Re-Posting: Progress and Goals for “CLEAN” NY Adoption Reform. Preparing For 2019 – 2020

While I remain disappointed and discouraged that our Adoptees’ Rights Bill did not pass this legislative session (which ended June 20), progress has been made.

I don’t know the specifics as to why there was another hold up; I have my concerns as to why. I think it has to do with the opinions of others who scream “mothers’ rights to be left alone” and abortion, and making this out to be search and reunion orientated.


Here is an update that continues at the links provided:

Progress and Goals for “CLEAN” NY Adoption Reform. Preparing For 2019 – 2020.

Tim Monti-Wohlpart
Brooklyn, NY
Jun 24, 2018 — Friends of “CLEAN” adoption reform,

Our cause— “CLEAN” NY adoption reform—gained immense ground, with your help, during the 2017 – 2018 legislative session! Albany hears you and we are not being ignored. While the legislature adjourned this week without passage of our bill, dialogue is slated to continue soon. So, we are already preparing for the 2019 – 2020 session (starting in January 2019). Giving up is not part of the equation. We remain humbled and grateful for your support and polite outreach to all key officials.

It’s tough knowing that A9959-B / S7631-B is not headed to Governor Cuomo, so he can enshrine long overdue adoptee equality—this time. But vital dialogue has progressed and is slated to continue, even this summer, and well in advance of the start of the 2019 – 2020 legislative session.

On Tuesday two of our partners, Annette and Barbara, from the New York Adoptee Rights Coalition (NYARC) reported, as requested, to Governor Cuomo’s office for discussion. With thanks to April, on Wednesday, Tim contributed to a call with a senior staffer who has assumed direct involvement on adoption reform. Her work, linked to the Department of Health following our March workgroup meeting, will be key in further consideration our appeal! Because of you, “clean” adoption reform has gained gradually rising consideration at the highest levels of New York government.


Re-Blogging: Don’t Keep Adopted People in the Dark – New York Times

Re-bloging from the New York Times…

Tim Monti-Wohlpart could see the differences between him and his adoptive family from an early age. He had olive skin and black hair; they were fair. But he wasn’t compelled to seek more information about his background until medical issues in his mid-twenties galvanized him to learn more about his birth family.

Because he was adopted in New York State in 1971, he had no legal right to such information.

It would take Mr. Monti-Wohlpart two years and several thousand dollars in private investigators’ fees in the late 1990s to find his birth mother and father, and learn more about his history. For years since then, Mr. Monti-Wohlpart, a Brooklyn teacher and co-founder of the New York Adoptee Rights Coalition, has been working to allow adopted New Yorkers access to nearly 650,000 original birth certificates. “I believe it’s a fundamental human right to know where you came from,” Mr. Monti-Wohlpart said.

To continue reading, go to…

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 process that revoked and sealed my birth certificate was signed into law in 1936 by New York State Governor Lehman. It also helped to perpetuate social taboos that adoptees should not know their origins.

My natural father and adopters met in person and in court several times. My natural mother was a distant cousin to my adoptive father’s two older half-brothers (they had a different mother who was my blood relative). Extended family in both of these families socialized, and traded stories and photographs of me during my childhood, but did not inform my father (or the court) of this contact. According to the court, this was a closed adoption – no contact between parties. My father stayed away from me and from my adopters as he was told to do by the court. This was an in-family private adoption. Nothing should have been secret and closed.





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.




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.








What’s so hard about that?

I just spoke with an agent at New York State Governor Cuomo’s office. She took my opposition to A5036B. She said that the Governor has been receiving many phone calls and letters asking him to veto A5036B.

Then, I said that I sent in at least one letter with photo copies of my sealed birth certificate and my adopted birth certificate, and my hospital birth certificate and my two baptismal certificates. I told her that whether or not Governor Cuomo vetoes or passes A5036, or promotes supposedly clean bills S5169 and A06821 (which do not have provisions for parental permissions), either way, the real problem is still not being addressed.

I could tell that this woman was not really familiar with what happens to adoptees’ birth certificates upon adoption. I could hear her gasp when I told her that I have been staring at my real birth certificate since 1974. The one that was issued upon my birth. I told her that New York State annulled that birth certificate and replaced it with a false-fact birth certificate when I was 15 months old.

I heard her gasp at that point. The light bulb went off in her mind. She understood!

I said that no piece of legislation will totally restore adoptees’ civil rights to our true birth certificates until we repeal the 1935 law that annuls and re-writes our birth certificates.

Then I asked her, “How is this even legal?”

I heard her let out an exasperated sigh.

I said, “It should not be legal to annul anyone’s birth certificate and replace it with a false-fact birth certificate issued upon adoption. All other bills address mere ACCESS to the sealed record, but do not stop the problem at its source.”

At this point, the woman said she found notation of my written letter. She said she’d write my points in a note to Governor Cuomo for me.

I thanked her.

All I want is my civil rights restored to obtain, without conditions, and use as official identification, my still-sealed birth certificate THAT SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN ANNULLED IN THE FIRST PLACE.

What’s so hard about that?


Adoptee Activists Revolt Against Adoption in USA and Globally

The following article was published online at Huffington Post on October 29, 2017. Written by Angela Barra co-authored by Dr Hannele Nupponen, Why #Adoptee Activists Are Reclaiming National Adoption Awareness Month (NAAM 2017) #AdopteeRightsAwareness!” states that “Adoptee issues and rights are often ignoredaddresses the points lost by most people.

It’s true. Society clings onto the praise and glorification of adopters who are seen as “saving children” from poverty, crime, or abusive parents. At the same time, society ignores the rights of the very children who are adopted. These children grow into adults who have no recourse to gain back their lost human and civil rights.

The article reads, in part:

“It’s that time of year again, National Adoption Awareness Month, where you will hear emotive catch cries via glossy marketing campaigns in the mainstream media by lobbyists. You will see celebrities spruiking the word permanency which appears to be the new euphemism for adoption. You will hear dire accounts of children being shifted around foster care and how permanency (including adoption), will be the panacea.

Further, and inexplicably, what you may not hear throughout this month is the voice of adult adoptee activists who speak about a range of issues including but not limited to:

  1. How adoptee issues and rights are ignored. What are these? According to the Australian Adoptee Rights Action Group (note that some American Activists are also members) these rights include:”

Follow this link to read the full article.