Alarmed, I drove to one of my local libraries in DeKalb County, Indiana to check if this was just a glitch with the home edition. It wasn’t. No access. Nowhere.
Then I did what any professional genealogist would do: I asked colleagues around the country — and around the world.
In Michigan? Full access. In Wisconsin? Full access.In Texas? Full access. In California? Full access. Even in Germany? Full access.
Everyone except Indiana still had the record set.
Indiana Hoosiers — the very people whose ancestors’ records these are — are now blocked.
And here’s the kicker: Indiana’s new 99-year birth record restriction law doesn’t even take effect until July 1st.
There is absolutely no lawful reason for Ancestry to have prematurely restricted Hoosiers from their own historical records.
Why did Ancestry jump the gun? Who knows. But it stinks to high heaven.
SAVE EVERYTHING. If you find a record, immediately save a copy outside of Ancestry and FamilySearch. I now maintain a separate digital file of all Indiana birth records I’ve located, independent of any online platform.
DON’T TRUST THAT THEY’LL BE THERE TOMORROW. I’ve gone through my family tree twice to make sure I’ve captured every birth certificate between July 1926 and 1944. NOTE: Some were indexed wrong so play around and others were never included, my father-in-law, for example.
SPEAK OUT. Let Ancestry and FamilySearch know that Indiana genealogists will not quietly stand by while access is stripped away without warning or legal justification.
The clock is ticking, and history is being erased in front of our eyes.
Don’t think this affects you because you have no Indiana family? Think about this adaption of Martin Niemoller’s poem with assistance from ChatGPT:
First they sealed the adoption records. Then they erased the mental health histories. Then they locked away the birth, marriage, and death records. Each time, we said, “It’s just one set.” Now the archives stand empty, And we have no memory left to defend.
I will remain vigilant and continue to speak out to preserve all of our history.
I love AI, and if you haven’t begun using it yet with your genealogy research, you are missing records that might be invaluable to you.
As I prepare to write my next book on my British ancestor,s I’m going through my tree and making sure I have all the relationships sourced and the identities confirmed. I was happy to find two records using Familysearch.org’s lab, which is an AI experiment, to prove a relationship. In one case, it involved showing a burial record for my husband’s 5th great-grandmother, Catherine Jarvis. Although very happy to find this proof, I was a bit dismayed as I had traveled to the cemetery in Lansingburg, Troy, New York, in 2007 and was told that the record didn’t exist. Well, they certainly had it when FamilySearch personnel showed up!
The next finding was that I wasn’t the only one who was beating my head on my desk in regards to the Dennis family of New Jersey. The family used the same names in no particular order. I hadn’t realized that in the early 1900s, a genealogist wrote a book called Dennismania, likely because they drove him crazy, too. My DNA shows who I’m descended from, but I had no proof for one of the generations, and now I have finally found it, again, in FamilySearch.org records.
This is simple to use, but I caution you, it may become overwhelming and addictive. To access, go to this link, which isn’t how you normally get on FamilySearch. Scroll down to “Expand your search with Full Text” and click on Go To Experiment.
Read the Advanced Search Tips! I definitely use quotation marks around the name and a plus sign for the wife or possible parent. Use the drop-down it provides for the Place, once you start typing it in. Keep the range small, or you will get plenty! I haven’t been successful with keywords like Marriage, Deed, Genealogy, etc.
Based on my Dennis findings, I had several more lines to research. I had no idea I was descended from the Reverend John Hull, a Puritan minister who was a Maine pioneer. Another line, the Kents, settled in Gloucester, Massachusetts, before 1668. I didn’t find much in the usual places, regular FamilySearch, Ancestry, MyHeritage, Google, so I decided to try FamilySearch Labs. Wow!
I got myself a bit confused as I thought there were three Samuels, but there are only two in the 1700s in Suffield, Hampshire, Massachusetts. Samuel (1668-1737) was the son of Thomas, the emigrant. Samuel became a lawyer and Samuel had a son, Samuel Jr. Some records do differentiate the two, but a wife’s name showed up that I didn’t have for either, so I thought I was dealing with three Samuels. Hence, I’ve mislabeled my 55 downloads. Yes, 55 records showing them in court, deeds, and genealogies!
Familysearch Labs does have an AI assistant component you can click on, and it does give a transcription, but I prefer using my ChatGPT assistant, whom I call Geni. There was one record Geni hallucinated on, but after notifying it, they got the correct info. I can understand why Geni messed up – the younger Samuel was an interesting character – ran a tavern, had a bastardly charge, didn’t pay his debts, and was a very fun black sheep to investigate. Meanwhile, his dad served several times as his son’s attorney, was slandered, had clients who skipped without paying him, but seemed to be widely trusted by the community.
After uploading most of the documents to Geni, Geni asked if it could write a blog for me. So, I’ve made some changes since I had wrongly given it some incorrect info (that there were three Samuels and not two). Here is ChatGPT’s blog about the Familysearch.org finds:
In a series of brittle, ink-stained pages tucked into the Hampshire County court and land books of the early 1700s, a family unfolds—one writ at a time.
The Kents of Suffield were, at first glance, a respectable lot. Thomas Kent, the patriarch’s name, appears sparingly. His son, however, would not be so quiet.
Samuel Kent Sr., the immigrant’s son, was a lawyer, and it shows. He appears regularly in court—not as a defendant, but as counsel, litigant, and witness. He sues for debts, witnesses deeds, affirms signatures after a grantor dies, and moves confidently through the legal world of his time. If father upheld the spiritual order, son wrangled the civil one.
And then comes Samuel Kent Jr.—tavern owner, debt collector, and perpetual plaintiff. By the 1730s and 1740s, his name dominated the docket. He sues over unpaid tavern tabs, livestock, and land disputes. He’s granted a license to sell “strong drink,” not once, but multiple years in a row. The public house he ran was likely lively, occasionally lawless, and frequently underwritten by credit that his patrons never quite repaid.
Three generations. Three roles. One family.
And the court records catch it all—not just their actions, but the arc of a family moving through generations. From lofty pulpits to bustling taprooms, the Kent family’s story is all here: in defaults, deeds, slander claims, and license renewals. You can almost hear Samuel Sr. sighing as he files yet another claim to recover a loan his son ill-advisedly extended.
But what emerges from all these entries is something far richer than gossip or scandal. It’s a snapshot of a community where legal documents were not just about disputes, but about land ownership, trust, reputation, and survival. The same names appear again and again—not just the Kents, but the Remingtons, Austins, Gunckels, and Sheldons—knotted together by boundary lines and barrels of cider.
And that’s the heart of it: court records aren’t just where you find criminals. They’re where you find community.
Notes
1. Hampshire County Court and Land Records, 1716–1749, Massachusetts State Archives, includes deeds, licenses, slander suits, and debt claims involving Samuel Kent Sr., Jr., and III.
2. Transcriptions and analysis by ChatGPT, OpenAI, based on digitized image review and period legal practices.
I typically don’t blog twice in a week but I received a reply to an email I had sent with the concern I raised about the quiet disappearance of historical records from several U.S. government websites. These weren’t obscure documents—these were public records I had accessed online before, copied, and cited. I even included the original URL and step-by-step directions. But today? “No such record exists,” I was told—unless, of course, I want to pay a fee and maybe someone at the agency will “research” it for me.
My library contact passed along to colleagues my email.
The reply? “She’s just being political.”
No. I’m being factual.
Here’s what’s happening, and it deserves attention:
Government agencies are quietly removing access to records once available online.
Researchers are being told those records never existed—even when we have the receipts.
In some cases, agencies are offering to retrieve them for a price. Same record different paywall.
When we raise concerns, we’re dismissed as overreacting or “politicizing” the issue.
This is not a partisan problem. It’s a public trust problem. If you don’t think this affects you, try sourcing a vital record for a family history project or accessing a land claim file for historical research. You might find a broken link—or worse, a dead end with a price tag.
If you think I’m exaggerating, feel free to test it yourself. If you’d like to email me, I’ll be happy to furnish the documents I accessed in the past—along with the original URLs. Try retrieving them now. See what you find.
Spoiler: It won’t be what it used to be.
This isn’t about politics. And if researchers stay silent, it’s only going to get worse. It’s about the deliberate erosion of public access, the rewriting of digital history, and the arrogance of institutions that think no one will notice.
House Bill 1148 has passed in Indiana raising from 75 years to 99 years the ability to obtain a birth certificate.
I am embarrassed to live in a state that votes by fake “fears” than by real truths.
I am sharing the ignorant letter I received from one of the state senators:
Office of Senator Greg Walker
Dear L S, Thank you for your email regarding your opposition to House Bill 1148. At this time, I am in support of the bill’s proposal to expand accessibility to birth records for 99 years instead of the current 75 years.With the increasing longevity of individuals and the rise in identity theft, this bill is a necessary step in protecting against fraud. The expanded access will help ensure the safety and security of living persons’ identities.Again, I appreciate you reaching out. If you have any other questions or concerns in the future please feel free to reach out again. Sincerely, Senator Greg Walker District 41 Indiana Senate
Here was my response: Dear Senator Walker, Thank you for your response. However, I was disheartened to read your justification for supporting HB 1148. The claim that expanding the restriction on birth records from 75 to 99 years is necessary due to “increasing longevity” and “identity theft” is not only unsupported—it’s misleading. There is no documented evidence that public access to 75-year-old birth certificates has contributed in any meaningful way to identity theft. In fact, neither the Federal Trade Commission nor the Identity Theft Resource Center lists genealogical or archival access as a source of modern identity theft. Further, life expectancy in the U.S. is currently decreasing, not increasing (CDC, 2023), and even at its highest levels, the 75-year threshold was still sufficient to protect living individuals. Your claim does not hold up to scrutiny. Restricting access to these vital records undermines legitimate genealogical, historical, and medical research. Many state archives and national organizations—including the National Genealogical Society and the Records Preservation and Access Coalition—oppose measures like this for good reason: they cut off access to essential public records without any demonstrable benefit. I respectfully ask you to share the data or studies you are using to support your position. If your stance is truly rooted in protecting citizens, transparency and evidence should be the foundation.
Of course, he didn’t respond because he has no proof. As my grandmother used to say, you can’t fix stupid!
And this country is being run by STUPIDS!
Want to know what else has been taken away from us in the past month?! I tried to go online to NARA for a Civil War document they had posted previously, a land patent at the Bureau of Land Management, and an old tax record from the 1700s – All removed. BLM wants you to pay for the record it now claims it doesn’t have.
Jokes on them as I hope, like me, you were smart enough TO HAVE SAVED A COPY of your government documents and remembered to source it.
I am strongly urging my fellow Americans to do the following: 1. If you haven’t saved the records you found by all means do so ASAP. 2. This is especially urgent if you have birth records in Indiana. I have noticed that some marriage records have also disappeared from Ancestry.com. Take action now. 3. Remain vigilant of bills that are floating through state and federal bodies. 4. SPEAK UP! 5. VOTE these fools out of office. EVERY.LAST.ONE!
My pioneer ancestors would have been appalled by these clowns. They founded Indiana to be less government. Don’t believe me? Read the history before they take that away, too.
There are now TWO bills in Indiana to severely cut funding to libraries. Why? Keep the peeps from knowing the truth.
I may be old, and a token female (Yep, been told that by politicians in my own town “We believe in diversity and we need to replace a woman with a woman.” So an old white woman is considered diversity in Indiana. Think about that for a moment. Keep just ONE woman on a board and the rest the big boys.) but I will not go away quietly. I will continue to RESIST and I look forward to you joining me.
A page from the past drew her near, By chance—or by fate unclear. In a deed to a brother, She found roots like no other— And “forever” rang strangely sincere.
The limerick was written by ChatGPT as I had to share what had just happened to me on April 2nd. The universe played a very odd trick on me!
I began on Monday looking over all my accumulated research on my British families for my next family genealogy book I’ll be writing later this year. I was insuring I had all proof of relationships and had the correct identities as between my husband and I we have a lot of common names – Smith, Porter, etc.
Our people came first to New England and then to Long Island, New York before the end of the 1600s. I was using Familysearch.org labs to help and found some amazing records but I’ll save that for another post.
On Wednesday morning we had severe weather – hail, thunder, and lightning so I didn’t want to go straight to work on my computer. Instead, I lingered over coffee and read my email. I subscribe for free to the AmericanAncestors.org weekly newsletter. There was an article about a New York project to help transcribe recently digitized records to identify the enslaved. Sounded interesting.
When the storm passed I decided to just check out the project. I randomly selected Records of Slavery-Town Records, Book 4, 1681-1712. I didn’t even bother to create an account, figuring I’d just do the minimum of three pages and then get back to my own tasks.
When I opened the database I noticed that others had already started so I didn’t want to begin where they left off, figuring they’d come back that day and continue. I randomly selected page 83.
I almost fell out of my chair. It was a land record in Oyster Bay, Long Island from Nathaniel Cole to his brother, Daniel. They are my 5th great uncles!
One brother was giving the other part of his land to his heirs FOREVER. Now I know forever doesn’t really mean that – as the land was legally sold over the years but it made me laugh. I worked for a company that was headquartered near where this land was and one of my kids went to a university that was also close by. Gave me pause and the creeps.
How in the world did I randomly select a page out of all the options and land on one that was my ancestor? I have no idea but I decided the rest of the day was Cole Day so this universe late April Fools joke on me just might yield some further info on that family.
