post

Tech Tuesday: Cute pictures with Cute PDF

,Documents for PDF

PDFs are great for compiling documents

I love PDFs.  They are great for compiling photos of documents.  Take, for example, the photographs of the pension file for Thomas H. Stanwood who served in the Civil War.  The original documents were photographed by my cousin who lives in Washington, D.C., and was kind enough to visit the National Archives and take the digital images for me.

After reading (and re-reading) the documents, I like to draft a summary of my findings and copy the images into a Word document.  (You can see the completed document for Thomas’ pension files here.)  However, this process is rather tedious.   What I find most time consuming is sizing the documents to fit into Word.   The process can be SLOOOOOOOOW when large images consume the computer’s memory and decrease it’s speed.

Sometimes I just want a “quick fix.”  I may have old photographs or images of documents that I want to convert into a PDF format.   Cute PDF comes to my rescue.

Cute PDF is free.  It allows you to “print” to PDF.

To make a PDF using Cute PDF:

1)  Download and install the program here.

2)  Select an image (or several images that you wish to include in your PDF) and right click and select “Print.”

You will see the following screen:

Cute PDF Screen

Cute PDF Screen

3)  Select Cute PDF Writer in the upper left hand corner, and click whichever format you prefer for your document on the right.  Click “print” in the bottom right hand corner.

4)  Type the name for your file and click “Save”.

Save PDF

Save Your PDF

5)  Open your PDF!

Photos in PDF

Photos saved into a PDF document

post

Family Planning and the 19th Century Family Tree

Susan (Stanwood) Clark and daughter Beatrice, 1906 - Floodwood, Minnesota

My great grandmother, Susan (Stanwood) Clark is shown above, holding my grandmother’s sister, Beatrice. My grandmother, Goldie (Simpson) Edwards, and Auntie Bea were the only surviving children born to Grandma Susie, who was herself one of eight children, seven of which lived to adulthood. Her father, Albert Stanwood, however, was one of only four children. Albert’s father, David, was from a family of six, born to Benjamin and Betsy (Wasgatt) Stanwood. Surprisingly, I’ve stumbled on a fair number of 19th century families in my genealogy (primarily in the Wasgatt lines) where only one or two children were born to the couple, while they were married many years. While not uncommon during current times, it certainly was not the norm in days past. It made me stop and ponder the reasons for these smaller family sizes. Infertility? Possibly. Choice? Maybe. But how? The Comstock law of 1873 declared birth control both obscene as well as illegal. So, what methods of birth control did our ancestors have available to them?

According to the CDC’s MMR publication Achievements in Public Health, 1900-1999:  Family Planning, discussing birth control, counseling women about family planning or distributing contraception was illegal under state and federal laws.  ”In 1912, the modern birth-control movement began. Margaret Sanger, a public health nurse concerned about the adverse health effects of frequent childbirth, miscarriages, and abortion, initiated efforts to circulate information about and provide access to contraception. In 1916, Sanger challenged the laws that suppressed the distribution of birth control information by opening in Brooklyn, New York, the first family planning clinic. The police closed her clinic, but the court challenges that followed established a legal precedent that allowed physicians to provide advice on contraception for health reasons. During the 1920s and 1930s, Sanger continued to promote family planning by opening more clinics and challenging legal restrictions. As a result, physicians gained the right to counsel patients and to prescribe contraceptive methods. By the 1930s, a few state health departments (e.g., North Carolina) and public hospitals had begun to provide family planning services.”

Despite this, we learn from history that contraception, in one form or another, has been used for centuries.   Planned Parenthood provides A History of Birth Control Methods, and describes ways our ancestors may have attempted to limit their family sizes.  In China, women drank lead and mercury, which we now know will cause sterility, but unfortunately, may also result in death.   Of course, there were other ineffective methods tried.  From the Planned Parenthood 2006 Report:  ”During the Middle Ages in Europe, magicians advised women to wear the testicles of a weasel on their thighs or hang its amputated foot from around their necks (Lieberman, 1973).  Other amulets of the time were wreaths of herbs, desiccated cat livers or shards of bones from cats (but only the pure black ones), flax lint tied in a cloth and soaked in menstrual blood, or the anus of a hare. It was also believed that a woman could avoid pregnancy by walking three times around the spot where a pregnant wolf had urinated. In more recent New Brunswick, Canada, women drank a potion of dried beaver testicles brewed in a strong alcohol solution.”

While many religions frowned upon family planning (birth control viewed as something that immoral women or prostitutes would use, not those who were married), husbands and wives continued to look for ways to decrease the sizes of their families.   A good example is extended and complete breastfeeding, which has been used around the world to increase the time between the birth of children.   While many found this to be very effective, it was not popular among the wealthy, who often utilized wet nurses.    Abstinence was another method of birth control, which was promoted in the 1870s for married women attempting to limit family sizes.  Planned Parenthood attributes a rise in sexually transmitted diseases to this movement, as men began to turn to prostitutes instead of their wives.

Barrier methods were also used.  Surprising to many, the condom is one of the oldest forms of contraception dating back to Egypt about 1,000 BC.   Originally created from animal gut in an effort to protect from syphylis, it wasn’t until the 1700s that the contraceptive properties of the condom were recognized.  By the 1840s, rubber condoms were available, and in the 1930s latex condoms became popular.

While birth control methods have certainly evolved through the years, and the 21st century woman has many options available to her today, it saddens me to think how many years it took for birth control to be accepted.  While watching ABC World News last night, I was immediately reminded how much we take for granted.  The segment included a Middle Eastern women with her newborn infant, who had the opportunity to talk via Skype to an American mom.  She asked, “Are you also afraid of dying in child birth?”  If such fears continue to plague the 21st century Middle East mothers-to-be, imagine the anxiety experienced by our American ancestors.  According to the CDC, in 1800 in the average mother bore seven children.  By 1900, the family size had decreased to 3.5 children, and six to nine of every 1000 women died in childbirth.   Some statistics report that the 19th century death rate was as high as 10% for those giving birth.

I am incredibly grateful for modern medicine and birth control, and even more in awe of my many female ancestors who married and had families without the advantages available to 21st century women today.

For additional reading, here are some other really interesting web sites discussing the history of family planning:

post

Wordless Wednesday: Salisbury Cove Cemetery, Bar Harbor, Maine

Salisbury Cove Cemetery, Bar Harbor, Maine

Salisbury Cove Cemetery, Bar Harbor, Maine

My mother took this photo on a trip to Maine in 2004.  I love this beautiful, peaceful cemetery, but I love the photo even more since Mom was the eye behind the lens.  Mom died just two years later, making each photo all the  more special.

post

Tech Tuesday: Money and the Great Ancestry.com Debate

Ancestry.com - making my research easier

The year was 1994, and I remember the day like it was yesterday.  That sound…that beautiful sound of a dial-up modem, connecting to the internet.  My husband was by my side, showing me what the “world wide web” was like.  I was mesmerized and astounded.  I don’t recall what I said, but I’m sure “WOW!” was in there somewhere.  Not that there was a ton of genealogy sites online in 1994, but my immediate thought was how this “www” thing was going to revolutionize genealogy.

Well, here we are, more than a decade (almost two!)  later.  My dial-up modem has been replaced with wireless internet service and WiFi in my home.   The internet has grown, and we have a lot of free genealogical stuff available to us online.  Find-a-Grave and FamilySearch are a couple of my oft-visited sites and bookmarked for easy use.  I have subscriptions to several pay sites, but by far Ancestry.com is the one I simply can’t live without.

Therefore, it came as quite a shock and a surprise to hear a genealogist recently state he  had canceled his membership to Ancestry.com due to the price.

Wow.

Hmm.

Really?

I recognize that times are hard and some people may not be able to afford Ancestry.com.  That is certainly understandable, and fortunately Ancestry.com is available for free to users in many libraries and Family History Centers, so even those who aren’t able to have a personal subscription may still take advantage of their many great databases.

However, the person relating this decision was not financially strapped.  This person simply felt that Ancestry.com’s prices were out of line, and chose to cancel the subscription to “make a point.”   Unfortunately, he’s not the first one I’ve heard with the same beef.

Hmmm.

Well….

It never ceases to amaze me how some people expect to get something for nothing, or at least something for next to nothing.  Maybe I’m old fashioned, but I don’t have a problem paying for services I use, and allowing the company who provides me those services to pay their employees who process and index the records, pay for the technology that publishes those records so I can download them on my home PC, and even make a couple of bucks.

I consider my Ancestry.com membership to be quite a bargain.  While FamilySearch.org is spectacular (and FREE- hooray!), it is only one site.  Most people will concur that Ancestry.com is by far the leader of the large, subscription-based family history research sites.  The number of databases, constantly growing, is astounding.  The types of records I’ve been able to download is incredible.  I’m particularly grateful for Ancestry.com’s Maine databases, providing a strong framework for researching my Maine roots with birth, marriage and death records.  FamilySearch.org complements my research with excellent Massachusetts and other records.

Could I obtain those records by other means?  Certainly.  With one little caveat – I have to know WHERE to look in order to find those documents.  Oh yes – I would also have to invest my time in scrolling through those rolls of microfilm, and then print, scan or photograph any items I found that I’d like to save for my own records.  Even with the many pay (and free!) web sites, I still spend a considerable amount of time in front of the microfilm reader at my local FHC to look at the many documents (okay, MOST documents) that aren’t yet available online.  Online research gives me a huge advantage as I can find out where my ancestors were, and what additional records I need to find either through research trips or on microfilm.

I guess it all comes down to priorities.  For me, time is my most valuable commodity, and Ancestry.com is worth every penny I pay.  I can search, find my family, click a button and download the image right onto my hard drive.  In exchange for $299 per year (I have the “world” membership, but could downgrade to $149 for a U.S. subscription), I can view records from around the world in the comfort of my own home.  Ancestry.com gives me the head start so I know what films to order, where to fly off to for my research trips, and allows me to develop my family history at a much more rapid pace than would otherwise be possible.

Instead of looking at how much I pay for my membership, I’m inclined instead to think about how much I’ve saved…saved in time not wasted, money not spent on incorrect microfilms, and trips not taken to locations where my efforts will prove unfruitful.

Perhaps it all comes down to perspective.  You know….is that glass half empty or is it full?  Ancestry.com keeps mine pretty darn full these days.  What about you?   Do you get your money’s worth from your Ancestry.com subscription?

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 26 other followers