Talk:Heirs of the body

I think I understand the meaning of "natural descendant" and "heirs of the body"--that the relationship must be biological, and that an adopted child / heir does not qualify. However, nowhere does the article SAY that, and indeed, the whole discussion is rather circular / oblique.

Furthermore, reproductive technology is raising questions almost unimaginable fifty, and certainly a hundred, years ago. Where the question is who is a natural descendant of a female, what if she had a child with an egg that another woman donated? What if another woman carried a child created with the egg of the woman in question? Indeed, we are near if not at the point when a child might be born with the DNA of more than one father and one mother. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.211.66.7 (talk) 04:33, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Those are good points, especially about the issue of adopted children. I wanted to read on here what 'heirs of the body' means with regard to adoption, and the legal issues of adoption and 'heirs of the body'. These issues are not addressed in this article. I think the article would benefit from the input who knows about adoption law and its effect on the concept of 'heirs of the body'. Boleslaw (talk) 21:04, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Heirs General, etc

"Heir General" redirects here and yet the article does not explain the distinction (nor for any other the several other formulations merely mentioned). From various sources it *appears* that an heir general inherits "through ordinary rules of inheritance" which is distinct from formulations which exclude females and/or female lines, and in contrast to heirs of the body would allow inheritance by e.g. a nephew etc. I don't feel qualified to edit the article but it would be considerably more useful if it defined the distinctions between the various types of inheritance mentioned, particularly given that other heir types redirect here as if this article somehow supplies the definition/explanation. 23.239.33.124 (talk) 00:38, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This article, which seems to be mostly in the form of original research, seems to be in essence an exposition on a term that might, in more contemporary writings, be replaced by "issue" or "descendents". Arllaw (talk) 17:57, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]