Featured

My Revoked and Sealed Birth Certificate and its Replacement Issued After Adoption – Proof that New York State Vital Statistics Department Uses False Facts on Official Birth Records

Doris Michol Sippel

.

I’ve taken out references to legislation to give readers a look at my documents without complicated legal discussion. If you want to read about that, please see my documents presented with legal arguments against compromise legislation here.

.

Comparing My Factually Accurate Medical Record of Live Birth with My Falsified Birth Certificate

Using my own factual birth certificate and falsified birth certificate as a comparison, I will prove the difference between a medical record of live birth and a falsified birth certificate issued after court-ordered adoption.

Parents’ names on all documents redacted by author.

.

Hospital Birth Certificate

It is signed by the attending physician and the hospital administrator

.

.

Birth Registration

.

A registered number is typed in at the upper right hand corner of both the short form birth registration and the long form medical record of live birth. The registrar of vital statistics signs both the birth registration and the medical record of live birth. The attending physician does not sign the short form birth registration, only the medical record of live birth – the long form birth certificate.

.

Birth Registration

also called a Short Form Birth Certificate

.

Medical Record of Live Birth

also called a Long Form Birth Certificate

SIGNATURE OF ATTENDANT: “I hereby certify that I attended the birth of this child who was born alive on the date stated above at 12:55am”.

The hand-written number above-left of the registered number indicates that this is the 766th certificate issued that year to date.

.

.

The 3-page Decree and Order of Adoption names my father and adopters, and orders my name change.

The 3-page Decree and Order of Adoption names my adopters and my father, and sets in motion my legal name change. Both parties knew each other, met in court several times, and had exchanged addresses and phone numbers. My adoptive father was a distant cousin to my newly-deceased mother. This was an in-family private adoption. The records were closed as if we were strangers.

.

.

.

Similarities and Differences Between the Actual (Original) Birth Certificate and the Falsified (Amended) Birth Certificate

.

When a child is adopted, a similar, but different, birth certificate form is used for the amended birth certificate. It appears the same in every way, except for a few details.

The registered number follows the child to adoption and appears in the upper right hand corner of the amended birth certificate (my short form does not have the registered number).

Some medical information is included, such as birth date, time, place, single or twin or triplet birth, and name of hospital.

The birth weight, gestation in weeks of pregnancy, tests and medications given to the “mother” and newborn are not included because this woman did not give birth, nor was this re-named child actually born. This child was created upon the finalization of adoption, but that fact is not indicated anywhere on this document.

Some States allow adopters to change the city, state, and birth date as well.

There is no line for the attending physician’s signature because this “birth” never took place.

When the State Director of Vital Statistics in the State capital creates a birth certificate by swapping in the information from the final court order of adoption, she or he then signs it, and affixes the State’s raised seal, certifying false facts as true.

The State Director of Vital Statistics is authorized to lie.

If anyone else gives false information on a government form, that is perjury.

.

Amended – Falsified – Birth Registration

This is the amended “birth” registration issued in my adopted name.

The Certificate Number indicates that this is the 2760th certificate issued that year to date. This “birth” registration and the following “birth” certificate were created and issued on March 4, 1957 – fifteen months after Doris’ actual birth. The “file dates” are the dates that Doris’s, not Joan’s, birth certificate and birth registration were filed locally and in the state capital, yet this “birth” registration states “registered certificate of said person”. The SAID PERSON named on THIS “birth” registration was not born on January 7, 1956 – Joan was created on the date of the signing of the Final Order of Adoption on January 14, 1956 and Joan’s “birth” certificate was issued on March 4, 1957.

.

 .

The following document is 

Joan Mary Wheeler’s 

Amended – Falsified – “Birth” Certificate

No attending physician’s signature, only the signature of the State’s registrar at bottom. This mother did not conceive, nor give birth to Joan. There are no hospital records of this “birth” because it did not happen. This father did not sire Joan. The only document that documents this truth is the court order of adoption. Joan was not born; she was created when legally adopted on January 14, 1957. This birth certificate was issued 15 months after Doris’s real birth, yet it claims that Joan was born on Doris’s birth date and at the exact same time in the same hospital and that this was a single birth.

THIS IS LEGAL FICTION.

.

.

Baptismal Certificate

I was baptized at my dying mother’s hospital bedside on March 4, 1956. She died on March 28, 1956.

.

.

Falsified Baptismal Certificate

Joan Wheeler’s baptism never happened. Joan did not exist on the date of the baptism listed on her certificate.

Note that the Sponsors remain the same on both documents. They are Doris’s Aunt and Uncle.

Who directs priests to swap false facts for the truth after a child has been baptized? The Pope? Local bishops? Is this an individual priest’s decision?

Since the priest who falsified my 2nd baptismal certificate followed church doctrine by not baptizing me a 2nd time, why was he allowed to alter the facts?

Yes, I wrote to the Pope, twice:  on April 28 and May 20, 2008.  The first response was a form letter. The Pope did not respond to my second letter.

.

.

.

.

.

END

 

NYS Assembly: Please PASS A9959B The Adoptees’ Rights Bill. Please DO NOT PASS 6959 The Surrogacy Contract Bill

June 15, 2018

Dear Assembly Speaker Carl E. Heastie and Brenda, and members of the Assembly:

Please advance A9959B, the Adoptee Rights Bill, to the full Assembly for a vote.

Please VOTE TO PASS A9959B as it will restore to all New York adoptees the unrestricted right to obtain their own original birth certificates upon request. I support access, without modification and without the necessity of a court order, to the original medical record of live birth as recorded within five days of every adopted person’s actual birth.

I have been an activist for the birth rights of adoptees since I was found in 1974 by full blood siblings I never knew I had. I also support the conception and birth rights of donor-conceived people. For over 30 years, I have written articles against sperm donation, egg donation, surrogacy, and embryo transfers because of the obvious violations against the human and civil rights of the children produced via anonymous Assisted Reproductive Technologies. I addressed the President’s Council on Bioethics in 2004 in Washington D.C. when I presented a short, three-minute paper defending the rights of all people to the truth of their conceptions and births.

It has come to my attention that the Assembly Health Committee recently held a hearing on Surrogacy. Assembly Bill 6959 on Surrogacy Contracts would abolish Governor Cuomo’s ban on commercial surrogacy in New York and put intended parents on birth records based not on genetic and biological facts, but based on intentions and contracts.

While the American Academy of Adoption Attorneys (renamed Adoption and ART) supports adoptee access to our revoked and sealed original birth certificates, they are now proposing a future where intended (contractual) parents will be named on the birth certificate instead of the actual genetic and birthing parents. This means that birth certificates for people born of Assisted Reproductive Technologies, or born to surrogate mothers who signed pre-birth contracts, will not have an original birth record to access because the State’s only record of their birth will be based on agreements the person whose birth is recorded was not party to.

Adoptees, including myself, along with donor-conceived and surrogate-born people, stand for truth and honesty in recording the conception and birth of every human being. Every person has the fundamental human right – and should have the civil right – to have an accurate medical record of live birth that can be verified by medical records and DNA to prove parentage. I urge you to VOTE NO on Assembly Bill 6959.

Sometime in the near future, over and above the reach of the current Adoptee Rights Bill – A9959B, the 1936 law that revokes and seals adoptees’ medical record of live birth, and then issues replacement birth certificates upon adoption, must be abolished. Amended birth certificates serve no purpose. These false-fact birth certificates exist only to prove that the adopters have been assigned as legal parents. Legal parents are not parents by birth; therefore, their names should not be listed on a new birth certificate created after adoption. The law’s intended purpose was to legitimize illegitimate bastards via adoption, but hiding illegitimacy is no longer needed in today’s society. Birth and adoption are two very distinct events: a birth is a medical event in which a new human being enters the world, and an adoption is a legal transaction.

Is there any socially assigned shame applied to today’s myriad of ways a child can be created via Assisted Reproductive Technologies? All people created via donated sperm, donated eggs, and incubated in a surrogate mother’s rented uterus are conceived and birthed outside of marriage, yet the stigma and shame of an illegitimate birth is not assigned to people conceived and born this way. Why is that? Is it the sex act itself – the sexual union of not-married parents – that defines the product of such a union as an illegitimate bastard? When one examines the sexuality of producing a vial of sperm anonymously, or harvesting eggs from an anonymous donor, or implanting a frozen embryo created in a petri dish into the uterus of a surrogate mother, no one assigns shame to any of these acts. Yet, people conceived and birth via contracted arrangements are, indeed, conceived and birthed outside of marriage. Why is there a different standard applied to children born to a woman who is not married and to children born via Assisted Reproductive Technologies?

New York State holds adoptees to the strict definition of illegitimacy – despite the fact that many adoptees were born to married parents: children adopted by step parents, children who were orphaned by the death of one or both parents, children who were adopted by their grandparents or other relatives, and children removed from abusive or neglectful parents. In every case, each adoptee, whether born a bastard or not, is held to the existing law that removes the certification of the adoptee’s medical record of live birth and replaces it with a false-fact birth certificate. THIS law should be abolished!

All people deserve one, and only one, true and accurate birth certificate. Revoking, sealing, and replacing birth certificates of adopted people, and issuing false-fact birth certificates stating the names of the contractual intended parents and not the egg donor mother, the sperm donor father, and the surrogate mother, is inhumane, immoral, and unethical.

My mother died of cancer when I was three months old. She was a married mother of five children. I was not born a bastard, yet the law that existed in the year of my birth (1956) is the same law that continues to revoke, cancel, annul, rescind, seal, and replace all adoptees’ birth certificates since 1936. Since the law was written to hide the stigma of an illegitimate birth, this law should not apply to me.

But it did, and it does.

The 1936 law targeting adopted people still holds my accurate medical record of live birth as hostage from me, a person born the fifth child to married parents.

Why? Why is my birth any different from yours?

I urge you to VOTE TO PASS Bill A9959B that will give access to all New York adoptees’ revoked and sealed birth certificates.

Creating false-fact birth certificates upon the legal contract of adoption is almost the same as creating false-fact birth certificates based upon a signed contract of intended parents of reproductive technologies. I urge you to re-consider what facts belong on a birth certificate and what false-facts do not belong on a birth certificate.

Please PASS A9959B – the Adoptees’ Rights Bill.                            Please DO NOT PASS AB06959 – the Surrogacy Contract Bill.

Thank you,

Doris Michol Sippel

www.forbiddenfamily.com

author of

Forbidden Family: An Adopted Woman’s Struggle for Identity

Amazon, available in Kindle and Print

Helpful articles:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/why-all-us-states-should-_b_8858162

Why All U.S. States Should Allow Adoptees Access to Their Authentic Birth Certificates, 2/22/2015 09:21 am ET, Updated Dec 06, 2017, by Mirah Riben

https://forbiddenfamily.com/2018/02/02/my-revoked-and-sealed-birth-certificate-and-its-replacement-issued-after-adoption-proof-that-new-york-state-vital-statistics-department-uses-false-facts-on-official-birth-records/

My Revoked and Sealed Birth Certificate and its Replacement Issued After Adoption – Proof that New York State Vital Statistics Department Uses False Facts on Official Birth Records, February 3, 2018, by Doris Sippel (legally re-claimed birth name)

https://forbiddenfamily.com/2018/02/02/arguments-against-punitive-and-compromising-adoptee-rights-legislation-using-cited-resources-and-my-sealed-and-falsified-birth-certificates-as-examples-to-legislators-to-write-equitable-legislation/

Arguments Against Punitive and Compromising Adoptee Rights Legislation Using Cited Resources and My Sealed and Falsified Birth Certificates as Examples to Legislators to Write Equitable Legislation, February 2, 2018; originally published March 24, 2017, by Doris Sippel (legally re-claimed birth name)

http://buffalonews.com/2017/07/14/another-voice-cuomo-must-veto-flawed-adoptee-bill/

Another Voice: Cuomo must veto flawed adoptee bill, July 14, 2017, by Doris Sippel (legally re-claimed birth name)

http://dissidentvoice.org/2016/12/global-call-to-stop-the-propagation-of-adoptions-altered-birth-certificates/

Global Call to Stop the Propagation of Adoption’s Altered Birth Certificates, December 18th, 2016, by Doris Sippel (legally re-claimed birth name)

http://dissidentvoice.org/2015/10/no-one-should-place-false-facts-on-birth-certificates/

No One Should Place False Facts on Birth Certificates, October 20th, 2015, by Joan Wheeler (former adoptive name)

http://dissidentvoice.org/2015/08/end-identity-theft-caused-by-adoption/

End Identity Theft Caused by Adoption, August 22nd, 2015, by Joan Wheeler (former adoptive name)

Letter to NY State Assemblywoman Paulin: Reject SB00017A/AB06959 on Surrogacy Contracts

Dear Assemblywoman Paulin,

 

We, the undersigned leaders and activists in the movement for gender, racial, and economic justice, respectfully urge you to withdraw your support of SB00017A/AB06959, which would legalize reproductive surrogacy contracts and the reproductive surrogacy industry in New York State. Our opposition to this bill emerges from our deep concern of the legalization of surrogacy contracts. We believe that the surrogacy industry in our state will harm the physical and psychological health of the most marginalized women in our State—women in conditions of poverty who disproportionately have histories of abuse and discrimination, including on the basis of gender and race—and will incentivize and unleash a ruthless industry to profit from their exploitation.

Many of the undersigned have a long, productive history of partnering with you to protect the basic human rights of women and girls in New York State and holds you in high esteem. While we know you to be a passionate advocate for the rights of women and girls and feel certain that your sponsorship of the bill to legalize surrogacy in New York State is well intended, we believe that you may not have at your fingertips comprehensive information about the magnitude of harm that this bill, if enacted into law, would inflict on the most economically vulnerable women in our state. We are convinced that if passed, this bill will legitimize the reproductive trafficking of women in New York State, open the door wide to the mass exploitation of women in consumer-driven contract pregnancies in our State, and ultimately render New York State a global destination for reproductive tourism.

Reproductive surrogacy creates risks to the physical health and well-being of women. In New York’s 2018 Report on the Status of Women and Girls, a key platform is reducing maternal mortality and improving women’s health. Legalizing and legitimizing reproductive surrogacy undermines these crucially important goals. A recent report on 124 surrogate mothers, showed that surrogate pregnancies and births “had significantly higher obstetrical complications, including gestational diabetes, hypertension, use of amniocentesis, placenta previa, antibiotic requirement during labor, and cesarean section.” These statistics translate into more high-risk pregnancies and longer hospitalization stays for both surrogate mothers and the infants born, who face higher rates of preterm birth and low birth weights.

The relationship between the surrogate mother who frequently is in a situation of economic need and the intended surrogate parents, who typically are people with considerable economic means, is premised on gross inequality. Although the proposed New York legislation on gestational contracts provides protections against certain onerous and invasive terms that have been imposed on women in surrogate contracts, such as restrictions on diet, submitting to testing, and proscriptions on sexual relations, this legislation cannot guarantee that such restrictions will not be used against the woman used as a surrogate since the intended parent(s) is allowed to purchase her medical insurance policy and pay for her legal assistance.

Surrogacy contracts institutionalize the commodification of women’s bodies. Even the language of surrogate and gestational mothers signals this commodification of women, pregnancy and reproduction. The so-called surrogate becomes an instrument of others’ desire for biological children. In the case of gestational surrogacy, pregnancy also becomes a commodity that can be bought by those who have means and sold by those who are disadvantaged economically.

Rather than a relationship between mother and fetus, pregnancy is treated as a product or a commercial service to be purchased. In the rarefied world of surrogacy contracts, pregnancy that under usual conditions is a relationship of the biological mother to the fetus, becomes stripped of any developing connection between the biological mother and the child-to-be-born. In fact, this normal relationship is frowned upon as interfering with the rights of the contracting parent (s) because the gestational mother is required to hand over the child born at birth. The chief function of women used as surrogates is to produce a child for the contracting parents and NOT develop any relationship with the intended child. She is encouraged to tell herself that she is not the mother of this developing child and is essentially treated as a breeder for others. Women’s wombs become mere environments for others’ reproductive choices.

In almost every country of the world, persons cannot legally sell their organs. It is recognized that selling organs, even with regulatory provisions, can create a burgeoning market and invite unscrupulous brokers whose goal is financial gain and taking advantage of those whose bodies are used. The poorest, the most disadvantaged, are the ones who usually come forward.

Some individuals believe that it is possible to create a legal market in live organs that would institutionalize safeguards against exploitation. As with those who argue against the legality of organ selling arrangements, we would argue that however surrogate contracts are regulated, surrogate arrangements can never be ethical because they will always target and harm the most vulnerable women. Why is it primarily the most disadvantaged women who participate in these contracts? We would further argue that the system can never be adequately regulated to prevent exploitation of the vulnerable because financial motivation and profit margin drive the decisions of the surrogate brokerage agencies.

The European Parliament “condemns the practice of surrogacy, which undermines the human dignity of the woman since her body and its reproductive functions are used as a commodity; considers that the practice of gestational surrogacy which involves reproductive exploitation and use of the human body for financial or other gain, in particular in the case of vulnerable women in developing countries, shall be prohibited and treated as a matter of urgency in human rights instruments.”

The new European Union policy framework to combat violence against women calls upon all member nations to “acknowledge the serious problem of surrogacy, which constitutes an exploitation of the female body and her reproductive organs.” It also emphasizes “that women and children are subject to the same forms of exploitation, that both can be regarded as commodities on the international reproductive market, and that these new reproductive arrangements, such as surrogacy, augment the trafficking of women and children.”

Women’s wombs are big business. Laws, regulations, and contracts overwhelmingly protect those with money, not those who need money.

As a lifelong and committed champion of women’s rights and equality, Assemblywoman Paulin, please withdraw your support of SB00017A/AB06959.

Sincerely,

PLEASE CLICK ON THIS LINK TO SEE THE ONLINE FORM AND FILL OUT THE REQUIRED IDENTIFICATION TO SIGN THIS LETTER

My Email to Assembly Speaker Carl E. Heastie and to the New York Assembly

June 13, 2018

Dear Assembly Speaker Carl E. Heastie and New York Assembly Members:

Please assure that A9959B, the Adoptee Rights Bill currently in the Codes Committee, advances to the full Assembly for a vote.

A9959B will restore to all New York adoptees the unrestricted right to obtain their own original birth certificates upon request. This is personal for me and I ask for your leadership on this important issue.

I would like to present to you my story, which is very different from the usual illegitimate bastard adoptee wanting a copy of their sealed original birth certificate to know the names of their mother and father, date and time of birth, and location of birth. You probably have already heard that mothers were never promised confidentiality, that opening records will not increase abortion rates, and that adoptees deserve to be equal to non-adoptees in access to our sealed birth certificates.

I was not born a bastard, yet the law that existed in the year of my birth (1956) is the same law that revokes, cancels, annuls, rescinds, and seals all adoptees’ birth certificates since 1936. The birth certificates of all New York State adopted persons are replaced with a false-fact birth certificate issued after adoption. Since the law was written to hide the stigma of an illegitimate birth by creating a new identity for the adoptee who is then considered to be legally reborn – legitimized – through adoption to a married woman and her husband, this law should not apply to me.

I was born the 5th child to married parents in 1956. Our mother had cancer while pregnant with me and died when I was three months old. My father received no supports to keep his family together. He followed his parish priest’s suggestion that “the baby needs two parents.” I hold no anger toward my father for giving me away.

What I am opposed to is the fact that I was born legitimately – I had a name, I had a home, I had a family – and my government took all of that away from me. We know now that family preservation, kinship care, or custodial guardianship are better alternatives to adoption. I was not a blank slate on which a new identity could be legally stamped. All 5 children conceived and born to the same mother and father have birth certificates that link us as family, including me. I am the only one who was relinquished and adopted out. After my adoption, my birth certificate was revoked and sealed and replaced by a false-fact birth certificate. My four older, full blood siblings have the legal right to obtain their birth certificates, I do not, yet we were conceived and born to the same parents.

This has nothing to do with the love and affection my adopters had for me or me to them. This has everything to do with moral and ethical right action. New York State wronged me.

In 1974, when I was 18 years old and still in high school, 4 older siblings I did not know I had found me. They initiated our reunion. I was shocked that my adopters knew but chose not to tell me. The reunion had its difficulties (no need to discuss that here – a dysfunctional reunion points to my broken natural family as well as to the dishonesty of my adoptive family). I have no contact with my older siblings. One died. The other 3 are still abusive to me. I do not want them in my life, yet they harass me through social media, even though I blocked them.

A few days into the beginning of my reunion (1974), my adoptive mother angrily threw all of my personal papers at me: amended birth certificate, original birth certificate, baptismal certificate, falsified baptismal certificate, hospital birth certificate, and final order of adoption. This was the first time I had seen any of these papers. This left me devastated. Not only was my adoptive mother fearful that I’d leave her, but I realized that my government stole my identity.

All 4 of my parents are now deceased.

I have owned my certified original birth certificate since 1974.

In 2016, I legally changed my name back to my full name of birth. Together with the name change court order and my certified original birth certificate, I changed my name and parents’ names with social security, the DMV, and all other government entities that require updating my name with the same social security number.

BUT I DO NOT HAVE THE LEGAL RIGHT TO USE MY STILL SEALED ORIGINAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE.

I used it anyway.

My operable birth certificate in Albany is in my adoptive name of Joan Mary Wheeler with my adoptive parents falsely named as my parents of birth. Not only is that document a legal lie, it does not match all of my other current and corrected forms of ID, including my passport.

Do you understand NOW what adoption does to adoptees?

Not all adoptees were born illegitimate bastards. Many children of divorced and remarried parents are adopted by their step-parent. Children who are orphaned by the death of one or both parents are adopted. Some children are adopted by their grandparents, or an aunt, or an uncle, or an older sibling. These non-bastards are targeted by the outdated birth certificate law that binds all adoptees into one category. Even those adoptees who are the products of unmarried parents or of rape do not deserve separate treatment concerning the verifiable facts of conception and birth.

This has absolutely NOTHING to do with the misperceived natural parents’ rights to confidentiality. All parents who sign relinquishment papers give up all parental rights. To then turn around decades later to give legal authority to parents who gave up their parental rights the right to redact their names or to prevent all adoptees access to their sealed birth certificates is an absurd notion. That is why Governor Cuomo vetoed that “Mother-May-I” bill in December of 2017.

Adoptees’ civil and human rights to access the truth of our births are rights that the Adoptees’ Rights Bill A9959B will allow. I am asking you to take the stance that you will vote to pass this bill for the advancement of adoptees’ rights to know the truth of our births.

I realize that the passage of Bill A9959B will not revoke adoptees’ amended birth certificates. That is exactly what I demand of my amended birth certificate. I am legally now Doris Michol Sippel (and should have been since birth), yet my legal birth certificate is in my adoptive name of Joan Mary Wheeler.

I will go back to the judge who signed my court order of name change to ask him to unseal and reinstate my original birth certificate to its intended purpose – because the passage of the Adoptees’ Rights Bill A9959B will provide adoptees certified copies of their original birth certificates but it will not allow adoptees to use it as identification.

That will be the next step that New York State will take. There will come a day when all adoptees are respected for who we are at birth and no amended birth certificate will be issued upon adoption. Instead, a truthful adoption certificate will replace the issuance of a falsified birth certificate because no one deserves the stigma of illegitimacy – especially people like me who were born legitimately but labeled as bastards because we were adopted.

Please PASS A9959B.

Thank you,

Doris Michol Sippel

www.forbiddenfamily.com

author of                                                                                                     Forbidden Family: An Adopted Woman’s Struggle for Identity

Amazon, available in Kindle and Print

Sincerely, I’m the Ghost of Alicia

What can I say here?

I remember meeting Alicia’s mother, Mirah Riben, at my very first adoption conference. Adoption Forum of Philadelphia, 1980. I was 24 and had six years of reunion behind me. But I had never before met a mother who lost her first born to adoption. That was the same day I met Sandy Musser, too. My eyes were shocked open. Their emotions, their pain, laid bare.

Here we are in 2018, 38 years later. Still activists. Still banging our heads and screaming. Is anyone listening? Does anyone care?

Alicia, I didn’t know you. I wish I did know you. I wish I could have walked with you, arm in arm, carrying our protest signs at the March on Washington DC in 1989 when your mother organized the speeches at the podium in front of the Reflecting Pool. I spoke. So did others. Your voice should have been heard that day.

Your mother carries on, for herself, and for you. RIP dear Alicia.

Sincerely, I’m the Ghost of Alicia

I was born in The Summer of Love, 1967. But love was not enough to help my mother. No one helped her.  They told her that I would ruin her life. Me, a tiny, helpless newborn infant!

My mother fought hard to keep me. She wouldn’t give up on me. She wouldn’t sign. I went to a wonderful foster family who really loved me – especially my two big teenaged foster sisters! Mom visited me but it was hard and the pressure was on her. After six months I never saw her again.

Then just a week before my first birthday my foster Mom put me in my car seat and she was crying. They took me to the house in New Jersey with the plastic covers on the furniture. They handed me over to my “new Mommy.”  I had three big brothers. And…

View original post 350 more words

My Response to Marci Auld Glass’s “Adopting a Child Mirrors God’s Adoption of Us All”

Dear Marci Auld Glass,

As promised, since you have deleted my posts that point to your faulty logic in your article published at The Presbyterian Outlook, I have turned my deleted posts into a blog post for all the world to see.

As usual, religious people boast their beliefs without backing up their statements. It is highly irresponsible of you to continue blathering on. It is my intent to show you, and others like you, how utterly ridiculous your beliefs truly are.

There is so much wrong here, in your essay, that I do not know where to begin.

Skipping through most of your religious gibberish, which is meaningless because it is all made-up nonsense, I will caution you to set aside religion to see the very real history of some of the words of adoption.

You said:

“Most people likely hear “gave him up” in reference to salvation. There is also a resonance with adoption. “Giving up” is adoption language. Children are given up for adoption. Adoption is not unrelated to God and God’s saving work in the world through the person of Jesus.”

Correction:

Most people who believe in the same religion as you do will see this in reference to salvation, and bla, bla, bla.

Again, put religion aside to pay attention to reality.

The history of adoption in America is plainly rooted in slavery. Slaves were PUT UP on the auction block. In the mid-1800s, when slavery ended, adoption began in America. Homeless children were swept out of New York City (at the beginning of my profession of Social Work – a sad, disgusting start) and put on Orphan Trains. These trains stopped in major cities heading West to farmland where the children were PUT UP FOR ADOPTION by being raised up on stages, platforms, auction blocks so that prospective adopters (purchasers) could better see the children and pick through them for the desired child of their liking. Adoption back then meant that the child was a helping hand, an indentured servant, not considered family, and some worked instead of going to school. Some were treated fairly well. Most weren’t.

This is history. Look it up.

My adoptive mother was born in 1916. Her mother died in 1918 of the Spanish Flu. My two year old future adoptive mother, along with her brothers, went to live in an orphanage. They stood on stages and platforms and sang for prospective adoptive parents who stared at the children. My mother was never adopted, and neither were her brothers, because their father paid for their room and board while he worked. The orphanage was torn down in the mid-1970s and the last residents were sent to foster care.

As for your comparing modern adoption to your religious beliefs, please don’t. This is going down a slippery slope. You are placing meaning where it doesn’t belong. Again, pay attention to reality.

So you see yourself (as an adoptee) as the solution to your mother’s unplanned pregnancy? Do you not see how hurtful (to your mother) that is? Your mother had to go through her pain in order for you to be adopted. It’s your god’s plan.

I see you begin to address your pain:

“The wound of my rejection exists alongside the gift of my adoption, and with my gratitude for my birth mother’s gift of releasing me to live my life. The many blessings in my life do not erase my wound.”

But you hide behind your religion without actually dealing with anything. You sing the praises of your god, say you are grateful for being a gift, but there is no substance to your words.

If I were to follow your logic, I should be grateful that: God knit me in my mother’s womb so she could die and leave behind 5 children – me being 3 months at the time – so that my adopters could adopt me, ending their 18-year dry spell of childlessness? Praise the Lord!

FUCK THAT SHIT!

My adopters continued to be childless – adopting me didn’t cure their infertility.

I lost my entire family because of adoption. I lost my name, my birth certificate, in order to gain a new name, a new birth certificate, and a new family.

According to your beliefs, those losses – and the converse (my father lost his newborn, my siblings lost their baby sister) – is perfectly okay because it was your god’s will.

Let me back up. My parents – NOT BIRTHPARENTS – were married for 10 years and had four children. Our mother was pregnant with me, her 5th child, when she became ill with cancer. She was x-rayed and the tumor was a big as me. I was born two weeks later at 32 weeks gestation. A preemie. My mother died three months later. That was in 1956.

Your loving god told a priest to tell my father to give me up for adoption. Instead of being helpful, like enlisting Catholic Charities to come over to help my father to take care of his children, maybe give some diapers and clothes, maybe arrange babysitters and people to prepare food, at least for a year or so until a more stable arrangement could have been made. But no. Stupid Catholic priest told my father to give me away.

I am not mad at my father. I detest the priest.

And then, a woman came up to my father to say, “I know someone who will take your baby.”

Both of these conversations took place at my mother’s funeral – in front of her corpse.

Yes, this woman arranged for her brother to adopt me. Right in front of my dead mother’s body.

I was raised an only child. Eighteen years of naïve love for the parents who loved me dearly. But their love was conditional. I was theirs, as long as I didn’t know the truth, but they knew the truth and did not tell me. They betrayed my trust.

I was found at age 18 while still in high school by my older siblings. My full blood siblings.

Don’t think we had a lovely reunion. It’s not about a happy, or sad, or traumatic, reunion. It’s not about Jesus placing me in this family to be found later (according to you). It’s about the injustices I suffered, the injustices my siblings suffered, and the pain our father felt. It’s about being needlessly, and permanently, separated from my own family.

You said:

“Ultimately, the wound of rejection is a wound for which I am grateful. My adoption has been a blessing. I’ve always experienced my birth mother’s decision to place me for adoption as an act of love, a recognition that in the difficult situation in which she found herself, this was the best she could do for me. I feel like she released me to live the life I was meant to live. I am so grateful to have been adopted, and the wound that comes with it is one I gratefully bear for the gift of my life, the gift of joining my family.”

How do you know for sure your mother chose to give you away? That she rejected you? Maybe you were stolen from her at birth? Ripped from her body with force?

This being grateful for your perceived rejection borders on mental illness. You want to be a glutton for punishment?

And you are grateful that you gave away your own child to adoption? Geesh, lady, get yourself to an adoption conference to be de-programed. Look up American Adoption Congress for starters.

You said:

“…illegitimate” is not a word to describe a human life…”

Well now. Are you aware that it was the Victorian thought process that resulted in the adoption and birth certificate laws we have today? Yes, illegitimate bastards were considered to be scum of the earth back in Victorian days. Religious zealots had to dispose of the slutty mothers and find a way to humanize the bastards so the invention of modern adoption began in the 1920s. Slutty mothers could be discarded, fathers not held accountable, and the bastards would be reborn to a mother who was married – the bastard child had a legal father through adoption! The child’s actual medical record of live birth – the birth certificate – was rescinded, annulled, canceled and then sealed, and then replaced by an amended birth certificate with the names of the adoptive parents as if they gave birth to the renamed child.

Does any of this sound logical to you? Is this truthful? Do you enjoy living lies? Does your religion condone this? Isn’t lying a sin?

As for the definition of REAL PARENTS is concerned, I suggest you study biology. DNA proves who your parents are. If that were not true, then millions of people wouldn’t be spitting into cups and sending their DNA off to labs to get back their genetic family trees.

As for being raised by loving parents. Well, they were assigned as parents, you loved them as such, as I did mine, but the truth is, there is a split when someone is adopted. Nature vs. nurture. The social parents do all the social and psychological parenting, and that is where the confusion sets in. Foster parents and custodial guardians can do the same thing – love a child and provide a stable home – without forcing identity theft on a child and without forcing permanent cut-off from family. With foster parents and legal custodial guardians, the care givers know they do not replace the biological parents. In adoption, it is expected that all who live this lie play the game of delusional denial of the facts.

I speak here as a social worker and a mental health worker. Adoption sets people up to believe in false facts. When people believe in false facts, they are delusional, not grounded in reality. When people are not grounded in reality, they are mentally ill.

Get your head out of religion and into reality. For your own good.

Oh wait, you said:

“A few years ago, I got my birth certificate and started meeting my birth family. It’s astonishing, really, to consider. Members of my birth family answered a phone call from a total stranger – -me – and from that call, managed to expand their definition of who was included as a part of their family. …”

It’s as simple as that? Really?

How did you get your Original Birth Certificate? Was it god’s will? It just magically appeared, or you had to go through some legal channels? Join a search group?

You gloss over your reasoning for getting your OBC and searching for your natural blood kin.

Why is it important for you to have your OBC, to search for and reunite with, your natural mother and extended blood kin when it was your god’s will that you were given up and adopted? I thought you were grateful to be adopted? If so, then you have no reason to want to own your OBC, to reunite with your mother, because the one answer in your religion is, as the title of your article states, “Adopting a child mirrors god’s adoption of us all”.

If adoption is so wonderful, and you are grateful to be relinquished and adopted, and happy to have given away your own infant conceived out of marriage, then why on earth did you want your Original Birth Certificate and to be reunited with your mother?

Seems very hypocritical to me.

Your essay glosses over the agony of adoption, and the real hard work that goes into the lives of activists like me who pave the way for other adoptees, like you and your son, to be free.

That should have a mention in your essay, but the glory goes to your god who saved you and your son via adoption.

You have done a great disservice and injustice to adoptees and our natural parents by focusing on your god and not reality.

NY: Let’s finally get on board with adoptee rights reform

To this re-blog I will add: why on earth does any state government, any country, continue to revoke, annul, cancel, rescind, then seal the medical record of birth for adoptees? Why is replacing the facts of birth with false-facts of adoption considered to be legal, moral, and just? If YOU would not want this done to YOU, why are YOU accepting this done to adoptees?

Pushing on a Rope

Editor’s note: Adoptees like me born during the era of closed records are effectively in a kind of witness protection program. We are typically not allowed access to our original birth certificates but instead get amended birth certificates, which list our adoptive names and the names of our adoptive parents. It is against the law to know our true identities, but slowly that is beginning to change. 

odd one outAs DNA testing and social media connect adoptees with their natural families, laws that keep adoptee records sealed from public view have become moot. In recent years nine states have changed their laws to allow adult adoptees unrestricted access to their original birth certificates. Other states are beginning to consider changing their laws, too. New York has taken up adoptee rights reform for years without success, and is doing so again this year. Maybe this year will finally be one that works. 

The latest…

View original post 572 more words

NJ Governor Murphy wants to put INTENDED parents on OBC and not have a biology based record

Posting an email request from New York State Adoptee Equality:

In New Jersey, S482/A1704: on Governor Murphy‘s desk S482 provides that the intended parents in a pre-birth contract go on the original birth certificate.

No records are kept of the source of egg or sperm. No genetic connection and no homestudy is required for custody: custody is determined by who paid under the contract.

We have postcards – they can be ordered at the link below to transfer design to your own account and order from there. Please order cards and encourage your friends, family and contacts to complete and mail them in. If you want a few cards send an email to NewJerseyAgainstS482@gmail.com with your USPS mailing address.

Link to Read S482/A1704 Bill to put INTENDED PARENTS on OBC – – child custody by contract NOT best interst of the child

EVERYONE needs to contact Governor Phil Murphy encouraging him not to sign this into legislation. This bill will abrogates the rights of those born under contracts between adults who never meet each other or met in lawyers offices.

Mario Cuomo’s Commission called Surrogacy indistinguishable from Baby Selling.

The practice is contrary to what adoptee rights stands for.

Following is a link to the postcard design.  Postcards have the pre-addressed backside: 

POSTCARD S482/A1704 anonymizes infants for surrogacy market – PLEASE VETO

Why and How to Ask NJ Governor Murphy to Veto S482

New Jersey’s “gestational carrier bill” a/k/a “rent-a-womb,” twice vetoed by Governor Christie, has again passed both houses.

What is the law now? What will this bill do?

Right now, under the “In Re Baby M” decision, surrogacy contracts are not enforced by NJ courts. Surrogacy contracts still happen: they are governed by NJ Adoption Law. The expenses of surrogate mothers are paid, which can be as much as $60,000, and they have three days to sign the surrender.

The biological facts go on the original birth record. “Intended Parent(s)” must file for NJ adoption, have a home study. When their petition for adoption is granted, a new “birth certificate” is issued listing the intended parent(s) as having given birth to the child (with or without a womb). The original birth record is sealed. Under a law that took effect on January 1, 2017, as an adult the person whose birth was recorded has the right to that original birth record.

If this new law is signed, NJ will no longer make biology-based birth records for newborns conceived to be raised by others. The “Intended Parent(s),” those who sign the contract for the baby, will be on the original birth record — without NJ residency, without a home study, without a biological connection to the child.

Currently in New Jersey, every woman has the choice to abort or continue a pregnancy. No woman has to ask anyone for permission: not her husband, not her parents, not the baby’s father. It is her choice.

If signed, as Deputy Speaker Valerie Huttle confirmed in the Assembly Hearing, the “carrier” does not have that choice. Whether to abort or continue the pregnancy belongs to the “intended parent(s),” the contract signers.

One attorney testified in support of the bill: she said multiple pregnancies requiring “reduction” or risk to the mother would be rare because NJ doctors transfer only one embryo, or two if they know to a medical certainty the multiple pregnancy can be sustained. But that limitation is not in the Bill. There are no limits to the number of embryos that may be transferred. Note well that the reported industry norm is to transfer two or three embryos.

Proponents say the bill gives New Jersey’s infertile couples the right to have their own biological children. But the Bill does not require the contract signers to use their own genetic material: eggs and sperm are for sale.

Proponents say most who will use surrogates are New Jersey residents who will provide stable loving homes to children. But the Bill does not require residency, and there are no required inquires (like with adoption) to ensure the “Intended Parent(s)” intend to or are able to provide a loving home.

Governor Christie vetoed this bill twice, it has not been modified.

Ask Governor Murphy to Veto S482.

by mail
Office of the Governor
PO Box 001
Trenton, NJ 08625

via Twitter
@GovMurphy https://twitter.com/GovMurphy

by phone
609-292-6000 (operators do not take your personal information)

by fax
609-292-3454

 

What NPR Got Wrong in its Story About Ethiopia’s Adoption Ban

In addition to the points raised by this blogger – that not one adoptee was interviewed, not one birth parent was interviewed, that adoptee Hana Williams’s death was glossed over, and much more – I would like to highlight the fact that this Ethiopian adoptee was issued a false birth certificate stating that these white Americans gave birth to her. And since they murdered her, her American death certificate also names her adopters as her parents of birth. There is a hidden crime in all adoptions – and that remains the falsification of facts.

Light of Day Stories

NPR recently did a soft story: “In Ethiopia, A New Ban on Foreign Adoptions Is About National Pride.”

Here’s what went wrong with it:

In a story about Ethiopian adoptions, not one adult adoptee was included for perspective. Nor was an Ethiopian birth parent quoted, if any were even consulted.

The tragic death of Ethiopian adoptee Hana Williams was glossed over. Her murder by her adoptive parents was considered homicide by abuse, and roiled the Ethiopian adoption community as well as Ethiopians in Ethiopia and in the diaspora.

Fraud and corruption didn’t even get a mention in this story. Staff from one agency were indicted by the US Justice Department, pled guilty, and were given jail time. That’s not insignificant. Many adoptive families and adoptees from Ethiopia have learned that the reasons that adoption agencies provided for their adoption were not true or accurate. For example, many adoptees have…

View original post 1,418 more words

She’s Bad

Want to know what it feels like to live every day of your life knowing that you were rejected from the moment of your conception, and then your adoption?

This is how one woman feels. And I see this in many other adoptees as well. For these adoptees, each day is a reminder that your pregnant mom didn’t want you. And that sets the stage for a lifetime of self doubt.

IMG_7642

If only we could see ourselves as other people see us.

My feelings of being “bad” began in utero at the very beginning, at the moment of conception. These feelings are stored in my subconscious memory at a preverbal stage of life.  I was  born out-of-wedlock and I’m a product of a drunken one night stand, an affair with a married man.

BAD

The pregnancy was no joyous time for my birth mother. She knew she was going to give me up for adoption. I was told she was never seen without a drink in her hand, and she drank the entire pregnancy. Knowing these things, I believe my birth mother rejected the pregnancy, and I felt every bit of it in utero and I’m sure every day that passed she was eager to just get it over with, and move on with her life.

BAD

I was kept a secret from the world, even my own…

View original post 1,985 more words