(Came up in a recent [in UK] repeat of NCIS!)

We have a term for those who've lost parents: orphan. (The majority of
us become one of those.)

We have a term for those who've lost a partner: widow or widower.

But we don't have a term for those who've lost child(ren) - I was going
to say a common term, but I'm not aware of _any_ term.

I suppose it's the case that in the past (i. e. when such terms were
being created), people had a lot more children. But it's still an
interesting point.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual
rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities. - Ayn Rand, quoted by Deb
Shinder 2012-3-30

On 31/01/2024 08:51, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
> (Came up in a recent [in UK] repeat of NCIS!)
>
> We have a term for those who've lost parents: orphan. (The majority
> of us become one of those.)
>
> We have a term for those who've lost a partner: widow or widower.
>
> But we don't have a term for those who've lost child(ren) - I was
> going to say a common term, but I'm not aware of _any_ term.
>
>
> I suppose it's the case that in the past (i. e. when such terms were
> being created), people had a lot more children. But it's still an
> interesting point.
Not only in English but in other languages (and no Shakespearean words
no longer used).
A couple of discussions from the many found from an internet search:
https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/62469/word-for-grieving-parents
https://www.reddit.com/r/EnglishLearning/comments/14vh299/is_there_a_word_for_a_parent_whos_lost_a_child/?rdt=38046
You need to expand some of the reddit comments which includes:
In recent days, this word is gaining acceptance and is building a
community around itself. The term “Vilomah” describes a parent who has
lost their child.
Life has its natural order, and in that order, children are supposed to
outlive their parents. "Vilomah” comes from Sanskrit, which means
“against the natural order.” Sanskrit is one of the oldest languages
that dates back to 400 B.C. The same language gave us the word “widow,”
signifying “empty.” There are times English cannot capture the true
essence of a word. The term “vilomah” is a powerful yet straightforward
word that captures the pain and turmoil that a parent faces in this
situation.

On 31/01/2024 07:51, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
> But we don't have a term for those who've lost child(ren) - I was going
> to say a common term, but I'm not aware of _any_ term.

Try asking @susie_dent

In message <upfid6$1vjqq$1@dont-email.me> at Thu, 1 Feb 2024 08:48:53,
john <john1@s145802280.onlinehome.fr> writes
>On 31/01/2024 08:51, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
[]
>> But we don't have a term for those who've lost child(ren) - I was
>>going to say a common term, but I'm not aware of _any_ term.
>> I suppose it's the case that in the past (i. e. when such terms
>>were
>> being created), people had a lot more children. But it's still an
>>interesting point.
>
>Not only in English but in other languages (and no Shakespearean words
>no longer used).

Chinese apparently has one for those who've lost their only child -
though it wasn't clear (from the second discussion below) whether it was
a noun or an adjective.
>
>A couple of discussions from the many found from an internet search:
>
>https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/62469/word-for-grieving-parents
>
>https://www.reddit.com/r/EnglishLearning/comments/14vh299/is_there_a_wor
>d_for_a_parent_whos_lost_a_child/?rdt=38046

Thanks! Seems it's a common source of discussion, though I get the
impression those discussions are general, or language, or specifically
bereaved parents (the best phrase, I think, as it's clear what it
means), rather than genealogists specifically.
>
>You need to expand some of the reddit comments which includes:
>In recent days, this word is gaining acceptance and is building a
>community around itself. The term “Vilomah” describes a parent who has
>lost their child.

Apparently it's Sanskrit for "against the natural order" (because
parents aren't expected to outlive their child); although that could
mean many things, I guess it's OK to bring it into English to have this
specific meaning: English has lots of words and phrases that don't mean,
in English, what they did in their original (some mean the opposite!).
Though this one hadn't reached me (i. e. I'd never heard of it), and I'm
fairly into both language and genealogy, so it has a way to go.

>Life has its natural order, and in that order, children are supposed to
>outlive their parents. "Vilomah” comes from Sanskrit, which means
>“against the natural order.” Sanskrit is one of the oldest languages
>that dates back to 400 B.C. The same language gave us the word “widow,”
>signifying “empty.” There are times English cannot capture the true

I didn't know that origin. Probably cognate with the French "vide".

>essence of a word. The term “vilomah” is a powerful yet straightforward
>word that captures the pain and turmoil that a parent faces in this
>situation.

I wasn't after something that "captures the pain and turmoil", just a
straight factual word. Though I suppose widow(er) and orphan still _do_
have an element of sadness about them, in many places (rather than just
legal and genealogy). Other than "merry widow" of course!
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

The squeamish will squeam a lot.
(Barry Norman on the film "300", in Radio Times 30 March-5 April 2013.)

On 31/01/2024 07:51, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
> (Came up in a recent [in UK] repeat of NCIS!)
>
> We have a term for those who've lost parents: orphan. (The majority of
> us become one of those.)
>
> We have a term for those who've lost a partner: widow or widower.
>
> But we don't have a term for those who've lost child(ren) - I was going
> to say a common term, but I'm not aware of _any_ term.
>

Looking at how many children failed to survive into adulthood in my
family tree, I think the term is parent.

>
> I suppose it's the case that in the past (i. e. when such terms were
> being created), people had a lot more children. But it's still an
> interesting point.

--
Colin Bignell

In message <z5mdnX5dnMKEASb4nZ2dnZeNn_idnZ2d@giganews.com> at Thu, 1 Feb
2024 13:31:05, Colin Bignell <cpb@bignellREMOVETHIS.me.uk> writes
>On 31/01/2024 07:51, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
>> (Came up in a recent [in UK] repeat of NCIS!)
>> We have a term for those who've lost parents: orphan. (The majority
>>of us become one of those.)
>> We have a term for those who've lost a partner: widow or widower.
>> But we don't have a term for those who've lost child(ren) - I was
>>going to say a common term, but I'm not aware of _any_ term.
>>
>
>Looking at how many children failed to survive into adulthood in my
>family tree, I think the term is parent.
>
>> I suppose it's the case that in the past (i. e. when such terms were
>>being created), people had a lot more children. But it's still an
>>interesting point.
>
Others have pointed that out, in the discussions another here kindly
found; with the suggestion that there might once have been almost a need
for those none of whose children predeceased them. Though "lucky" would
do.

Nowadays it's different though - especially in China for some decades in
the late 20C, where government policy was to encourage only one child,
which may be why Chinese apparently _does_ have a word.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

The first banjo solo I played was actually just a series of mistakes. In fact
it was all the mistakes I knew at the time. - Tim Dowling, RT2015/6/20-26