nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

"Former Name" in Web View should not map to "Maiden Name" in DB View

Amelia Ketzle

Wanted to register a concern about the fact that when a name is added as ‘Former Name’ to web view, it automatically appears in the 'Maiden Name' field in database view, which can certainly be incorrect and misleading. While this may arguably be a training issue, if a user adds what is, in fact, a Former Name for a constituent in web view, but it is not a maiden name, it's creating a false information trail in database view by telling us that it is. Maiden Name should only ever mean the name a woman was born with before she got married. The name her parents gave her before it changed due to marriage. I know by some measures that concept may be becoming antiquated, but it's a very specific meaning that leads us back to parental relationships that may not exist if someone entered a different Former Name on a constituent. We will need a Maiden Name field or Alias Type or something in web view when we move to it as our “total web solution,” but if the desire is to eliminate that as a specific field or type for some reason, Former Name should rightly be mapping to Alias in database view rather than Maiden Name. I would advocate for keeping some version of Maiden Name as a distinct field in web view, but something as generic as Former Name certainly shouldn't be mapping to something as specific as Maiden Name between the two systems.

3e6ddc7eb3b6fc305528000c99e103d0-huge-im

7d6e7fbc20efea10ac21f75efac68a97-huge-im

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

JoAnn Strommen

@Amelia Ketzle Wow. Definitely agree separation is needed from maiden name field. Maiden name field is key to alumni data.

If it's not in idea bank, please create and post back the link. Will definitely vote for it.

Dariel Dixon

@Amelia Ketzle This is…something. I wonder if they are trying to move away from the Maiden Name label. Which is fine, and they do mention that in the help pages that former name is maiden name in DBV. But yes, former names does not necessarily mean maiden names. I guess you could argue that all maiden names are technically former names, but that's playing semantics. But BB has been hesitant to change labels in DBV. I would definitely create an alias type for this if you haven't already.

Austen Brown

@Amelia Ketzle - Here is an idea in the Idea Bank that concerns this, I recommend you vote for it - Rename “Former name” in NXT: https://renxt.ideas.aha.io/ideas/RENXT-I-2063

Christine Robertson

@Amelia Ketzle Totally agree with you. While a Maiden Name may be a Former Name, not all Former Names are Maiden Names. It's also problematic to call it a Former Name IMO because some name changes are First Name changes and those don't work quite as well for searching via that field.

Sherry Aldrich

@Amelia Ketzle We have used the Alias field for this purpose. Often a name will change legally (either first or last) so that's how we track it. You can search both in the database view and NXT.

Amelia Ketzle

@Austen Brown - Thank you!

Amelia Ketzle

@Dariel Dixon - We actually had an Alias type for this, but isn't it redundant when there's already a field dedicated to that? I hate having the same type of information in two places, which is inevitable if we have an Alias, too. Do you just not use the Maiden Name field, then? Maiden Name (while perhaps antiquated) does tell you something about familial relationships and early life that you wouldn't know with certainty otherwise. I just don't see it becoming obsolete until or unless women stop taking their spouse's names when they get married.

Amelia Ketzle

@JoAnn Strommen - Austen Brown provided the link to it above. Apparently someone beat me to it!

Dariel Dixon

@Amelia Ketzle Oh I agree. It's terribly redundant to say the least. I don't like it at all. In my case, we have an alias for former name and maiden name. I feel it's worth mentioning in some cultures the family names are maternal, so the term maiden name doesn't apply, but the concept does. The issue isn't even what the term is called but the inconsistency with the language.

Amelia Ketzle

@Dariel Dixon - Am I correct that the search functionality works better with Alias than with Maiden Name (i.e., Former Name)?

Dariel Dixon

@Amelia Ketzle As far as I can tell, I think the functionality is exactly the same. Alias types show up in the NXT Omnisearch just like anything else. And you can change the flag in DBV to search for aliases as well.

Amelia Ketzle

@Dariel Dixon - Right, but in my experience, searching by a name that's only present in the Maiden/Former field and not in Alias doesn't yield a result. Which makes the Maiden field even more useless, if they're not going to fully support the functionality. It needs to be searchable in combination with the First Name field to be much use.

Dariel Dixon

@Amelia Ketzle How interesting! I can't confirm this as my organization has a business rule for that field to be added automatically as an alias. Has that field always worked that way? I don't know? I don't know if that is a NXT thing or something else. I doubt that they would make the field work in a different way if they expressly stated that the fields are the same.