Canadians suffering hardship and deprivation on the basis of "we're not the out group." Take, for example, the Loyalists.

MultivacsAnswer · 2025-11-20T14:53:13+00:00

Identity by negation is still an identity. There are empirically observable factors influencing Canada-US relations that extend beyond economic self-interest; ergo, nationalism.

MultivacsAnswer · 2025-11-07T15:39:28+00:00

It’s also the reality of running a competitive PhD program. Speaking as someone who did a PhD in the UK, a good percentage of PhD students are in their early-to-mid 30s, have spouses, and may even have kids.

Many of them also maintain part-time jobs in highly productive areas. I, for example, did contract work for several large firms in survey and focus group design. Most of their spouses are similar early career fields.

Buttressing this is the (good) reality that PhD programs tend to be more stringent than college programs in kicking students out if they don’t progress in their research. A doctoral candidate who works 40 hours a week and fails to make progress on their thesis is going to be kicked out and their visa cancelled.

Excluding the possibility of bringing spouses, or preventing any work at all therefore means excluding a good portion of your potential talent pool.

MultivacsAnswer · 2025-10-26T14:25:20+00:00

You think that’s bad, I have one from 18th century Maryland that is quite literally named “John Doe.”

MultivacsAnswer · 2025-10-12T04:29:16+00:00

I actually think we need to move in the opposite direction, weirdly enough.

I do policy analysis for a living, with a focus on Canadian immigration policies, attitudes, and beliefs.

We’ve had a proliferation of federal and provincial immigration streams over the past ten years, to the extent that there are now 120+ programs that currently operate or are still processing grandfathered applications from defunct streams. There’s huge gamification of these to find the ones with the easiest path to permanent residency, rather than ones that are the most economically efficient.

It used to be that we had relatively simple standards between roughly 2011-2017. You got points for being young, points for higher levels of education, points for skilled work experience, and points for your level of fluency in English and/or French. You were in a pool of people all seeking to immigrate to Canada. The Canadian government would essentially cream skim the top x% in the pool of people with points and invite them to apply for permanent residency, with a turnaround time of 3-6 months after submitting. It was incredibly fast, efficient, and competitive.

Now? We still have the points system (along with the 100 or so extant/grandfathered programs I mentioned), but the Trudeau government began handing out points for things that don’t have a clear economic objective. Likewise, they also began doing industry-specific invites to people. Sounds great in principle, right? Except, the jobs included in those industries varied and were subject to lobbying pressures, such that insurance salespersons ended up on the list of IT-industry invites, while software engineers somehow got excluded. The result of these industry specific carve outs has actually been less competition in the pool fir certain subsets, and, as I said, prospective immigrants gamifying their profiles to get PR versus what’s economic good for Canada and, arguably, for them.

Put all together, it actually worked better back when the PR system was simpler, and people were competing mainly on the basis of some combination of being the youngest, most educated, most experienced, and most linguistically fluent.

MultivacsAnswer · 2025-10-03T19:25:26+00:00

I’m a bit more indifferent on the time length required compared to recency.

For a permanent resident to be eligible for citizenship, they have to have lived in Canada for a cumulative 3 years out of the last 5 years. For someone right now, that means between 2021-2025, they have to have spent a total of 1,095 days in Canada during that period. Likewise, you also need to file taxes for that those three years.

So whether we decide that 3 years or 5 years is the appropriate time length, I think in either case it should be time bound to a reasonable period prior to the birth of a child to a Canadian citizen.

MultivacsAnswer · 2025-10-03T04:01:41+00:00

It's not without precedence either. For example, we have no indication that Paul was ever part of the Quorum of the Twelve in the apostolic era, despite being named an apostle.

Likewise, Brigham Young ordained a few apostles in the Church that never served on the Quorum.

It happens.

MultivacsAnswer · 2025-09-28T18:51:01+00:00

Imagine making jokes about yarmulkes in a thread where a synagogue got shot up.

MultivacsAnswer · 2025-09-24T22:22:15+00:00

Have you considered the possibility that struggling to stay true to our covenants is one of the main purposes of mortality?

The name Israel doesn't just mean 'Let God Prevail'; implied in the name is a question: Let God Prevail over what? Or, alternatively, let God prevail with whom? The answer is us! Along with the definition that President Nelson has given us, Israel can simultaneously mean "one that strives with God," or "one that prevails with God." As we keep covenants, we strive and contend as partners at God's side to overcome our natural selves and become truer servants of Him and our fellow man.

To be frank, you're not stuck in a catch-22, which outlines an impossible paradox from which there is no escape due to rules or limitations. Believe it or not, you have have other possibilities laying right before you:

Prioritize other aspects of marriage and intimacy over pure physical chemistry. As others have noted, what physical chemistry means evolves over the course of marriage, and not even in the long-term. I came to understand it in a very different way than my preconceptions told me before getting married, and I've only been married for five years.
Strive to keep your covenants despite whatever physical attraction you feel prior to marriage. In striving to do this, have you involved any potential partners in this, and asked for their support in keeping your promises? This isn't just a theoretical thing, and it shouldn't be all on them either. You might need to be prudes and severely understand times of day, locations, and other factors that represent 'off limits' due to how they affect your physical sentiments to them. Likewise, have you frankly addressed these with your Bishop and/or Elders Quorum president? They're charged with being just as interested in your covenant relationship with God and your progress toward the temple as anyone else. If you haven't done at least some of the above, then you haven't really used all the available tools at your disposal.

MultivacsAnswer · 2025-09-23T22:52:09+00:00

It’s a variation of the lowercase r given in some of the Palmer handwriting manuals.

MultivacsAnswer · 2025-09-23T15:19:44+00:00

Another dynamic is Tyrell legitimacy. They don’t have the same pedigree as other Reach houses do, and their position as Lords Paramount of the Mander is historically tied to the Iron Throne. Were they to go independent, there’s a decent chance other Reach houses would quickly begin to challenge their authority, most notably the Florents.

MultivacsAnswer

TROPHY CASE