Featured

Presenting My Sealed Birth Certificate and Falsified One as Evidence of New York State Fraud – Revoking, Sealing and Falsifying Adoptees’ Birth Certificates is Unconstitutional

Forty-three years ago today, on March 24 of 1974, I met my father for the first time in my life of 18 years. On that day, my father gave photographs to me of my deceased mother, her death certificate, and her obituary from the newspaper with the names of her five children – I was her youngest.

I had a name when I was born. I had a birth certificate and a baptismal certificate. But then, adoption happened. I became someone else.

There is nothing I want more than for my government to tell the truth. I demand the restoration of my true birth certificate – the one that certifies my birth as it happened on January 7, 1956. I demand that my parents be reinstated as my parents by the very government that annulled my medical record of live birth. This demand extends to all New York State and all American adoptees who have been victimized by archaic laws that stole  our natural-born identities.

  • Doris Michol Sippel

.

Summary

This paper was originally written in response to the “Adoptee Bill of Rights” A02901C and S05964B and the amendments made to these identical bills in 2015.

There is quite a bit of discrepancy between information given out by the two existing adoptee-rights organizations in New York State. Unsealed Initiative posted a note on their website that the Assembly Bill A5036 [1] has been “introduced without change from last year’s amended bill…same as Senate Bill S4845 [2] sponsored by [Andrew J.] Lanza.” Assemblyman David Weprin introduced A5036 on February 6, 2017.

NY Adoptee Equality announced on Monday March 13, 2017, that a new bill was introduced by New York State Senator Tony Avella, Senate Bill S5169. [3] Then, Assembly Bill A06821 [4] was introduced by Assemblyman David Weprin on March 21, 2017. Both bills are identical and would require “the commissioner of the department of health to issue non-certified copies of the original long form birth certificates to adoptees who request such copy within forty-five days after the receipt of such request.” These bills would also allow the descendants of the adoptee to apply.

Aside from the fact that the two existing adoptee-rights organizations disseminate different information, adoptees and the general public are not well-informed about these legislative actions. This should be announced to the public through the news media. But it is assumed that the rights of adoptees are not important enough to be news worthy.

The old “Adoptee Bill of Rights” with new numbers A5036 and S4845 must be killed outright. This article will explain why.

The new Senate Bill S5169 and Assembly Bill A06821 address the rights of adoptees without including any parental controls and they provide for the descendants of the adoptee to apply. These two provisions should be applauded. But these bills are now being publicized as “clean bills” by NY Adoptee Equality. As good as the new bills are, S5169 and A06821 do not go far enough because these bills call for the release of information-only uncertified birth certificates. If information is all you want, then that is all you might get. And don’t forget, the opposition has fought against adoptee-access to sealed records for over 20 years. They might tack on parental permission amendments, just as they did in 2015.

I stand by my statements and proof in this article that no bill is “a clean bill” unless it completely restores adoptees’ full identity rights to certified copies of our accurate birth certificates. Here is why:

Revoking, sealing and then falsifying adoptees’ birth certificates is integral to the adoption process by federal guidelines established in 1930. New York State began revoking, sealing and falsifying birth certificates of adoptees in 1935. This law should be repealed, along with all tentacles of law connected with it in vital statistics, public health, domestic relations, and adoption. These laws should be replaced by reality-based documentation of live birth as applied to all other American citizens who are not adopted. This would immediately restore to New York State adopted citizens full identity rights to our certified medical record of live birth, annulling falsified birth certificates, reestablishing adoptees full equality under the law to non-adopted citizens – a right we had prior to 1935.

.

Under a 1930 Federal Model Law, New York State Began Revoking, Sealing and then Replacing Birth Certificates of Adoptees in 1935

In June 2016, at the age of 60, I legally reclaimed my name that should have been mine since birth. New York State changed my name when I was 15 months old in compliance with a 1935 State law that revokes, seals, and replaces birth certificates of adopted people.[5] But I still do not have the legal right to unseal and obtain a certified copy of my accurate birth certificate.

Prior to 1930, American adoptees had the civil right to their accurate birth certificate, just like everyone else. Since 1930, all States began to modify laws when a National Conference of State Registrars of Vital Statistics proposed a model law requiring that adoptees’ birth certificates be replaced with amended birth certificates that combine information from court-ordered adoption with some facts of birth.[6] Masquerading as live-birth certificates, these documents were, and still are, issued by every State’s Health Department, Office of Vital Statics, even though parents’ names were swapped and the child’s name was changed.  Mimicking documentation of a biological birth assured that the actual parents were erased, adoptees would never know the truth, and adopters could conceal the adoption.

 

National Adoptees’ Rights Groups Began in the 1950s; New York State’s Activists Work on “Adoptee Bill of Rights” for Over 20 Years

Adopted people have tried to change public opinion since the mid-1950s and lobbied for access to sealed records since the mid-1970s, with little progress. Many thought it would be impossible to put an end to revoking, sealing, and replacing birth certificates, so access was all they fought for. I never gave up the fight that one day adoptees would not be mandated into false identities.

In my home State of New York, two decades of work between activists and supportive legislators produced the “Adoptee Bill of Rights” that would release certified copies of adoptees’ sealed birth certificates. Activists know that a minority of mothers-of-adoption-loss are so traumatized that they cannot face their grown offspring. This is why a contact preference form – a legal contract that would be enforceable – was included into the original New York State bill to protect parents from interference if they do not want contact. At the same time, these parents would have no right to interfere with adoptees’ right to obtain a copy of their sealed birth certificate.

 

The June 2015 Legislative Amendments and How They Would Effect Adoptees

Exactly 24 hours before the vote in June 2015, legislators decided that was not enough. They added identical amendments to the Assembly and Senate bills with disclosure and contact vetoes to protect the supposed rights to confidentiality of mothers-in-hiding.[7]

Adoptee activists nicknamed these conditional amendments to what were adoptee-rights bills as “Mother-May-I?” bills. If passed, adopted people aged 18-to-100 will be required to obtain written permission from our unknown parents-of-adoption-loss, and adopters, before a certified copy of our sealed birth certificates will be released to each adopted petitioner. State Supreme Court-appointed confidential intermediaries will arrange supervised meetings at the court only if parents agree to meet their now-adult adopted-out daughter or son. If our parents wish to remain anonymous, they will have the right to redact their names from the released document. If parents do not respond, then an un-redacted birth certificate will be issued. If the State Supreme Court judge determines that the release of the sealed birth certificate will be “detrimental to the welfare” of the parents or the adopters, then an informational summary will be released to the adoptee. It is unclear what will happen if both parents are deceased. Some States require that adoptees provide a death certificate to prove that their unknown parents have died.

 

Why Activists Protest These Amendments

New York State’s mothers-of-adoption-loss who are activists protested by providing proof in the form of actual signed surrender documents that carried no such promised confidentiality in print. To which I will add that signed relinquishment removes all parental rights but does not erase parents’ names from their child’s birth certificate. Assigning parental power where none exists invalidates the right of children to become autonomous adults at the age of majority. No parent has legal authority over an adult offspring, nor has the right to redact their name from their child’s birth certificate. Mothers-in-hiding claim they should be granted rights that they never had.

After relinquishment, adoption agencies and attorneys are under no obligation to tell parents whether or not their child was adopted, or lived in ten different foster homes, or died at age four. Many surrendered children live with other relatives, legal guardians, or in foster care until they age-out of the system. These children keep their birth certificates, even if they were removed from abusive parents whose rights were involuntarily terminated.

Whether parental rights were terminated by a court, signed under duress, or voluntarily relinquished, the outcome is the same. Surrendering a child does not revoke, seal, nor replace a child’s birth certificate with a new one. The only legal process that results in a person’s total loss of identity of birth is court-ordered adoption.

These points are lost on mothers-of-adoption-loss who are in hiding. They do not want their names revealed to their now-grown offspring or their secret shame exposed to others. Even people who support these mothers, including some legislators, are not aware of these details.

Some raped mothers or victims of incest want confidentiality, but again, signed relinquishment removes all parental rights and does not guarantee confidentiality or anonymity. The pain of rape and incest should not force us as adoptees to lose our identity. The place to take emotional pain is therapy, not discriminatory legislation. Mothers-in-hiding need to accept that a medical record of live birth records the facts of birth of a new human being whether conceived within a marriage, by teenage love, an affair with a married man, a priest, a well-known public figure, a known or unknown rapist, a brother, father or uncle incest perpetrator. Perhaps these mothers are more afraid of repercussions when the father’s name is exposed than they are of meeting their own daughter or son. Maybe the fathers of some adoptees don’t want to be known so they fight adoptee-access legislation.

The belief that adoptees should be forever banned from knowing the truth for fear of “ruining” our mothers’ lives by revealing their terrible secrets assigns the stigma of bastardy to all adoptees. Those who were born illegitimately should not be punished for how they were conceived. But not all adoptees were born bastards. Many children were, and are, removed from married parents due to abuse or neglect and then adopted, sometimes more than once with each adoption creating a new birth certificate. Other children are kidnapped from their families, trafficked, and sold into black market adoption rings. Sibling groups are often split apart by adoption when one or both parents died, leaving the children half or full orphans; this happened in my family when our mother died three months after my birth. Many poor families are forced to give up the last child born to survive. Numerous children today are adopted by step parents, grandparents, or other family members so it is ludicrous to re-name these children, revoke and seal their birth records, create new birth certificates for them, and then impose “Mother-May-I?” legislation on them as adults.

Foundlings may be the only children who need a legal family construct. Infants who are found on doorsteps, in dumpsters, or left in baby drop boxes typically do not have a birth certificate. They are issued a foundling certificate which approximates the date of birth and the baby is named by the person who finds the child. Once adopted, foundlings, too, are re-named by their adopters and are issued a falsified birth certificate instead of an adoption certificate. In the past, it was nearly impossible to locate the mothers of foundlings. Today, we go after putative fathers for child support using DNA, so mothers who abandon their infants could be found through DNA and hospital records.

Criminals who are imprisoned for life never lose their civil right to their birth certificates. Felons who were executed had the right to die as themselves. Adopted people, however, are stripped of a civil right for life, and death, because of one reason only: adoption.

Adopted people are treated as and made to feel like criminals for even asking about our roots. Staff at vital statistics offices glare at us, and then sneer that we have no right to our sealed birth certificates, as if our documents contain top secret information that would destroy the world if revealed. Adoption agencies often tell us our records were burned in a fire. Society demands that we feel “grateful” for having been adopted. We are told we were “better off” and should not “open Pandora’s Box”. This stigma has been passed down through the generations that adoptees should never know the truth.

There is no reason we should live with this stigma today.

Intertwining and complex laws govern vital statistics, public health, domestic relations and adoption. These laws require all individuals who are adopted (including those in socially-open, in-family, intercountry, and adult adoptions) to lose our medical records of live birth when reassigned a new birth certificate, complete with a new legal family construct, as if our lives prior to adoption never existed. Our children carry our false names as will our death certificates.

It is still considered legal throughout the United States to revoke and seal a person’s birth certificate and then create a completely new one. Only Kansas and Alaska do not seal adoptees’ birth certificates, but continue to revoke and replace them. Why is adoption reason enough to remove adoptees’ right to our birth certificates, our names, our parents, our siblings, our medical and genetic information, and our genealogy? Intercountry adoptees lose nationality, culture, and language as well.

.

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.

The first document is my hospital birth certificate signed by the attending physician and the hospital administrator.

Parents’ names on all documents redacted by author.

 

The medical record of live birth is signed by the attending physician and the local registrar of vital statistics. 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.

 

This is my Birth Registration, also called a Short Form Birth Certificate.

CertificateOfBirthregistration-DMS ParentsNamesRedacted Resized Web 6x5

This is my 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.

CertificateOfBirth-DMS-RESIZED Web InvertedBW 1 ParentsNamesRedacted

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.

DecreeAndOrderAdoption 1957-1-14 pg1 RESIZED FOR WEB names redacted

Decree and Order pg3- (F) highlights RESIZED WEB

When a child is adopted, a similar, but different, birth certificate form is used. 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.

 

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 t he 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.

ThisIsToCertify JMW BirthRegistration GREY Redacted

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’ 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.

CertificateOfBirth JMW long form ParentsRedacted RESIZED Web 6x6 (B)

 

This, of course, creates lies on religious documents as well. 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.

CertificateOfBirthAndBaptismDMS NamesRedacted RESIZED WEB

CertificateOfBirthAndBaptism JMW NamesRedacted RESIZED WEB

 

.

New York State’s Amended “Adoptee Bill of Rights” is Eerily Similar to Compromise Laws in Seven States that Produced Devastating Results

New York State’s amended “Adoptee Bill of Rights” have been given new numbers for the 2017-2018 session, A5036 and S4845. These are conditional adoptee access bills favoring the supposed rights of mothers to confidentiality.

I will continue here by highlighting what happened in other states when conditional adoptee access laws were passed. [4] We do not need nor want the same thing to happen in New York.

Illinois’s conditional access law left about 50 adoptees completely locked out from their sealed records. Adoptee Triona Guidry wrote about her experiences being born in Illinois and adopted in Ohio (where her adoption records are kept), under the control of a confidential intermediary, a contact veto, and forever banned from ever obtaining a copy of her forever-sealed birth certificate. Her blog posts provide valuable insight into the pitfalls of compromise legislation.

In her post, “Case Closed! Another Adoptee becomes A Confidential Intermediary Statistic,” (May 19, 2008)  http://www.73adoptee.com/2008/05/case-closed-another-adoptee-becomes-a-confidential-intermediary-statistic/ Triona Guidry tells of her lengthy involvement with the Illinois Confidential Intermediary program, from the years 2000 to 2008. At first, her application was rejected even though she was born in Illinois, “because the program ‘does not have a procedure’ for out-of-state adoptees.” She exhausted her own resources, hired a lawyer, and worked with the program “to prepare a procedure for out-of-state adoptees”. Once again, an adoptee had to educate state employees, and other so-called professionals, on how policy and procedures effect adoptees. The one-size-fits-all approach does not work. Once her application was accepted, Triona had to pay “a registration fee and separate fees for each search” (one for the CI to contact her mother and one for the CI to contact her father).

Triona Guidry writes of many discrepancies in the Illinois Confidential Intermediary program, including pointing out that CI program “deliberately discourages participants and contacted relatives from signing up with the state registry” presumably to “ensure a steady supply of paying clients. The state registry is free … the CI program costs hundreds of dollars.” CI programs refuse “to disclose the search steps taken on participants’ behalf” leaving adoptees wondering if they received what they paid for. Contact Intermediary programs refuse “to disclose their standard written policies and procedures.” Triona’s CI accidentally disclosed her identifying information to her mother and then refused to “provide official written notification of said disclosure,” providing no official accountability violating the adoptee’s privacy. Finally, Triona tells us that CI programs “charge[s] to re-open cases, with no way for participants to know what has or has not been done on their behalf.”

Triona closes her blog post with these words,

“This is sheer insanity. People say adoptees have more psychological issues than non-adoptees. If we do, maybe they’re imposed on us by situations like this! … This started as a simple request for my records. Twelve years later, the adoption industry has turned me into a vocal advocate for adoptee rights. It’s ironic that if the records weren’t sealed, there wouldn’t be people like me publicly questioning the adoption industry’s more dubious practices.”

In “Leaving Adoptees Behind: My Experience At The Illinois HB 5428 Hearing,” (April 15, 2010) http://www.73adoptee.com/2010/04/leaving-adoptees-behind-my-experience-at-the-illinois-hb-5428-hearing/ Triona Guidry writes,

“Senator Wilhelmi started off by expounding on all the “good” Sara Feigenholtz has done for adoptee rights and what an honor it’s been to work with her. Everyone sees her as a “champion” of adoptee rights, except those of us left behind by her compromises. Then he turned it over to Feigenholtz who talked about “wearing her heart on her sleeve” and “begging for human rights.” She whined about being called a “traitor to the Adoption Reform Movement” but felt that she was striking a balance by honoring the voice of the majority. Small consolation to those in the minority.”

“For those of you reading, if you don’t already know: I am in that minority. My birth mother has filed the denial of contact. So hearing that it’s okay for people like me to be left out so others can have access does not sit well with me. And I speak as someone who used to believe that intermediaries were the answer, that compromise was necessary and fair, until I got screwed by the process and realized that it’s really all about politics, influence, and making money off adoption records access. All of this became even more clear to me as I sat and listened to the committee meeting.”

When I met Sara Feigenholtz at the American Adoption Congress’s international conference in Cleveland, Ohio in 2013, she was more concerned about speaking of her role in achieving “success” in contributing to the effort to pass a compromise bill into law than she was in acknowledging that such compromises have had detrimental and lifelong effects on certain adoptees who are denied their rights. When our elected politicians use their positions to gloat about their own accomplishes, even when those accomplishments are clearly biased and limited in scope, I am left fearing the same thing will happen in New York State. Legislators must completely understand the ramifications of the bills they support. Listening and watching the live-stream of New York State’s hearings, however, it is painfully obvious that many legislators have little to no comprehension of the issues at hand. Compromise legislation is not a “step in the right direction” to provide adoptees our rights, yet, many legislators parrot these words in their voting support for a harmful bill.

In his February 7, 2017 blog post, “The Missing Asterisks of Adoptee Rights,” http://gregoryluce.com/blog/missing-asterisks-adoptee-rights/ adoptee Gregory D. Luce tells us that Indiana’s conditional access law was signed in 2016 with some adoptee access allowed in 2018, but many adoptees born within a specific time frame will not receive their birth certificate or information at all. Missouri’s Adoptee Rights Act, which took effect in August of 2016, presents similar problems. New Jersey’s limited access law went into effect in January 2017, leaving behind 550 adoptees who are permanently closed out of their sealed records.

State laws are now being passed that favor protection of parental confidentiality over adoptee rights. This approach is sweeping the country, even though an additional seven States provide unrestricted access (no parental controls) to information-only sealed birth certificates.

.

Imagine if YOUR Birth was Deemed Invalid by Your Government

As in the handful of other States that have released uncertified sealed birth certificates without the state raised seal and current registrar’s signature, New York State’s certified documents will be released with a statement stamped across the front such as “VOID” or “Not For Official Use” or “For Genealogical Purposes Only” or “Pre-Adoption Birth Certificate”. At the end of the legislative session in 2016, an assistant at the office of the bill’s sponsor, New York State Assemblyman, David Weprin, admitted that there had been no decision on what words would appear on New York State-released sealed birth certificates. Don’t let his answer fool you; even though the “Adoptee Bill of Rights” stated “certified birth certificates” will be released, no citizen can hold two certified birth certificates at the same time. Authorities believe that would give adoptees the chance to commit fraud with a second identity.

Second Identity? That “second identity” was given to us at birth, but stolen by our government.

Adoptee Rudy Owens writes of his feelings upon seeing a word stamped three times across the front of his released-but-still-sealed birth certificate in his blog post, “Getting what has always been mine–my original birth certificate.” (July 29, 2016)

https://rudyowensblog.com/2016/07/29/birthcertificatevictory/

He writes,

“On July 18, 2016, the sheet of paper, with a legal stamp from the state registrar, finally arrived in my mailbox. Vital Records at the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services made sure to remind me that I am a bastard by placing in large capital letters “SEALED” three times on the copy of my original birth certificate–an act not required by state law. I was stunned looking at the copy of my original birth certificate. The state had given me a final insult by writing three times in big bold letters, “SEALED,” as a reminder I was still a bastard and not a normal person. But underneath that insulting bureaucratic graffiti that purportedly protected the well-being of the state and its residents were all the facts I already had known for three decades. The only new information I found on the document was the full name of the attending physician, who helped to safely bring me into this world one spring day in Detroit, Michigan, many years ago.”

Rudy Owens also addresses the denial of his civil rights,

“… All my life, I was classified by law as being undeserving of this record, unlike all-non-adopted state residents, simply because I was relinquished as an infant to become an adoptee. The only reason—and I repeat only reason—I now have possession of what is and always has been mine is because I never once recognized the legal or moral authority of the state’s so-called vital records professionals to deny me equal treatment and equal status by law.”

If New York State were to ever issue my accurate birth certificate to me with any words stamped over the front to invalidate the document itself, I would be horrified. Yet, this is exactly what would happen if the old “Adoptee Bill of Rights” A5036 and S4845 or the new Senate Bill S5169 and Assembly Bill A06821 were to be passed into law.

It is bad enough that I was born in America – The Land of the Free – where my home state decided that my birth was not worthy to be officially certified so it revoked my birth certificate, essentially annulling my birth, and replaced the document with a fabrication. But to issue a non-certified copy and stamp words on the front to be sure adoptees do not use the document as identification, is yet another insult.

Most adoptees are not as lucky as I was to have had a certified copy of their now-revoked-and-sealed birth certificate preserved over the years. Thank goodness my father, in his grief, gave my papers to my adopters when he gave me to them in 1956 after my mother died. I have owned a certified copy of my accurate birth certificate since 1974 when my adoptive mother gave my documents to me. What I’ve wanted ever since is for my government to reinstate the validity of my birth.

Imagine if YOUR birth was deemed invalid by your government; that your name is not your name, that your parents are not your parents and that replacements have not only been assigned, but certified as true.

.

Segregating Bastards from Non-Bastards, Adoptees from Non-Adoptees, by Laws Written Only for this Segment of the Population is Systemic Discrimination

State laws followed a federal guideline in 1930 as a legal internment against a certain population based solely upon the condition of being born bastards. That was a time in history when it was thought that concealing illegitimacy was the best course of action to avoid stigma by creating new identities, legitimizing the illegitimate. But it was an illusion. Those laws now continue to use that supposed stigma against us, even when many adoptees were not born as bastards. Segregating bastards from non-bastards, adoptees from non-adoptees, by laws written only for this segment of the population is discrimination. Drastic measures were taken from 1930 onward to conceal bastardy. Now drastic measures must be taken to put an end to systemic discrimination against adoptees.

.

Access to Our Sealed Documents Does Not Solve the Real Problem Because Our Falsified Birth Certificates Will Still Remain Viably Operable as Required by Existing Law

Equal treatment and equal status under the law is more than receiving a copy of a still-sealed document with a government stamp across the front. Mere access to our sealed documents does not solve the real problem because our falsified birth certificates will still be the only ones that remain viably operable as required by existing law. All access laws are conditional, even the ones with no parental controls.

.

Access-Only Bills Do Not Go Far Enough; Repeal and Replace the 1935 Law that Revokes, Seals and Replaces Birth Certificates of Adoptees

There must be no compromise with mothers who think this is about reunion. Searching and reunification are part of the equation for some, yes, but the underlying issue is the blatant disregard for our birthrights.

As I stated in the summary, the “Adoptee Bill of Rights” A5036 and S4845 must be killed. And, as good as the new bills S5169 and A06821 are, they do not go far enough. These bills call for the release of information-only uncertified birth certificates. If information is all you want, then that is all you might get. And don’t forget, the opposition has fought against adoptee-access to sealed records for over 20 years. They might tack on parental permission amendments to these supposedly “clean” bills too.

It is time to wipe the slate clean. Stop the production assembly-line of revoking, sealing and replacing birth certificates of all New York State adopted people and restore to all adoptees our full identity rights to certified copies of our accurate birth certificates.

During the Assembly Floor Debate on June 18, 2015, adoptee and former Assemblyman (who is now Council Member in Staten Island) Mr. Joseph Borrelli stated on page 18 of the transcript [9], “I should own my birth certificate and frankly not be given a fraudulent government document…” He touched on the main issue, but did not expand upon it.

The 1935 New York State law that revoked, sealed and replaced adoptees’ birth certificates should be repealed, along with all tentacles of law connected with it in vital statistics, public health, domestic relations, and adoption. These laws should be replaced by reality-based documentation of live birth as applied to all other American citizens who are not adopted.

.

“Adoptee Identity Rights Restoration” Needs to be Written into New York State Law as well as United States Constitutional Law

An estimated seven to ten million adopted American citizens demand full rights restoration to our certified medical record of live birth so we can reclaim ourselves as we were born to be and use our accurate birth certificates as identification just as non-adopted people do. We will not settle for compromised rights with hand-holding to mothers-in-hiding as if all adoptees are bastards to be hidden away for pretty-please restricted access to a summary, redacted, or an uncertified copy of our “pre-adoption birth certificate”. Adoptees’ birth certificates should never be revoked, sealed, nor replaced. Adopters (straight or gay) should not be given the upper hand to call the shots as to whose names appear on the birth certificate as mother and father, or mother and mother, or father and father. Adoptees are autonomous beings, not possessions. We should not lose our birth certificate, nor be assigned a new name and new parents, in exchange for a home, if we truly need one. Today’s adoptions “build families” rather than provide homes for children in need.

The changes I am proposing would provide for several situations. Adoptees who are not interested do not have to file. Those who choose to obtain an information-only uncertified copy of their medical record of live birth while keeping their adopted name and falsified birth certificate could do so, or they could also request to annul their amended birth certificate and replace it with an adoption certificate. Many adoptees, however, want to reclaim their name of birth, just as I have done. Thousands of adoptees across the United States and the world have already done so via court order, but we still do not have the civil right to unseal our birth certificates to obtain a certified copy and use it as identification. This is why adoptees are not equal under the law to non-adopted people.

In the legal process of reclaiming my name, I spoke with an attorney who cautioned me against obtaining the legal right to completely unseal and certify my medical record of live birth. He said that action would invalidate my amended birth certificate and annul my adoption, which he thought was a bad idea. Defending the decisions made by adults at the time, the attorney claimed that their decisions should stay as originally intended. He missed the point that adoptees’ medical record of live birth should stay as originally intended.

Adoptees are ignored in the adoption transaction. State laws violate the constitutional rights of every single adopted person in the United States. What further proof is needed to see that revoking, sealing and then falsifying adoptees’ birth certificates is integral to the adoption process? The legal structure of adoption requires the obliteration of the adoptee’s identity and family when a new one is created. Would adopters adopt if they were required by law to respect a child for who she is and who her parents are, that they have no right to re-name a child or to replace parents’ names on a government falsified replacement birth certificate?

Moving forward, let 2017 be the last year of secrets and lies. From now on, reality-based documentation of live birth will provide all citizens their identity rights. Take away revoked, sealed, and falsified birth certificates from adoption and the resulting legal process is custodial guardianship. Guardianship preserves a person’s right to name of birth, the medically-factual live-birth certificate, and family of birth, even when parental rights are terminated.

“Adoptee Identity Rights Restoration” needs to be written into New York State law as well as United States constitutional law. Let America lead the way for adoptee freedom worldwide.

Endnotes

  1. “An act to amend the domestic relations law and the public health law, in relation to adoptee rights,” New York Assembly Bill A5036 (2017)https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2017/a5036/amendment/original                                                                            Text of Bill A5036 in PDF http://legislation.nysenate.gov/pdf/bills/2017/A5036
  1. “An act to amend the domestic relations law and the public health law, in relation to adoptee rights,” New York State Senate Bill S4845 (2017) https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2017/s4845/amendment/original                                                    Text of Bill in PDF http://legislation.nysenate.gov/pdf/bills/2017/S4845
  1. “An Act to amend the public health law, in relation to issuing non-certified copies of original long form birth certificates to adoptees,” New York State Senate Bill S05169A (2017) http://nyassembly.gov/leg/?default_fld=&leg_video=&bn=S05169&term=2017&Summary=Y&Actions=Y&Memo=Y&Text=Y
  1. “Relates to requiring the commissioner of the department of health to issue non-certified copies of the original long form birth certificates to adoptees who request such copy within forty-five days after receipt of such request,” New York State Assembly Bill A06821 (2017) http://nyassembly.gov/leg/?default_fld=&leg_video=&bn=A06821&term=2017&Summary=Y&Actions=Y&Memo=Y&Text=Y
  1. “An act to amend the public health law, the public welfare law, the judiciary law, the domestic relations law, the inferior criminal courts act of New York City, and the Greater New York charter, in relation to records of birth,” Chapter 854, 1779-1790, Laws of New York, Vols. 1-2 1779 (1936).
  2. “1930: Birth Records of Illegitimates and of Adopted Children,” Sheldon L. Howard, Illinois State Registrar of Vital Statistics, and Henry B. Hemenway, Medical Assistant Registrar, Vital Statistics Division, Illinois Department of Public Health, Springfield, Illinois, read before the Vital Statistics Section of the American Public Health Association (1930-10-30) originally published in The American Journal Public Health Nations Health (1931-6-21) (6): 641–647. https://forbiddenfamily.com/1930-birth-records-of-illegitimates-and-of-adopted-children/                                       And, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1556353/
  1. “An act to amend the domestic relations law and the public health law, in relation to adoptee rights,” New York State Assembly Bill A02901C, Bill Summary and Text, (2015) http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?default_fld=&bn=A02901&term=2015&Summary=Y&Actions=Y&Votes=Y&Memo=Y&Text=Y
  1. Adoptee Access Laws, State Legislation, American Adoption Congress, (2016) http://www.americanadoptioncongress.org/state.php
  1. Joseph Borrelli, quoted from transcript of New York State Assembly Floor Debate and Vote, Bill A2901a, An act to amend the domestic relations law and the public health law, (June 18, 2015) page 18 http://www.unsealedinitiative.org/assets/images/A2901a_061815.pdf

Natural Mother’s Birthday Today

Happy Birth Day Mother. May you smile from the spirit world, knowing that you were, and are, loved, and missed.

My mother would have been 85 years old today, if she lived. She died 54 years ago at her age of 30 years, 5 months and 24 days. Mom lived long enough to have to five children, four girls and one boy, but not long enough to raise us. Mom gave us life and then she was gone.

I mark her birth day with both celebration of a life and a mourning of her death. Mom was born carrying the eggs that would produce her children.

I lived inside her body for 32 weeks of a difficult pregnancy. Mom  was dying while pregnant with me.

There are some who claim that a baby does not know and cannot remember that far back, but they are wrong. As I nestled inside her, I heard her voice and that of my father and my four older siblings. I heard her heartbeat. Mom’s body moved and with each step she took, I rocked back and forth. An unborn baby does not forget these primal beginnings.

I wonder what my mother’s primal memories and childhood memories were.

My mother died before she could share her stories with  her children. She died before she could fully enjoy being a mother taking care of her children throughout their lifetimes. A mother’s love was cut short when she died.

Not a day goes by without me thinking of my mother’s birth and death. A life cut short. And when she was gone, the lives of her children would be forever damaged by events that further destroyed our family: coerced relinquishment of the youngest child to an arranged adoption, displaced younger children, a sudden marriage for our father that forced thee remaining children into simultaneously grieving their mother’s death and having a new step mother to raise them.

If only our mother had lived. If only she could  have celebrated 54 more birth days with her children and her husband. The possibilities, gone now, remain mysteries. My mother’s birth remains a chance event in the scheme of life. Her innate talents and intelligence, hard wired in her genes, passed down into me, and into her grandchildren I bore. Perhaps one day, my children will have children of their own, passing millions of years of evolution through genes from my mother.

I don’t have my mother’s birth certificate. I do have her death certificate. It states her birth date and death date. Concrete evidence of her birth and her death anchor me to reality. These are the facts withheld from me because of my adoption. I wrote my book and write this blog as a testiment that no adoptee should have to suffer from  the lack of information neccessary to come to grips with life and death in order to live a productive life. No adoptive parent has the right to withhold this information from  their adoptee as my adoptive parents did when they adopted me. They knew the whole truth and deliberately lied to me. The adoption system and society’s mythical beliefs worked together to make sure I was denied pertinent facts of my personal life history.

~ ~ ~ Joan M Wheeler, BA, BSW, born Doris M Sippel, author of Forbidden Family: A Half Orphan’s Account of Her Adoption, Reunion and Social Activism, Trafford Publishing, Nov 2009.

Obituary: Annette Baran dies at 83; crusader for open adoption

There are two published obituaries for Annette Baran. One is in the LA Times and the other is in KansasCity.com. Both are open to comments. The Kansas City Obituary is a reprint of the LA Times article. Please note the separate link for comments to the Kansas City article. Thanks to Mirah Riben for the notice of these publications.

http://www.kansascity.com/2010/07/18/2092196/annette-baran-author-crusader.html#ixzz0u8kicSB6

http://www.kansascity.com/2010/07/18/2092196/annette-baran-author-crusader.html#Comments_Container

http://www.latimes.com/news/obituaries/la-me-0719-annette-baran-20100719,0,2544355.story

 

The clinical social worker and psychotherapist co-wrote an influential book that helped popularize the argument that an adoptee’s knowledge of birth parents is crucial to his or her identity.

 Annette Baran | 1927-2010Annette Baran, seen at home in 1981, was a clinical social worker and psychotherapist who co-wrote “The Adoption Triangle,” an influential 1978 book credited with giving early shape to the open-adoption movement. (Bob Chamberlin, Los Angeles Times / July 18, 2010)

By Valerie J. Nelson, Los Angeles Times

July 19, 2010

Living with a secret is psychologically destructive — that concept was nearly an anthem for Annette Baran, a clinical social worker and psychotherapist who co-wrote “The Adoption Triangle,” an influential 1978 book credited with giving early shape to the open-adoption movement.

Baran died July 11 at St. John’s Medical Center in Santa Monica of complications from an infection, said her son Joshua. She was 83 and lived in Santa Monica.

“If there ever was an activist who changed the world of adoption, it was Annette,” said Joyce Maguire Pavao, founder of the Center for Family Connections, an educational and counseling center in Cambridge, Mass., that specializes in adoptions.

From the late 1950s to 1974, Baran was director of adoptions at was then called Vista Del Mar Child-Care Service in West Los Angeles and placed more than a thousand babies, her family said.

Her acceptance of working in an era of sealed records and secrecy surrounding adoption eroded after a birth mother insisted on meeting the potential adoptive parents, Baran later said.

As Baran watched the back-and-forth between the couple and birth mother, she said she thought, “This is pretty good. Why does this have to be secret?”

As time went on, she also encountered many adoptees searching for their birth mothers who were in psychological pain, said Betty Jean Lifton, an adoption reform advocate.

“She thought, ‘Oh my god, what have I done?’ It really radicalized her,” Lifton said. “She was waking from the great sleep that social workers were in and realizing how secrecy in closed adoption affected people.”

Moved to crusade for open adoption, Baran joined a novel research project started by a UCLA psychiatrist, Dr. Arthur Sorosky, who noticed that his patients who had been adopted tended to have identity problems. Another Vista Del Mar social worker, Reuben Pannor, collaborated with them.

When they solicited opinions on open adoption — the idea that birth parents and adopted family know who each other are — they received more than 600 letters and interviewed many of the writers.

“The Adoption Triangle: The Effects of the Sealed Record on Adoptees, Birth Parents, and Adoptive Parents” resulted from that study. It helped popularize the argument that an adoptee’s knowledge of birth parents is crucial to his or her identity.

Adopted adults “told us the reunion with birth parents made them feel normal and whole, for they finally experienced genealogical connections,” the researchers wrote in 1980 in a letter to The Times.

For birth parents, there is “always a lingering pain for that child given up for adoption,” they wrote. “Birth parents do not know if that child is alive or dead, well or ill.”

“All adoptees, if they have a shred of intelligence, have to assume somebody dumped them,” Baran told the Chicago Tribune in the 1985, displaying the forthrightness that was a hallmark. Knowing about their background can ease those fears, she said.

The book significantly altered people’s attitudes about adoption, according to several histories of adoption in the United States. The authors “quickly became the intellectual patron saints of the adoption rights movement,” E. Wayne Carp wrote in the 2000 book “Family Matters.”

Today, varying levels of open-adoption practices have become the norm, said Chuck Johnson of the National Council for Adoption.

In the early 1980s, Baran was again ahead of her time when she began investigating the secrecy surrounding birth by artificial insemination, colleagues said.

With Pannor, Baran interviewed donor offspring, donors and parents years after the fact and wrote the 1989 book “Lethal Secrets: The Shocking Consequences and Unsolved Problems of Artificial Insemination.” The authors advocated for a child’s right to know and were critical of the business of artificial insemination.

“No child is the product of a teaspoon full of sperm,” Baran said more than once while arguing that donor records should be made public. “A child has a father — a genetic father. And to be denied half of one’s genetic origins is really unfair.”

She was born Annette Dolinsky on Jan. 7, 1927, in Chicago to house painter Hyman Dolinsky and his wife, Lillian. Her brother, Meyer Dolinsky, wrote for television.

Growing up, she spoke Yiddish as her first language and as an adult hosted a Yiddish-speaking group in an effort to keep the language alive.

At UCLA, she earned a bachelor’s degree in social work and followed it with a master’s in the same subject at USC.

After working at Vista Del Mar, Baran directed an adolescent drug treatment program at UCLA, and as a psychotherapist in private practice often counseled adoptees.

“She became the Joan of Arc of open adoption,” her son said. “To the adoptees, she was their hero. At conferences, they would cheer her and weep.”

In addition to her son Joshua, she is survived by her husband of 62 years, architect Ephraim Baran; another son, David; a daughter, Naomi; and two grandchildren.

valerie.nelson@latimes.com

Copyright © 2010, The Los Angeles Times

 

Comments (0)

Add comments | Discussion FAQ

Currently there are no comments. Be the first to comment!

Comments are filtered for language and registration is required. The Times makes no guarantee of comments’ factual accuracy. Readers may report inappropriate comments by clicking the Report Abuse link. Here are the full legal terms you agree to by using this comment form.

Email from Lola – An Adoptive Parent Repulsed by This Blog!

Lola writes:

I would be ashamed to post the awful things you have on your blog.  I hope you get flamed constantly!  There are orphans in this world that need homes.  Why don’t you adopt some and stop whining?!  Learn what it’s like from the other side as an adoptive parent!  You make me sick!  You need therapy, not a blog.  Being so anti-adoption may be good for your mind, but it certainly hurts all those kids in foster care.  Don’t they deserve a home away from the abusive people that gave birth to them?  Those kids are taken away FOR A REASON!  Hello! Get a clue!  You may be unthankful for being adopted, but ask a 10 year old in the foster system or in an orphanage if they want a Mom & Dad…ask a kid waiting to come home to the US in Haiti right now where they would rather be!  I think you would be surprised by the answer!

Dear Lola,

Getting flamed is not an issue for me since I am paying for this website and am in constant contact with my webhost tech support.

I lived a life of torture and still am — at the hands of my adoptive family and natural family, too, not all, but enough to cause me considerable pain and anguish. Read my book for full details of the crimes committed against me by my adoptive family and others.

Lola, you are the one who is having an emotional reaction to my life. If you can’t take reading the terrible things done to adoptees (I’m not the only one) you are the one who needs therapy. There are thousands of adoptees and our natural parents who have been organizing since 1955 in America and around the world to expose the disgusting treatment we have received: examples: Adoptive parents who are lawyers have destroyed paperwork on their own adoptee’s birthparents. That’s a crime against that lawyer’s own adopted child! Adoptive parents who treat their adoptees like slaves and sex objects – like the rich couple who imprisoned a girl from a foreign country to do their household chores like Cinderella, and the Russian girl, Masha, was adopted by a pedophile and repeatedly raped and then she was freed and adopted by another woman who gave up on Masha and voided the adoption. So much abuse in adoption.

Lola, criticism from people such as you does not bother me. You only have an opinion of what you read. You do not know me personally and you do not know how this adoption has affected me and my children. They were also abused and mistreated by the relatives who mistreated me. The destruction of adoption lies and discrimination and prejudice scars adoptees and their children for life.

Lola, you can attack me all you want, but remember: in my book, I have published proof that our government has defrauded millions of adoptees by the practice of seizing our birth certificates, sealing them permanently, issuing materially false statements on a new, amended Certificate of Live Birth in the new adoptive name and naming the adoptive parents as parents of birth. This is fraud and perjury. If that happened to you, you might feel a tad bit offended, pissed off, and disgusted.

I was 18 years old when I had the shock of my life, and then my adoptive parents yelled at me, threw pots and pans at me, and acted as if I had done something horrific. No, I was found by siblings that they knew I had and they prevented me from a continued and meaningful relationship with them because my adoptive parents wanted me all to themselves. Any parents who would do that today would be up on child abuse charges. The only reason they got away with that is because my father signed relinquishment papers.

Do not blame my natural father for it, either. He was used, first by the good old Catholic Church and then by a child-stealer who was procuring a baby for her brother. No one helped my father in his grief that he lost his wife to an early death. No one helped my father keep his kids together. And all you, Lola, can think about are the so-called orphans in orphanages.

I have said this before but it needs repeating: Children who need homes can very easily have those homes through legal Guardianship and not adoption. Guardianship provides a legal guardian (a single person or a couple) who provide a safe, loving, and permanent home for children who need a home. If children cannot be raised by their natural parents, this is a far better alternative than total and complete adoption. Even “open” adoption is not a safe alternative due to the sealing of the child’s birth certificate and a replacement, “new” birth certificate in the child’s new adoptive name and adoptive parents named as parents by birth. Adoptive parents cop an attitude of ownership over the child and see the parents of birth as inferior.

With Guardianship, a child’s legal birth name, legal birth certificate, and status as the child of one and only one set of parents is protected. The legal guardian is under legal obligation to act legally and lovingly for the child as a parent would, as foster parents do, and as adoptive parents do, but they do not have the “advantage” of the law sealing the child’s birth certificate, replacing it with a new one with the guardians’ names on it and changing the child’s name and identity for all eternity.

In situations where the safety of the child is concerned, better to remove a child from the danger, but retain the child’s identity and relationships with that parent or parents. Adoption erases the existing problem as to why removal of children seems necessary, but, the adoptee faces lifelong harm from adoption and must face those issues later in life.

Yes, I am completely anti adoption. No adoption under any circumstances. Not even to save the Haitian children from starving to death after the earthquake. Good grief I hear that refrain already…Family Preservation at all costs, even if their parents are dead, there are other relatives who would be lost to them in adoption by foreigners.

I am not ashamed for anything I write. The only people who are flaming me are my own stupid family members who do not want me to write about my life. Foreign governments and Social Service Agencies throughout America and other countries are reading my website: Australia, New Zealand and South Africa, to name a few. Why? Because there are active adoption reform movements in those countries who have achieved what America needs: drastic reform in adoption.

I worked in foster care and in homeless shelters where I have seen kids removed from their parents solely due to poverty, not abuse. Even in the cases of abuse, those parents are still parents and those kids were born of those parents. By your way of thinking, Lola, adoption should totally erase the past and give these poor kids a new and better life. Wrong. Kids do not forget what has happened and they must cope with it all. Subjecting kids to the total identity change of adoption and forbidding them any knowledge of or contact with their own blood kin is child abuse. I’ve been at this adoption reform activism and advocacy for very near 36 years. I’ve worked in and around foster care, troubled youth, homeless families, crisis centers and disadvantaged families for my entire adult life. I went to court with an 18 year old that aged-out of the foster care system and went out on his own because he had no family. He bought me a rose from a street vendor because I cared enough to see him through that last year. He faced the reality of his life and was a strong young man. I did the same for an 18 year old young woman. She was all alone at the end of the court proceeding. Both of these kids went through foster care with their parents in what-ever state that left them incapable of taking care of their children, but both of these young adults had their birth identities intact, had their personal histories, had the rough experiences of foster care, but they also had a determination to press forward and do something with their lives. They also were free to establish some type of relationship with their parents, which they said was important for them to figure out. And they both thanked me for being at their sides when they stepped out of that court room to face the world. Adoption would have stripped them of their names, their birth certificates, and their families. Guardianship would have provided a home and loving family while giving them the right to their own birth identities. Guardianship conveys freedom, adoption conveys possession.

Oh yes, and lets all go over to Haiti to adopt all those poor orphans! That will solve these black kids’ problems, right? No it won’t! Being adopted by foreigners of a different race is an inner struggle for Transracial Abductees: go see their website under my Links page and here. They will face prejudice in this lily-white biased country of ours who hates Obama for being a “light-skinned black man”. You prospective adoptive parents who think it is the loving thing to do to go to Haiti and adopt their children — do you know what emotional damage that will do to these children who have lived through the trauma of an earthquake? They have seen their parents and other relatives die and you want to put a band aid on that by taking them away from that devastation? Do you not see that taking care of them in their own country is the best solution? I suggest you read some other blogs about taking kids for adoption out of Haiti. The Daily Bastdardette: HAITI: OPERATION PIERRE PAN POSTPONED; POLITICIANS PANDER. In that blog post alone, Bastardette has many links to a wealth of information.   You will be shocked by what you read. World organizations are advising against adopting kids out of Haiti for the very reasons I have just stated, and more.

Lola, be thankful that you have led a most comfortable life. Do not suggest that I adopt! I wouldn’t do such a horrible thing to a child! My life was ruined because of adoption.

My goal is to change adoption laws and social policy so that what happened to me will never happen to another child, ever. To be lied to, to be prevented from knowing my own siblings, to be forbidden to grieve the death of my mother, to not ever be taken to her graveside — those are crimes of child abuse perpetrated upon me by my own adoptive parents. That is sick perversion and possession of a human being.

My adoptive mother is dying in a nursing home right now. She has not once acknowledged the damage she caused me. But she is happy that I used a photograph her brother took of me as an infant for my book’s cover. She gets tears in her eyes because she is happy that I have reached my goal of publication. Maybe she cannot accept the horror of the crimes she and others committed against me, but she is happy for me to be published and encourages me to attend the next AAC Adoption Conference. Mom has realized the importance of the falsified birth certificate as being fraudulent. She has realized that her actions and that of other adoptive relatives and my dead mother’s relatives “were cruel” to my natural father, she said so this past summer. My mother now knows the destructive words said to me by my loving adoptive cousins: “Joan, you OPENLY declare you have two fathers, so you must not love this father. We don’t want you here…” at my adoptive father’s funeral in 1982. I had been in a reunion with my natural father and many other relatives for nearly 9 years at that point. The hate directed at me from prejudicial relatives was their inability to let me live my own life.

My adoptive Mom has also lived the destructiveness and spiteful hate from my own full-blood sisters who not only attacked me because they (like you) did not want me to write anything about my adoption (see my horrible articles in the Buffalo News in MY ARCHIVES page) that they repeatedly abused my mother and my kids and my ex-husband by hate phone calls and hate mail and false child abuse charges. Normal people will let go and let the other person live free from contact. Continued harassment because I am an adoption reformer is completely out of line. There is no reason for my sisters to attack my adoptive mother, but they have. My mother is dying. We need to resolve what we can and live in peace, yet, my sisters are still out there harassing me. I have no contact with them for a number of years into our reunion, and do not want contact from them because of their destructive behavior to me, my children, my adoptive mother, and my ex-husband. Why would I want to build relationships with people who have mocked me for decades and now want in on the action because my book is published? Or because they now want to be a part of adoption reform when they mocked me for being in adoption reform since I was 18? They are filled with nothing but malicious slander and defamation toward me. Every word I write is the truth. Even my ex-husband and my young adult children will attest to the hateful behavior of my relatives toward me and to them. Even my adoptive mother deserves respect as my mother, instead, she was mistreated by my blood sisters by false child abuse charges claiming she was sexually abusing her own grandchildren! Adoption and its aftermath has negatively-affected entire family systems — but you, Lola, want to sing adoption’s praises!

Adoption, in its present form, has been and is, a destructive social and legal device that splits up families.

Lola, are you under 36? If so, I have lived more trauma since 1974 than you have as a non-adopted person. You sound like a young kid who does not know beans about adoption reform. Keep reading. Visit other adoption reform blogs. See the kinks on the side bars. These links will lead you to other links in adoption reform. Better yet, show up to our Conferences and really learn what it is like to be adopted and to lose your child to adoption:

American Adoption Congress

Adoption Crossroads:  Adoption Healing, Baby Scoop Era Research Initiative, Origins Inc. Australia, Origins Canada are proud to announce: Shedding Light on the Adoption Experience VI an Educational Conference About Realities: The Lifelong Effects of Adoption and the Need for Family Preservation.

Lola, you are living in a fantasy world. You need to wake up and smell the coffee. It is people like you who make me sick.

Search Info As Requested – Guest Post

Well, maybe I should start a Guest Post Regular Feature!

The following came in via email. I normally don’t do Search Info because there is so much out there and my passions are Reunions and Civil Rights for adoptees and our natural parents, but this is important to post:

Thank you to Archie Hyde for this information.

Joan,

Here is something that you might want to put out for the ones that do searches.

Archie Hyde, a_hyde007@comcast.net

the Georgia rep.

27 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: New obituary collections at GenealogyBuff

Please forward

 From GenealogyBuff.com

Hi all,

GenealogyBuff.com http://www.genealogybuff.com has recently placed
several considerable data collections online.

Here’s the list:

ALABAMA – Madison County Obituary Collection
http://www.genealogybuff.com/al/madison/webbbs_config.pl

ARKANSAS – Clark County Obituary Collection
http://www.genealogybuff.com/ar/clark/webbbs_config.pl

ARKANSAS – Lafayette County Obituary Collection
http://www.genealogybuff.com/ar/lafayette/webbbs_config.pl

FLORIDA – Manatee County Obituary Collection
http://www.genealogybuff.com/fl/manatee/webbbs_config.pl

GEORGIA – Cherokee County Obituary Collection
http://www.genealogybuff.com/ga/cherokee/webbbs_config.pl

KANSAS – Johnson County Obituary Collection
http://www.genealogybuff.com/ks/johnson/webbbs_config.pl

MISSOURI – McDonald County Obituary Collection
http://www.genealogybuff.com/mo/mcdonald/webbbs_config.pl

NEBRASKA – Dawson County Obituary Collection
http://www.genealogybuff.com/ne/dawson/webbbs_config.pl

NEBRASKA – Nuckolls County Obituary Collection
http://www.genealogybuff.com/ne/nuckolls/webbbs_config.pl

NEW YORK – Chautauqua County Obituary Collection
http://www.genealogybuff.com/ny/chautauqua/webbbs_config.pl

NORTH CAROLINA – Lee County Obituary Collection
http://www.genealogybuff.com/nc/lee/webbbs_config.pl

PENNSYLVANIA – Cumberland County Obituary Collection
http://www.genealogybuff.com/pa/cumberland/webbbs_config.pl

PENNSYLVANIA – Lycoming County Obituary Collection
http://www.genealogybuff.com/pa/lycoming/webbbs_config.pl

VIRGINIA – Smyth County Obituary Collection
http://www.genealogybuff.com/va/smyth/webbbs_config.pl

Each of these data sets are searchable from the upper part of each
page.  The Manatee County, Florida collection is great because many
“snowbirds” from the northern and New England states are represented
there.

Hope this helps,
Bill Cribbs
_______________________________________________
genealib mailing list
genealib@mailman.acomp.usf.edu
http://mailman.acomp.usf.edu/mailman/listinfo/genealib


Laura W. Carter
Heritage Room Librarian
Athens-Clarke County Library
2025 Baxter Street
Athens, Georgia 30606

Voice – 706 613-3650 Ext. 350
FAX –        706 613-3660

It is Not Reunion I Resent — It is Being LIED to and Harassed

I was checking my trackers when someone’s search words caught my eye: “adoption reunion resentment”.

Let me make this clear: I will not be the Poster Girl for Bad Reunions. You will have to read my book to know the whole story.

I was lied to be my adoptive parents for the first 18 years of my life. They did not EVER want me to know my own siblings. Siblings that they knew I had! Siblings who lived just a 20 minute drive away! When those siblings called me on the phone and shocked the living hell out of me when I was 18 years old, I was not mad at them. I was in deep, profound, emotional shock! My adoptive parents lied to me and prevented me from having meaningful relationships with my own siblings and my blood cousins, but it was alright for other members of my adoptive family to socialize with my own blood kin!

I was happy to meet my siblings, my niece and nephew, my father, and I was grieving the loss of my dead mother for the first time in my life. Do not for one second label me as against reunions!!!!

My reunion turned sour because I was getting abuse from my adoptive mother who never wanted me to know the truth. I was getting abuse from adoptive relatives who believed I was disloyal to my adoptive parents for accepting a phone call from my own siblings! I was seen as the villain by my many of my adoptive relatives.

A few of my adoptive aunts took me kindly aside to explain what they knew. The point is: if THEY knew, I should have known all along. Not only that, but my natural father was completely unaware that the adoption contract was broken. He put his trust into the couple he chose to adopt me, but he was not told that there would be socializing going on with his deceased wife’s family. If my adoptive father’s family and my deceased mother’s family allowed themselves to socialize, but left my father out of it, then his rights were violated. He was also unaware that rumors were spread about him, rumors that affected how I was treated by my extended adopted family.

In my beginning stages of my reunion, and for decades after, I could not be everything to everyone. I was expected to learn my family history, learn names, dates, go here, go there, finish high school, go to college, and be OKAY. No one was concerned for my emotional or mental health. I was alone, until I went to a support group for adoptees. The group met once a month. Then, I went to an Adoption Forum of Philadelphia Day – long adoption conference. I met authors, natural mothers, and adoptees who felt just like I did. I found friends. Back home, I was criticized for being in a reunion, and ridiculed by natural family and adoptive family for writing Letters to the Editor about adoptees rights. This was in the 1970s.

I have been ridiculed for being an adoption activist, for standing up for what I believe in.

I am not against adoption reunions!!! I am against the lies, the deception of entire family groups, I am against being discriminated against for being an adoptee writing about my life.

My reunion went sour for many, many reasons. Too many for a blog to explain.

Message to adoptive parents: do not ever lie to your adoptees. THAT abuse destroys the parent-child relationship. To prevent an adoptee to live as a “only” child, knowing that there are siblings nearby, is child abuse. Divorced parents would face charges if they did that.

Reunions with blood kin can only work if all people work at it. My father worked at it, but could not handle me going public. He did not understand the politics of me being adopted. He felt guilty for giving me away and I have told him repeatedly that I never blamed him. I have a lovely step mother. My adoptive parents and my natural parents visited with each other. It was hardest on my adoptive mother since she did not want me to ever know my father. And my siblings and I had wonderful times together. I had a hard times adjusting. I was one person. They were many. I was overwhelmed. I was alone in my suffering.

Reunions between families separated by adoption are positive, natural events, that, if handled with respect and dignity and honesty, can and do, work.

Reunions happen with and without open birth and adoption records.

DO NOT pin negativity upon me and blame “bad” reunions on me! Many relationships ebb and flow and some end. It is part of life. Not all families get along even without adoption separation and reunion. It is now nearly 36 years after my initial reunion. There are many relatives that have sustained relationships with me, and many who have not. The younger generations now are asking questions. Adoption, just like marriage, grows and changes as we all grow and age and die.

My adoptive mother is dying. She has faced some difficult issues. She has accepted that the falsified birth certificate must end, and in its place, an adoption certificate must tell the truth.

My natural father read my book as I wrote it, twice, in these last few years. He gave his own input as to what happened. He also answered questions about the relinquishment, and, no, he was never promised confidentiality. He was told by the judge: “you must not interfere with your daughter’s life. She now is the adopted daughter in this new family. When she turns 18, you may find her again.”

Ahh, but single mothers who give up their babies, or rather, who are coerced into giving up their babies, are, and have been, told that they will never see their baby again.

There is so much that is wrong about adoption itself.  We need to focus on fixing those issues, which will then fix the reasons why relationships break down. There is much in adoption psychology of the entire family systems that cannot be explained in a blog. Read some adoption psychology books. They apply to family systems, and not just finger-pointing at the adoptee.

Society always must have scapegoats. That’s why illegitimates are called bastards. Cuss words. I resent it. Especially since I am a half orphan who should have been given respect, dignity, and honesty right from the very beginning of my adoption. Too many rumors. Too many untruths. Too much confusion for the adoptee.