Relationships, eh? Time was, relationships for family historians were all so simple: Ancestor “A” met Ancestor “B”, they married and begat Ancestor “C” and probably “C.2” to “C.5” as well. Nice and easy on the family tree. (Unless we’re talking of my great-grandfather Edward Parsons who had two families on the go at the same time)
But it’s not so easy now, is it? Relative “F” may be living with Person “Q”, and possibly Person “P” before that, but does that make them part of the family? Do they warrant an entry on the family tree? After all, they may have lived together longer than many of the marriages that have been recorded.
Now, obviously, if “F” and “Q” were to add Relative “R” to the World’s population, then “Q” would qualify for treedom, legal relative or not. But if they were no children, I guess “Q” has no blood or legal connection and thus wouldn’t be part of the family in the genealogical sense. After all, if the requirement was simply co-habitation, what would be the minimum qualifying period: a month, year, seven years?
I think I’m going to leave this to the genealogists of the future to unravel.