Dear Mr. President at Congress dot org

My letter to President Barak Obama on the website Congress.org:

Letters To Leaders

All messages are published with permission of the sender. The general topic of this message is Children/Families:

Subject: Adoptees’ Civil Rights to their true birth certificates

To:
President Barack Obama

December 5, 2009

Mr. President,

It is of vital importance that you pass Federal Legislation restoring the legal right for adoptees to not only have access to their true birth certificates, but it is also imperative that you immediately halt the state-by-state assault on illegitimate bastards, half and full orphans, and step children adopted by their step-parents and children born within a marriage to be “legitimized” by adoption. The process of adoption strips a child of her/his name at birth, parents of conception and birth, strips them of their relationships with these parents, and forbids any contact with siblings left behind.

I urge you to immediately pass Federal Legislation that would erase the automatic issuance of “new” and “amended” and false and fraudulent Certificates of Live Birth to adoptees at the finalization of their adoptions.

Adoptees do not have the full civil right to access and obtain a certified copy of their true birth certificates. Meanwhile, the Certificate of Live Birth that is issued upon adoption falsely states that the parents named on the document are the parents by birth, which is a blatant lie. Such a document is a fraudulent birth certificate, yet this is what adoptees have to pass off as their birth certificates.

Much better is the way it is done in The Netherlands:
1 birth certificate + 1 adoption certificate = adoption truth

I am 53 years old and cannot obtain my true birth certificate, even though I already have it (because my natural father gave it to my adoptive parents at my relinquishment.

Visit my website: http://forbiddenfamily.com.

Sincerely,

Joan M Wheeler,
born as,
Doris M Sippel

author of: Forbidden Family:
A Half Orphan’s Account of Her Adoption, Reunion

Guest Post – ONE LIE = MANY GENERATIONS LOST

This post is written by Lori Carangelo founder of Americans For Open Records, and submitted by me, legitimatebastard, via email:

Another thing the general public as well as pro-adoption folks don’t consider is that neither relinquishing Parents nor Adopters have a say wih regard to falsifying and sealing the Adoptee'[s birth recoird — It’s the law, even in stepparent adoptions.  And it’s not only the immediate “Triad” of Adoptee-Parent-Adopter who are adversely affected by the Adoptee’s falsified records.  It’s also the Triad’s future children and their children who inherit the burden as well.
 
I found my son two decades ago, after an 18-year search hindered by falsified sealed “adoption-birth” records.  Two decades later,  now that they are of legal age and can make their own decisions, I found his two daughters, my granddaughters, who were also lost to adoption (stepparent adoptions with falsified, sealed records).  One of them who I had helped raise in her first year, could not possibly have remembered me nor know that I loved her.  I had no say in her parents’ decisions and only my son’s Adopter was permitted to be part of her life as “her grandmother,” just as only his Adopter was allowed to be his “Mother.”  This granddaughter was evidently conditioned from an early age to be angry and distrustful of not only her father (my son) but also his “birth” family, and so she rejected my attenpt to know and befriend her.
 
My other granddaughter, however, who has the same father (my son), different mother, and who I had never seen, has told me she was searching for her father before I found her and that she is interested to know about the family and “what she missed”…an expression of a natural need to know.  Is it that my two granddaughters have different genes and personalities?  Or that they have different resiliences to adoption’s lies, half-truths and false assumptions?  Or that they were raised in different environments with different histories?  I’ve had only a first contact with her at this writing, so cannot yet answer these questions, but anticipate we’ll both have lots of questons…and answers that adoption would otherwise withhold, distort, or fabricate.  
 
Books such as Joan Wheeler’s “Forbidden Family” are written to help break the cycle of adoption’s mistakes not only for themselves but also for future generations.
 
Lori Carangelo, Founder ( http://LoriCarangelo.com)
Americans For Open Records ( http://AmFOR.net )

Falsified Birth and Baptismal Certificates Revisted

It amazes me that people really do not understand this issue. Adoptees do not falsify their own documents. Adoptive parents do no falsify the documents. Natural parents do not falsify documents.

When a baby or a child is relinquished to adoption, that infant or older child maintains her/his birth certificate (and religious baptismal certificate) from birth. That is the child’s legal identity. That birth certificate names the parents who are responsible for creating that infant whose birth is recorded on the birth certificate: “Certificate of Live Birth”.

Only when an  infant or older child has undergone the legal process of adoption, a six month or longer process, at the moment the Judge and the adopting parents sign the Final Order of Adoption, only then is the legal process set in motion to change the legal identity of that infant. This legal process takes from  about 1 month to 3 months for the Judge’s Order to arrive in the hands of the Registrar of Vital Statistics. Then, the Registrar takes the information that the Judge sends over, and puts the new name of the child and the names of the adopting parents and the birth information onto a form that closely resembles the actual birth certificate. But this “new” birth certificate is not the exact same form. It is, however, a legal form. It is a legalized method of lying. It is a legal “Certificate of Live Birth”.

All adoptees have a legally falsified “Certificate of Live Birth” that states they were born to parents who did not create them biologically. The mother named on this “Certificate of Live Birth” did not give birth to that named child!

This is fraud perpetrated b y the government.

Fraud perpetrated by any Church (does not have to be Catholic, but in my case, is) to issue a certified religious document stating that an adopted child was baptised in the adoptive name is jiust that: fraud. If, on the other hand, a child is baptised AFTER an adoption, then that baptism is correctly done and correctly documented.

In my case, the Catholic Church falsifed my baptismal certificate to indicate that I was baptised in my adoptive name, which I was not. You will have to buy my book to see all of these documents clearly printed in black and white. 

Adoptees are not guilty of fraud. The State and Federal Governments are guilty of fraud. It is time to put an end to adoption fraud.

Yes They are Using BirthMothers to Keep Adoptees’ Birth Records Sealed

Lori A at her blog, DNA Diaries, has an excellent post about how slowly she realized the issues surrounding adoptees’ fight to obtain a certified copy of their own true birth certificates.

In her post, Slowly Coming Around to a New Way of Thinking (Dec 16, 2009), Lori states “U.S. courts have ruled that there are no such things as ‘adoptee rights’. No rights exist in law or can be upheld in court. Let that soak in for a minute. No matter how old you get as an adoptee, there are still certain rights that do not and will not pertain to you, because of a decision that was made for you. You are disallowed certain rights that pertain to the non adopted, but there are no other rights that pertain to you under the law.”

And then, Lori states, “Then it slowly, over days, begins to sink in. When adoption started it was to hide the sins of an unwed mother and the embarrassment of infertile couples. As time goes on, it becomes more about privacy for the parents raising the adopted child. Now, it’s about my right to privacy as a damaged first parent. … Now I get it. They are using ME, my status to promote ‘their’ agenda.”

Yes, that’s right. Lori. They, The NCFA, and the ACLU, and the Catholic agenda, are all working against us to protect the rights of the unwed mother to remain in hiding. That not only is an inaccurate assessment of single mothers who lost their newborns to adoption, but it is a gross injustice to all adoptees. For we are punished for the “sins” of our parents, yet, many of us were born to married parents! I was. And then my mother died, making me a half orphan. A half orphan has rights. But then I was adopted and adoption overrode my first birth rights.

This cycle needs to stop.

Thank you, Lori, for your post.

Response to NCFA’s “Mutual Consent: Balancing the Birthparent’s Right to Privacy with the Adopted Person’s Desire to Know” – Re-Post

This is another Re-Post from my former blog. This article was originally posted on Sunday 2-22-09 in response to the article by Marc Zappala of the NCFA – National Council For Adoption, https://www.adoptioncouncil.org/resources/documents/NCFAAdoptionAdvocateVolumeNo10.pdf

This is so important to beat-down the opposition, considering adoptive parents who are not in the know fall back on the rape-issue as an important tool/weapon/excuse/reason to keep their adoptees (and the rest of us adoptees who are not products of rape) from accessing their/our true birth certificates.

Happy Reading!

HalfOprhan56 – December 16, 2009

…. …. ….

Sunday 2-22-09

My Response to the NCFA’s recent publication:

“Mutual Consent:
Balancing the Birthparent’s Right to Privacy
with the Adopted Persons’ Desire to Know”

by Marc Zappala
National Council For Adoption

Click to access NCFAAdoptionAdvocateVolumeNo10.pdf

Dear NCFA: One Size Does Not Fit All

Your organization does not speak for me, an adoptee reunited for 35 years. Nor do you speak for my adoptive parents, and you certainly do not speak for my natural parents. Your basic premise of protecting “the birthmother in hiding” has absolutely no applicable usefulness to my adoption whatsoever.

In your recent publication named above, you have not included the full spectrum of adoptees’ and natural parents’ experiences. Instead, you choose to focus on one small group of distraught birthmothers whom you claim need protection from being identified. Natural parents and adoptees come from many different family circumstances, so it is unwise to base all of your conclusions on just one aspect of adoption. By focusing on fear and intimidation, you are perpetuating the shame and guilt of pregnancy without marriage resulting in an illegitimately born infant. Flaunting terrified mothers-in-hiding whose infants were conceived of rape or incest shows your lack of concern for these mothers.

I find it interesting that you use a vulnerable group of childless mothers to achieve your goals. These women were so traumatized that they can’t face the horror of what was done to them, and what they had to sacrifice. Instead of seeking appropriate psychotherapy for coping with rape, incest, and unimaginable grief, their understandable rage is misdirected. They are under your direction. This small segment of birthmothers is held in high esteem by the NCFA (and religious Christian fanatics who claim to have superior morality). You use them as weapons against their own offspring! Worse yet, you use them as the galvanizing force to prevent all 6 or 7 million adoptees from achieving access to our true birth certificates. This is a grave injustice.

By being receptive to learning about the true-life situations of millions of adoptees and their natural families, your organization can foster healing and understanding. Not all adoptees are products of rape, incest, or not-married teenage mothers. Every adoptee has a natural father, too, but you don’t talk about fatherhood. Are you purposefully hiding the identities of fathers who impregnated unmarried mothers and ran away? You don’t take into account children who are adopted by stepparents, nor do you address the issues of older children adopted out of foster care. You certainly haven’t given any consideration to half or full orphans. Nor do you address relative adoption, in which, for example, grandparents adopt their daughter’s or son’s child. Each one of these situations has a variety of social openness.

No matter how open an adoption is, the adoptee’s birth certificate is always sealed and a falsified birth certificate is issued in its place. There is not one sentence or even one phrase in your recent publication that addresses the ethical, moral and legal complications of lying, committing fraud, and willfully withholding information to that adoptee who supposedly is loved by the adoptive parents. The only aspect of adoption you seem to caress with any passion is the perceived moral indignation of an exposed mother in hiding!

I’m just one adoptee, but you can learn a great deal from me, and others, if you open your minds and hearts. I’m a half-orphan, not an illegitimate. My mother died, so there is no fearful birthmother to “protect”. There are no secrets and there is no shame in my conception and birth. I’ve pointed this fact out in at least two private letters to the NCFA. You have chosen to ignore them with no response.

If you, the NCFA, can wave huge red flags with the token few birthmothers who refuse to get the proper counseling to cope with their specific needs, and then claim that they will dominate and take control over all adoptees’ civil and ethical rights, then I am going to raise holly hell about being a half-orphan! Orphans are a minority group within the larger adoptee population. No hiding birthmother for me! My natural mother is dead so she does not need your protection!

My natural father does not need you protection, either. He was never verbally promised confidentiality or privacy, nor was a written contract of such presented to him to sign. Instead, my 31-year-old father was verbally told to stay away from my adoptive parents. (My adopting parents, however, were not told to stay away from him! They needed protection from the possibility that he would interfere into their lives, yet, my natural father he did not get the assurance that they would not interfere in his life. They did, but for that story you will have to wait for the publication of my memoir.) The verbal promise my father made to the court to stay away from my adoptive parents and from me, was backed up by written court papers, signed by my natural father and my adopting parents. The Court Judge told my natural father that he could seek me out again, and establish a relationship with me, after my 18th birthday.

Yes, you read that right! Relinquishing mothers have been told that they will NEVER see their adopted-out children again!

Since my mother cannot speak for herself, I’ll speak for her. How does my mother feel looking through the Spirit World at her now adult children, knowing that her youngest was legally cast out of the family? How does she feel that no one, not even the Catholic Church, helped her husband keep the family together after her death? How does she, MY MOTHER, feel that HER RIGHT to be named as the mother of birth was taken from her? How does she feel about some other woman named on a record of false birth as the woman who gave birth to her child? I would guess that my mother is very sad, hurt, and confused. Common sense tells us that a person can be physically born only once, and yet, some other woman is now named on my only legal birth certificate as my mother by birth! That is a disgrace and a dishonor to the mother who actually carried me intimately inside her and then gave birth to me!

NCFA, you don’t seem to be concerned about the natural mothers (and fathers) who lose their rights to be named on a certified birth certificate for the child they gave birth to. Snarky people quip, “She gave up her parental rights!” No, my mother did not give up her rights at all. She died…of cancer… when I was three months old. My birth certificate was registered in the local Vital Statistics Office within five days after my birth. Yet, that certificate was stolen from me, and from my deceased mother, and from my distraught father, when New York State sealed my true birth certificate and issued a fake one!

My four full-blood siblings, who are also half-orphans, can get their birth certificates — but I cannot get mine. (No – this is not an invitation for them to jump on the bandwagon. I do not want them in my life. As has been previously stated, they are presently an unwelcome interference in my life and are certainly not wanted within the adoption reform community. Read my book to find out why.) The only difference between us is that I lost my legal right to be a part of that family. I lost the right to my birth certificate because adoption legally wiped out my identity and family.

Luckily for me, my natural father had my birth certificate, my baptismal certificate, and my hospital birth certificate. He gave these papers to my adoptive parents, who gave these papers to me after my siblings found me and exposed the secret my adoptive parents never wanted me to know. So I know what is behind the seal in the Vital Statistics Office in Buffalo City Hall, but I am still legally banned from ever asking for it and receiving it at the window.

For me, access to my birth certificate, and reunion with my natural family, is much more than finding the names of the people who created me. To see documented proof that I was born grounds me and connects me to the family I lost. And yes, identity formation of an adoptee certainly does include knowledge of the natural family from which the adoptee originated. To be denied this may seem trivial to some people, but when you don’t have the right to your birthrights, when you don’t have the needed validation of your physical self, there is a deep, psychic aching, a longing for connection.

This is widely published adoption psychology. But it appears the NCFA has not read anything written by Annette Baran, Reuben Pannor, Arthur Sorosky, Ken Watson, Miriam Reitz, Nancy Newton Verrier, David Brodzinsky, Ron Nydam, Betty Jean Lifton, Sandy Musser, Mirah Riben, Lorraine Dusky and Joyce Maguire Pavao. It also appears that you have little knowledge of H. David Kirk’s books, nor have you read The Handbook of Adoption: Implications for Researchers, Practitioners, and Families, by Rafael A Javier, Amanda L Baden, Frank A Biafora and Alina Camacho-Gingerich. Shall I dare mention Adam Pertman’s book? The way you, NCFA, slammed his organization and the careful research that went into The Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute’s publication, For the Records: Restoring a Legal Right for Adult Adoptees, tells me you won’t even look at Mr. Pertman’s book, Adoption Nation.

Anything that criticizes your sanctimonious view of adoption should automatically be discredited by your organization and the pack of hateful natural mothers you carry with you. However, the short list of valuable authors listed above (there are many more)ought to be read by all people who are separated by, and connected by, adoption. The NCFA’s lack of knowledge in the life-cycle of adoptees, natural parents and adoptive parents and extended family on both sides, is frightening.

Adoptees have the psychological task of integrating their two identities. They have to come to terms with whatever transpired that was severe enough that they lost their first family. All adoptees have two sets of real parents, whether or not you want to admit that fact, it is fact! When you pit natural parents against their adopted-out daughters and sons, or arm adoptive parents with scare tactics, or treat adoptees as perpetual children, you are creating hostility between people who are intimately joined together by the adoptee in the middle! The emotional burden of sorting out the whys, the hows, the what ifs, the physical differences and awkwardness of being raised by a family that does not resemble the adoptee, grief and mourning the lost family, and so much more, all falls on the shoulders of the adoptee. Natural mothers suffer in ways most people can’t imagine, and yet, your organization promotes hate, fear, disgust.

Here’s a little background about me. I’m an adoptee from New York State who was found in 1974 by siblings I never knew. You, NCFA, can interpret that as a violation of my right to privacy, or, you can see that my four full-blood siblings wanted their baby sister so they found me. Yes, of course there are privacy issues of my adoptive parents who were never consulted. Also, my siblings did not consult with our father before they contacted me. Remember, this was 1974. No one really knew how to proceed.

I joined the Adoption Reform Movement within that first year of reunion.

In the very early 1980s, when the New York State Adoption Registry was just a bill, our local adoptees’ support group began a letter campaign against it. By 1983, I became the leader of the local support group. Many members wanted more emotional support, while others wanted to continue to fight against the Mutual Consent Registry. I wrote to then-Senator Anthony Masiello frequently, and he wrote back. Through this personal approach, I was able to get one man to understand deeper issues of adoption. Then I got married, had children, so my activism tapered off. When the Registry Bill became law, I wrote to the Editor of our local newspaper voicing my objections. A scanned copy of that published editorial is printed above.

In addition to what’s stated in that editorial, in my letters to Senator Masiello, I wrote that the Registry would not be of any use to me. My mother was deceased and could not give her consent to the release of any information, non-identifying or identifying. Even though I had had a reunion and knew all there was to know for 9 years before the bill became law, I did have an 11 year old half brother who lived with my natural father and his mother, my step mother. Because of this, I would have to wait until he reached age 21 before I could apply to the Registry. But I knew my blood-kin. There was nothing to hide! The Mutual Consent Registry simply was not at all helpful to me in any way.

I also pointed out to Senator Masiello that the required written parental permission would have to be obtained from both of my adoptive parents, and my natural father, and all three would have to pay their fees and file to the Registry. I was outraged that, at age 28, I had to ask my parents’ permission to gain information on myself, and my adoption, from the New York State Reunion Registry. Even if I had obtained written parental permission from three parents, the fact that my natural mother was dead and could not provide her written consent, her death would prevent me from being granted any information, even after paying the adoptees’ higher fees than the parents’ fees.

When I had my second child, I could not keep up the fight against this ridiculous law. A few years went by. I learned that a political action group in another city was successful in taking parental permission out of the Registry law. Finally! Validation that in every aspect of life, when a person reaches the age of majority, that person is free from parental control and does not need written parental permission to do anything!

I never filed with the New York State Reunion Registry. Instead, I petitioned Surrogate’s Court to unseal my adoption records. It was a long, drawn out procedure, but successful. The Judge gave me photocopies of most of my sealed adoption papers because I had proven that I had known my natural father and my siblings for over twelve years. But I still did not gain access to my sealed birth certificate.

The Surrogate Court Judge who presided over my adoption in 1957 knew that my mother died and that her death notice was public record, yet he proceeded with my adoption as if it were completely closed. On the day of finalization, the judge ordered my birth certificate in the Vital Statistics Office in Buffalo City Hall to be sealed from me and anyone else. He then ordered a new birth certificate to be made in my adoptive name with my adoptive parents named as parents by birth. Then, he sealed my adoption papers in Erie County Hall in downtown Buffalo, New York.

My four older siblings can get certified copies of their birth certificates; I cannot get mine. The only difference is that I am adopted and they are not. This is pure discrimination — not based upon circumstances of an illegitimate birth, not based upon implied “privacy and confidentiality protection” for my deceased natural mother to keep me from learning her identity, not based upon implied “privacy and confidentiality protection” for my natural father to keep me from learning his identity — but based solely upon my status as an adoptee.

I do not have the same equal rights to a certified copy of my true birth certificate issued within five days after my birth as my siblings do to theirs, or as anyone else has to their birth certificate. Instead, I have a New York State certified copy of a record of false birth. This record of false birth (officially titled Certificate of Birth, and Certificate of Live Birth) fraudulently states that I was born to parents who actually adopted me.

To correct this legalized fraud, I demand immediate access to, and a certified copy of, my true Certificate of Birth (both the short form and the long form), and the immediate revocation of my phony birth certificate. In its place, I demand a truthful adoption certificate, with complete facts of adoption, including the naming of my parents by adoption, certified as true by New York State.

For all the conspiracy theorists who warn that giving adoptees a certified copy of their true birth certificate would give adoptees freedom to commit fraud because they then would have two forms of ID in two different names, I need to remind you that I had been given my original birth certificate by my adoptive mother just a few days after being newly reunited with my siblings. I was 18 years old at the time. I am 53 years old now. I have never presented my certified original birth certificate to do anything illegal. I know my name was changed legally, and I know right from wrong.

To the larger issue, I say: change the law. Make it mandatory on a Federal level that adoptees need both the true Certificate of Birth and the Certificate of Adoption to prove identity and citizenship. This is how it is done in more progressive countries, such as The Netherlands. Dutch adoptive parents fully accept the truth. Dutch adoptees have full knowledge of their birth and adoption, and they have both: their certificate of birth and their certificate of adoption. That is an equitable, honest, and moral method of recording adoptees’ births and adoptions. Change the law and social attitudes will change.

Women were jailed and beaten to gain the right to vote in 1920. Blacks rioted in the 1950s and 1960s to gain civil rights equality with Whites. The Adoption Reform began in 1953, but we have yet to see full equality for American adoptees to gain back their civil rights to their own birth certificates and an accurate adoption certificate.

Yet, adoptees had rights to an unsealed and unaltered birth certificate before 1930. What happened in 1930? Three men decided they would protect adoptees from the stigma of illegitimacy by creating a new birth certificate for adoptees. This is documented history. For more information on this, see page 53 of historian E. Wayne Carp’s book, Family Matters: Secrecy and Disclosure in the History of Adoption. See also Elizabeth J. Samuels’ book, The Idea of Adoption: An Inquiry into the History of Adult Adoptee Access to Birth Records. See also Janine M. Baer’s book, Growing in the Dark: Adoption Secrecy and its Consequences.

Yours Truly,

Joan Mary Wheeler,
born as
Doris Michol Sippel

Thoughts on Being an Imposter

In the past 35 years of being in reunion and having my true birth certificate and true baptismal certificate, along with my legal birth certificate that states that I was born to a woman who did not give birth to me, and a baptismal certificate in my adoptive name that states that the person named was baptized three years before that person legally existed, I find it amazing that many other people are confused by my identities.

I, however, am not confused. It is troubling to view my true and falsified documents, but I know who I am, and I know my legal name prior to adoption. I know my religious name prior to adoption. Actually,my religious name will always be Doris Michol Sippel because, according to the Catholic Church, once baptized, a person is always that name in the eyes of God.

Because I have these documents, people assume all kinds of nasty things about me. They assume that I falsified my own documents. Some people have accused me of fraud. Some people are so confused themselves about who I am that they argued with me because they could not warp their brain around my life’s complexities.

It is not the fault of reunion, nor is it that my adoptive mother threw my sealed birth records and adoption decree at me three days into my telephone reunion in 1974, that caused this “identity” problem for me. Opening up adoptees’ sealed records will not cause otherwise intelligent adoptees to go into a tale-spin. The identity confusion for the adoptee comes in when the adoptee realizes that the government is at fault. Changing an adoptee’s birth certificate is inherent within the process of legally adopting an adoptee. It is part of the legal documentation of the exchange of that baby or older child from one set of parents to the other set of parents. The parents do not change the infant’s name: they do not cause the legal incongruities — the court and Registrar of Vital Statistics do that.

However, adoptive parents come to accept, expect, and eagerly await their new adoptee into their lives and with the receipt of that baby, they (the adopting parents) wait for the “new” amended birth certificate to arrive in the mail. This “new” birth certificate “proves” that they are the child’s new parents! The “old” parents now no longer exist, so adoptive parents develop an attitude of Entitlement over their adoptee.

But they forget: they would not be ADOPTIVE parents if it were not for the conception and birth of that infant to another set of parents.

When we get to the point of telling  the truth in both adoptive-parent-to-adoptee relationships and on the documents that record adoptions (a falsified birth certificate should actually be a Certificate of Adoption), then this adoptee who sometimes feels like an impostor in her own life, will be happy.

Truth in adoption and reproductive technologies needs to happen.

Adoption Activists are Not Afraid of The Feds, Are You?

Perhaps “Unknown” and “?” and other Federal Government entities have been monitoring online adoptees and parents-of-adoption-loss for many years. I’ve heard of other adoptee bloggers who have had their free blogs simply vanish without warning, while others are still up, but are disabled from further posting or comments.

They do not want us to tell the truth. This is a civil war without guns.

To put an end to slavery, many thousands of people lost their lives. The courageous women who fought for the right to vote were savagely beaten, jailed, and ridiculed. Gays and lesbians face violence and death for being who they are. (I highly recommend that everyone see the play, The Laramie Project. Matthew Shepard should not have been beaten to death. His mother is a courageous woman.)

Any adoption reformers, or friendly strangers, who want to read and post comments, can certainly use your online usernames for your security. While many people do not like the Comment Moderation, I have had to do that as a filtering system to weed out certain people who have nothing better to do than harass with petty nonsense. I am not engaging, nor allowing, childish bickering. While it is true, as some of my former commenters pointed out in my most recent former blog, I should leavein the nonsense and my readers will know the difference. Trouble is, I will not give certain people a voice on my website because this is a matter of their violating past (and present) police Orders of Protection.

So, here’s another nugget to think about: a while back, two gay men in a committed relationship won the right to adopt and put both of their names on their adoptee’s new birth certificate. This was seen as a victory in the gay and lesbian community. Wrong. It is unethical for one persecuted group to usurp the rights of another and call it a victory. In this case, two committed gay men won the right to adopt. That is a victory. The immorality and denying the rights of another comes in when one takes a closer look at the ‘new’ birth certificate issue. All adoptees suffer the indignation of government seizure of their birth certificates for the perceived benefit of the government then making a false Certificate of Live Birth for every adoption. This is immoral. It should be illegal.

Perhaps I am leaving no room for debate and that’s why people are not commenting.

I do not think so.

I have seen plenty of blog posts on other blogs where people write in great detail of their feelings and experiences concerning this great American (and Global) tradition of falsifying adoptees’ birth certificates. A few people posted over the years that someone should gather up these individual stories into a book. That sounds like a project I would like to do. So, please feel free to leave a comment on my blog posts and/or on the Pages on Birth Certificates or Anti Adoption.

As Basdardette pointed out in her blog post: http://bastardette.blogspot.com/2009/11/joan-wheeler-is-baaaad-girl.html, there is much to think about from the negative publicity of that ABC article I agreed to be a part of. (Thanks, Basdardette, I sure did need a bit of humor!)

I hope my readers now realize I DID NOT SAY I would have preferred to live in FOSTER CARE rather than in my adoptive home, like that reporter claimed I said. The real answer is that I would have preferred to either have open visitation during my childhood with the siblings and father left behind while being raised in my adoptive home, or, the better solution would have been to not coerce my grieving father into giving up his newborn daughter and separating his children. Relatives from my adoptive family and my deceased mother’s family still blame my father for that. I do not. I DO blame liars and cheaters who prevented me from developing and maintaining relationships with my own blood kin and nuclear family. THAT is nothing short of child abuse.

You do not see that in divorce, and if you do, the spouse who violates visitation rights is in serious legal trouble. Why, then, is it assumed that adoptive parents and entire adoptive extended family systems can get away with lying and preventing an innocent child from access with her own blood family? Is it because they believe it is the relinquishing parent’s “fault”? Is it because the public perceives that once a child is “freed” for adoption, then that child is somehow “better off” because the natural parents “didn’t want” the child so the adoptive parents are seen as saviors?

The entire social and legal system of adoption needs fixing. Better yet, it needs to stop.

While non-adoptees and non-parents-of-adoption-loss in  the general public flap around and argue about adoption policy in private (grey) market adoptions, and child-trafficking schemes (black market adoptions, and adoption agency (white market) adoptions, there is something that goes on underneath it all. We must stop the government seizure of birth certificates of vulnerable infants and children, stop the sealing of these documents, and stop the automatic issuance of ‘new’, ‘amended’, falsified Certificates of Live Birth to adoptees. This nationwide practice is also a global practice. These are crimes committed against infants and children who grow up to be adults still bound by laws that restrict their personal and legal freedoms.  Even adoptees who are blissfully happy in their adoptive homes, and have no interest in searching, or no interest in a reunion with their natural families, even these adoptees have been personally and legally violated by the practice of falsifying government documents by a Court Judge and the Registrar of Vital Statistics who carries out the court order to issue a falsified Certificate of Live Birth. I am not a lawyer, but I must say, this seems to be lying under oath, which is fraud and perjury, is it not?  

I have put my legal name of Joan Mary Wheeler, and my non-legal (but once was legal) name at birth of Doris Michol Sippel, to many Letters to the Editor and paid commentary newspaper articles since I was age 19 in 1975. I have always stood up for the truth. In the days of the Internet and screenames and usernames, I have posted many comments under these nicknames. Either way, I am not afraid of the government looking in on my now paid-for website, clicking on the Pages to see when my book will be published.

I have published snippets of my two Certificates of Live Birth on this website, but they are printed in full in my book. I am not afraid of identity theft. Financially, I am in ruin now. I am taking steps to legally protect myself in starting a small business, but I am in no way afraid to go public with the personal and governmental crimes committed against me.

If this is only a States’ issue, then why is the Federal Government spying on me? The Pentagon? Really? Why?

Rebuttle from Yesterday’s ABC Article

This post, too, will be quick. No time for editing. This is written in response to this article: 

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/MindMoodNews/adoptees-cite-discrimination-landmark-study-push-open-birth/story?id=9138141

I agreed to be interviewed, but I DID NOT say I would have preferred to be in foster care!!! The foster care and guardianship topics came up in my interview when the reporter asked me, “You’re not anti adoption, are you?”

I said, “Yes, of course, I am!”

The reporter said, “Well, what would you like to see done differently?”

I said, “Preserving the natural family is the first step. If a child cannot be raised by her parents, then kinship care,, and after that option, then guardianship.” I DID NOT SAY THAT I WOULD HAVE PREFERRED TO BE RAISED IN FOSTER CARE!

That kind of twisting my words has resulted in, again, more misunderstanding abaout adoption.

Of course I enjoyed my childhood. I was raised by doting, loving parents who gave me everything a child could want: a secure home, tucks in bed at night, good meals, snuggles and cuddles as a young chid, a good education, family get-togethers with extended family at other homes and at parks, and emotional closeness. I loved my parents while I grew up and they loved me.

But that love was destroyed when I got that phone call from a sister I never knew. It was at that moment at age 18, and a high school senior, that I realized a rush of information and acceptance. The two most trusted people in the world to a child are her parents. And mine lied to me. Not only did they lie, but they willfully prevented me from knowing my siblings during the time when it is most crucial for a child to have siblings: childhood.

The reporter made me out to be some kind of uncaring nutcase. I resent that characterization.

Foster care would not have been my preferred choice to the childhood  that I did have. However, finding out at age 18 that I actually had full blood siblings, devastated me.

Here is what I wrote in the onnline comments to that article. I acnnot stay to read comments waitiing for psoting, or to answer email. I need to go back to  hospital for my dying adoptive mother. Mixed feelings? Yes. How would you feel if your parents lied to you and prevented you from growing up with your siblings?

My reprints from online comments:

Part 1

The responses to this story reflect the ignorance of adoption that still exist. It is appalling what people perceive adoption to be.

 I will be posting a series of posts (due to space limitations) to correct mistakes in the bad reporting and mischaracterization of my adoption and reunion. First, it is not the reunion that went bad, it was my entire adoption that was wrong. Reunion, itself, is not a bad thing, and in miss-representing what I said to the reporter gives the wrong impression. Reunions are a good thing, if handled appropriately. Adoptions can be a good experience, if handled appropriately.

 I was an 18 year old high school senior, raised a socially isolated only child by parents who chose to keep secrets from me. They knew I had siblings within 5 miles of our home, and they chose to prevent me from access to them. Meanwhile, members of my adoptive father’s family and members of my deceased natural mother’s family socialized with each other, passing around rumors about my natural father and secret stories of me growing up. I was unaware of this and so was my father. This was social engineering and certainly not the proper way to handle a “relative adoption”. I was treated as an outcast by most of my adoptive family after my reunion – good enough to be in the family while my adoption is secret, but toss me out after I reunite with my father and finally grieve the death of my mother. I did not create resentment – adoption myths and taboos did.

 Part 2

When my older full blood siblings found me, it was a shock. Of course it would be: to learn that the most trusted people to a child lied, on purpose, and treated me as a possession. My siblings and I and our father had as good a reunion as could be, considering I was at everyone’s mercy for they told me their versions of the truth and assumed that I should get on with life quickly.

That does not happen. The shock of being found, the shock of lies, and the growing turmoil of both families putting me down because I chose to become an adoption reform activist, resulted in life-long psychological trauma. Do not twist my words around to make it seem that I had a “Bad Reunion.” THAT is mischaracterization of what I told this reporter.

It is the total accumulation of misinformed relatives, societal myths, and definite discrimination against adoptees in general that made my life difficult. How can one person defend herself against an adoptive family network of rumors and disgust, a split natural family (one side believing that my father was responsible for my mother’s death from cancer, and my father not knowing the full extent of the involvement of other people in the adoption of his child. There was total lack of concern for him as my relinquishing father, total lack of concern for the five children at the death of our mother.

  Part 3

The only thing that mattered was that I, the adoptee, had a so-called better life to be away from wretchedness of the father and siblings left behind. I paid for the “sin” of accepting my father back into my life by having hate mail sent to me and hate phone calls from anonymous adoptive relatives who took it out on me that I even dared to have a reunion with a man they hated. THAT is what was wrong in my adoption and reunion—distortion of beliefs surrounding adoption. I DID NOT say to this reporter that I wished I was raised in foster care or was under guardianship. THAT is a twist of what I actually said.   

If my adoptive parents were truthful to me while I was growing up, if the judge had realized that there were four other children involved and made it a part of this adoption to have ongoing sibling and father visitation, and if there were no hateful rumors spread for 53 years, then there would have been a cooperation in visitation for the sibling group, I would have known that my mother died and where she was buried. Better yet, my family should never have been separated by adoption in the first place. Family preservation should have prevailed, but no, adoption was seen as the only solution.

 Part 4

I said that, adoption as a social practice should be replaced by family preservation. IF a child cannot be raised by her family, then guardianship should replace adoption because adoption creates a new identity for the child and destroys the natural family connections. Adoption itself causes distortions in peoples’ attitudes.

This reporter misrepresented what I told her. And she chose to ignore the very real birth certificates I sent her. All adoptees’ birth certificates are seized by the government and a new, falsified, birth certificate is issued claiming the parents of adoption actually gave birth. The reporter was shocked when I told her this, “They don’t still do that, do they?” she asked me. “Yes, they do!” I responded. I sent her copies of all of my fraudulent birth and baptismal certificates, and true birth certificates. But she chose to ignore my message.

This is why I have written a book — because reporters are too casual with information given to them. I have told my story to numerous reporters since 1975, and it is always the same. They report a twisted version of what I actually said.

  Part 5

This adoptee has faced a variety of discriminations:  1st in my relinquishment that could have been prevented, then my adoption that was full of lies from the very beginning, and the lies told behind me as I was growing in a social circle similar to The Truman Show. Do not place the burden on a “bad reunion” upon me. Remember this: an 18 year old faced with psychological shock of this magnitude does not emotionally heal well, nor do the adoptive parents who lied for 18 years and defended their right to lie by screaming and yelling and blaming the adoptee, nor do the siblings of that adoptee, and, the relinquishing father who was talked into giving up his newborn at the funeral of his dead wife.

Adoption itself is wrong. Morally, ethically, humanly, wrong. Adoption is a no-win situation.

This reporter was more interested in getting a decent photo to put my face in her story to prove the bad side of reunions, without printing the evidence I gave her to expose the worst discrimination of all: sealed and falsified birth certificates that all adoptees suffer. Creating new and fraudulent birth certificates for each adoptee, and forcing us to beg for our truthful birth certificates, is the biggest discrimination in adoption today.

Joan Mary Wheeler, born as, Doris Michol Sippel

November 23, 2009

Re-Post of Last Year’s Commemoration: Commentary on article “Anti-Adoption Advocates: How Should We Respond?”

This is a re-posting of a post from my former blog.

November 14, 2008

November is National Adoption Awareness month.

To commemorate this month-long awareness campaign, I wrote the following in response to the article by Heidi Hess Saxton, “Anti-Adoption Advocates: How Should We Respond?” Her article appears in an online publication called The Catholic Exchange:
http://catholicexchange.com/2008/11/11/114414/. Seventeen comments by her followers and adoption reformers are included at that site.

 

Dear Heidi Hess Saxton:

Where are you getting your information? Are you making this up? Do you have personal or professional experience to speak with authority, or are you basing your article on value judgments? Please, learn about adoption before you preach.

Pardon me, I see that you have adopted two children in 2002. That gives you a wealth of experience to draw upon. Honey, your journey is just beginning. Live life a little before you judge others. Remember the Golden Rule. You’ve got a lot to learn.

I am 52 years old. I am not “an adult adopted child”. I am an adoptee. Don’t patronize me as an “adult adoptee” either. Do you hear anyone else in society preface the description of others or themselves as “adult social worker” or “adult doctor” or “adult teacher”? No, of course not. I am a woman who was adopted as an infant. But because of backward thinking, I am called every name and label people want to assign to me. I am a normal person.

I was orphaned by the death of my mother — that’s MOTHER, not “birth” or “first” mother, but MOTHER, as in mother, the one who conceived and gave birth to me, who would have raised me had she not died. But because I was adopted as an infant, the definition of mother gets split. The legal term is “natural mother” and “natural father”. Says so in my adoption papers. Go look it up in any law library.

How dare you ridicule all adoptees and our parents! We are not “the enemy”. If we are your enemies, why do you want to adopt “the enemy”?

When I was 18 years old, and an “only child” in my adoptive home, I was found by a sister I never knew. That was in 1974 — nearly 35 years ago. I speak from personal experience as well as professional. I have been advocating for adoptees’ rights since I was 19. I earned my 2nd Bachelor’s in Social Work 9 years ago.

My loving adoptive parents did not ever want me to know the truth: they lied to me for the first 18 years of my life. It was their responsibility to tell the truth, but they wanted me all to themselves. It was the lie, and their fierce determination to keep me from the truth that made me turn anti-adoption. At the moment I received that phone call, I realized that the love and trust I had with the parents who raised me was gone. They held information about me to themselves, selfishly. There was nothing altruistic, saintly, or even remotely “Christian” about those first 18 years of my life. I also knew that I had to make a decision. I was 18 years old, not out of high school yet, facing a life-trauma that took my life as I knew it, and destroyed it. My parents lied, betrayed me, yet, here on the phone was a woman who said she was my sister. I decided, without having influence from any media or professional (because none existed in 1974) that I have two sets of real parents. Both sets of parents made me who I am. I have never deviated from that logical reality.

Mom was married to Dad for 10 years. They had four older children. Mom’s death made the 5 of us half-orphans. A Catholic Priest told Dad that the baby needs two parents. There was no caring help for the family to stay together, no Christian love, no bags of clothes, no money to help pay for a funeral or burial plot, no financial aid to help pay rent, no caring nuns or priests or missionaries to help with child care. There was no one to come over to help these children cope with the loss of their mother and their newborn sister. No one helped my father in any way. Except the advice from a Catholic Priest to give up the baby to adoption. The reality is that my family suffered tremendous loss. I hear no compassion from so-called Christians.

I do hear the venom with which you address pregnant teens and their babies. In your arguments, you believe that all adoptees come from horrible pregnant mothers who lead such horrible, destructive lives. Where is your compassion for these mothers? Do you know what its like to have your baby torn from you after you gave birth? It is a horrible experience! I have not lived that myself, but I have known mothers-of-adoption-loss for over three decades. I empathize with them, as a woman, and as a mother myself.

I was born in January 1956. I was issued a birth certificate. I was baptized, twice. Once at birth by a nurse because I was near death. After I recovered, I was baptized in a real religious Catholic ceremony at my dying mother’s bedside, one week before she died in March 1956. At my mother’s funeral, people were buzzing about the baby. Who will take care of her? In April, following the advice of a Catholic priest, my father relinquished me to the care of a couple who were to become my adoptive parents. My adoption became finalized one year and one week after by birth. These pre-adoptive parents called me Joan, but my legal and religious name was Doris.

Do you know that an infant hears inside the mother’s uterus? It’s true. I heard my siblings playing, talking to me before I was born. I heard my mother’s voice. I heard my father’s voice. I felt a shocking, empty void, after my premature birth as I lay in an incubator for 6 weeks. I suffered the trauma of losing my mother because of my isolation in that incubator. I was too young to know what happened, but my tiny body knew something was wrong. I did not hear the familiar voices of my siblings, nor my father, nor my mother. I was alone for a very long time.

Then, I heard my new name of Joan. My pre-adoptive parents called me Joan for 10 months before my adoption was finalized.

The seeds for life-long psychological trauma were set for me pre-birth. The damage was compounded by adoption separation.

It is my opinion that you need to study the dynamics of pregnancy and birth, and separation trauma experienced by all adoptees.

My father was not given any paper to sign that guaranteed him to any privacy or confidentiality. Nor was he verbally promised confidentiality. He was not hiding in fear that I’d track him down. No, he never wanted to give me up in the first place. The judge told him that he could look for me when I turned 18. Yes, that’s right. Even my adoption papers say that after 18 years, my father could contact me. When I reach the age of majority, I would become an autonomous being, free from the legal binds of adoptive parental control over me. My father loved me. He anticipated my birth. I was his youngest child.

I lived 5 miles away from my natural family. My Catholic adoptive family, with all the extended family, knew the truth. They even knew my natural mother’s extended family. Photos were traded back and forth. Stories of “Joanie’s phases” were traded from adoptive relatives to natural blood kin. I, and my siblings, and our father, were kept out of this spy ring. While my father thought he relinquished me to a private, legal transaction between he and my new parents, he did not know that there would be contact between his deceased wife’s family and my adoptive family. He was purposely kept out of the communication. He was told to stay away, to not interfere, and he did not interfere. All of the other relatives interfered.

In divorce, and re-marriage of parents, there is no sealed birth certificate. The child is shared by two parents and their respective new spouses. Blended families are made adding half siblings, enriching lives by diversity and continuity. But in adoption, a hard break is made. For no clear reason. No one owns their children. We are innocent children whose lives are manipulated and mangled by others who are supposed to looking out for our well-being. Children are victims of sealed, closed adoption. Adoption in America is a severe trauma to children. Adoption in America also is a trauma to adoptees later in life as we are forbidden, by law forever, to know from whence we came.

Three years after my birth and baptism, my adoptive parents asked the Catholic Church to issue a baptismal certificate in my adoptive name so that I may go to Catholic Schools. That’s right. The Catholic Church lied! A priest took the date out of the Church book in which my baptism was recorded. He wrote in my new adoptive name, and the names of my adoptive parents, but, because the godparents were ever-important, he named them on my new, amended, fake and phony and fraudulent baptismal certificate! My godparents were related to my deceased mother! OH NO! The identities of my real, factual, godparents were named on the fraudulent baptismal certificate! Joan Wheeler was not baptized. Doris Sippel was baptized.

For the Catholics out there, no, for the non-Catholics who do not know, listen up. When a Catholic child grows up and partakes of religious rites of passage, it is with the name at baptism—the name that God recognizes—that a child receives Holy Communion, receives Confirmation, takes vows as a nun or a priest, or takes vows in matrimony.

Do you understand what I just wrote? How many violations to my personhood is the Catholic Church going to inflict upon me? And other adoptees?

My birth certificate (notice I said “birth certificate” and not “original birth certificate”) was sealed and a new, fake, phony, fraudulent birth certificate was issued in its place. The parents named on this “birth certificate” did not make love to create me. The mother named on this “birth certificate” did not give birth to me. Yet, the document clearly states that this mother gave birth to me on my birth date, at the hospital in which I was actually and factually born, and that I was a single birth, and the time of my birth was indicated. This document is not my birth certificate at all! It is a government-perpetrated fraud!

My adoptive mother and father were infertile. Does it not strike anyone out there that pretending to give birth is a psychological denial of facts? When the Registrar of Vital Statistics issues a fake birth certificate, adopting parents believe the lies. They can live in their happy dream world because the law created falsified birth certificates: adopting parents are following the law, so they believe a falsehood.

To be absolutely true, an adoption certificate should be issued upon the legal finalization of adoption. An adoption certificate would state the facts of the adoption. The birth certificate states the facts of birth. Both documents should remain open to the person named on it: the person born and the person adopted.

Any minor child who is not adopted has the legal right to ask for a copy of her birth certificate. It is the obligation of the parents to show the document to the child and to give the document to the child at the age of majority. Up until the age of majority, the parents are legally responsible for minor children; a child cannot apply for school attendance, parents do that. In a healthy parent-child relationship, the child is told the facts of birth.

Americans think that adoption means the legal possession of a child. In the Netherlands, a progressive society, adoptive parents know their place. They are respectful of the adoptee’s natural parents; they have the legal responsibility to tell the child the truth. The minor child has the legal right to ask for the birth certificate and adoption certificate. The adoptive parents are issued an adoption certificate for the minor child. Dutch adoptive parents know that they are not the only parents. There are no sealed nor amended records in Holland. Openness gives freedom of communication in a loving, respectful adoptive home.

Just so you understand, as a social worker, I’ve worked with homeless people. I’ve worked with many women who have had abortions, and they were all in financial straights, unable afford a child. Many women were married and had other children. Some women are too old to carry a pregnancy that would result in maternal harm, and the fetus has defects because of the age of the egg at fertilization. Some women are taking medicines for existing health issues of their own and an unplanned pregnancy happens. Prescriptions often interfere with the developing baby, rendering the baby a deformed mass of fused or missing bones with no brain or missing internal organs. Some women were beat up by their boyfriends or fathers and had no other option. Only a pregnant woman and her doctor can make an informed decision about what to do with an unplanned (not unwanted) pregnancy. Many women chose abortion rather than adoption because they could not see going through a pregnancy to lose a baby to an uncertain future with strangers; punishment upon punishment. The finality of death was a better choice than to send their baby to strangers and know that they would never see that baby again. A person can grieve a death, but the agony of losing a child to adoption is a loss women never recovery from. Closed adoption and closed records are very damaging. Open adoption is not enforceable; the records are still sealed and falsified.

Why is it that Catholics preach love, but treat adoptees as villains? Why do you see us as the enemy? If we are your enemy, then please, don’t adopt! Stay away! We don’t want adoptive parents such as you! You treat our natural parents and our siblings as villains also. We come from these people so don’t make them out to be evil! If they are evil, then so are we! And if we are evil, we should not be adopted! You wouldn’t want us if we that bad! And then, to top it off, you demand that adoptees should be forever banned from the truth of our births? How cruel! You do not speak of loving kindness, decency or respect or honor. You are spewing hate and prejudice with every word written by Heidi Hess Saxton!

And yes, the rights of the adoptee trump the rights of either set of parents. Why? Because an adoptee was a minor child when the adoption took place. No other autonomous adult must ask permission of any parent to do anything. No adult should be held as prisoner by either adoptive parents or natural parents. You do not play god over adoptees! According to you, you think you have the right to own adoptees. That’s slavery. Discrimination—Violation of our civil and human rights! The United Nations in UNICEF has a global mandate: to register the BIRTH of all children in the world.

When my adoptive father died of brain cancer in 1982—8 years after my reunion began—my adoptive cousin got out of her car and came up to me as I was preparing to see my father in the casket at the funeral home. She said, “You OPENLY declare that you have another father, so that means you do not love this dead father. You do not belong here.” This cousin, whom I played with as a child, treated me with such hateful disdain! She certainly is not a good, Christian woman!

Notice that she said OPENLY as loud and as disgusted as she could! Why, she made it seem as though I was OPENLY having sex with the funeral director!

Here is another lovely Catholic bit for you: Bastards are forbidden into heaven! Yes, it’s true! It’s even in the bible! We all know, if it’s in the Bible, it must be true! Deuteronomy 23:2—“No bastard shall enter the assembly of the Lord; even to the tenth generation none of his descendants shall enter the assembly of the Lord.”

How’s that for loving kindness?! Now, think about what it is you want! You want unwed mothers to give up their illegitimate bastard kids so they can be free from the stain of the curse of their birth, yet, the Bible says bastards won’t get to heaven. You want these bastards to grow up ever grateful for the blessings of being cared for by people who feel that the very people who conceived and gave birth to us, are evil in some way. You want to prevent us from contact with our own blood kin! Is this family values? Is this done in love? I don’t think so.

How many of you have the hobby of genealogy? Feel Proud? Well, don’t prevent adoptees from tracing their family trees for the sheer joy and curiosity of it. You enjoy it, so can adoptees. Butt out of our lives. When we are adults, we are not subject to the constraints of parents. We ought to have ongoing visitation with our blood kin during childhood and into adulthood. That’s what happens in divorce, so why treat adoptees and our blood kin any differently?

Is Sarah Palin’s 17 year old daughter pregnant? Yes! Why isn’t anyone coercing this pregnant teen to give up her baby to adoption? Isn’t there a needy couple out there who would benefit from being blessed with the ‘gift of life’, the ‘bad seed’, the ‘illegitimate bastard’ from such a prestigious, ‘good quality family stock’? The child’s birth certificate will be amended, the original birth certificate will be sealed, and no one else would ever know! Oh, and, best of all, that baby will never know that his grandmother was a Vice Presidential candidate as the Governor of Alaska! Why would the adopted bastard child want to know that anyway? He’s now adopted and has a whole new set of parents and extended family and family history! Adoption wipes away his need to know anything about his blood kin!

Did you know that John Lennon lost his older sister to adoption? How would YOU feel if you were adopted and found out now, in 2008, that your younger brother was John Lennon? He was shot to death 28 years ago, but, hey, you are adopted and you don’t need to know anything about your blood kin!

I am proudly anti-adoption. I am proudly anti-Catholic, too. I openly declare that I have two real sets of parents — that is the bare truth of all adoption.

The next debate will be “embryo adoptions”! There is no legal adoption; embryo adoptions are actually swapped. Because the recipient mother of a frozen embryo gives birth, she is named on the birth certificate, but she is not the only mother. Nor is her husband the only father. How many Catholics out there donate their sperm? Eggs? How many Catholics depend on the prostituted services of sperm and egg donors to make their children? What lies are you telling your children?

For GOD’s sake, people! Get an education! No, sorry, correction: for ADOPTEES’ sake, and our natural parents’ sake, GET AN EDUCATION!

Ignorance is at the root of all prejudice.

Joan Wheeler, BSW
born and baptized as Doris Sippel

This is the article to which the above responds to —

“Anti-Adoption Advocates: How Should We Respond?”
by Heidi Hess Saxton, printed online in The Catholic Exchange:
http://catholicexchange.com/2008/11/11/114414/

November 11th, 2008

… … … …

Comments From Last Year:

Submitted on 2008/12/05 at 7:12pm by Lisa Kay, Fla

I stumbled onto your blog via a link on the 73adoptee blog. Wow! You hit the nail on the head on so many points that I won’t even try to comment on the ones that ring especially true to my own opinions and experiences, or are otherwise noteworthy.I’m laughing as I ponder whether you should be an attorney, a media pundit, or a politician. Regardless, I’m glad that I’m on your side of the argument.Hope you won’t mind if I recommend your blog in a post on Adoption Database’s message board about blogs the members should check out. [If you don’t want me to, please contact me.]A new fan,Lisa KayFL Adoptee Searchingb. Jan 2x, 1963Gainesville, Florida

… …

……….

2008/11/18 at 4:04pm  janet blue

Thank you for speaking the truth about adoption. I wonder if my adopted children will feel the same when they are allowed to come and find me. They are not allowed to write to me at the moment but I keep looking for them. Janet UK

… …

2008/11/16 at 8:45am  mommaL3

THANK YOU! Your article was painful at times to read ,but oh so refreshingly honest and if there is one thing this reunited Mother of adoption loss insists on is honesty no matter how painful .I had enough lies ,when in my youth ,I was made to believe I had nothing that my daughter needed and the love for my daughter was used against both of us. Ms.Hess is no different than the other profiteers that have their own agendas for separating infants from their Mothers .Again they are trying to use us to keep business as usual. BTW,I never was promised confidentiality nor did I ask for it. I didn’t need protection from my own child.The real question should be “what do they need protection from? I see they also are not above trying to use God to continue this evil industry.. If anything many churches should apologize for what they did to us instead of justifying their actions and trying to make the victims the ones at fault. But than that is what abusers do, isn’t it? My God ,have they no shame???That was a rhetorical question. Thanks again Joan and I am sorry for your losses caused by adoption. Linda Webber

… …

2008/11/15 at 10:55am  Sandy Young

Doris, Send a copy of your piece to her. I did. She needs to hear this stuff from various sources. She needs to know that mothers and their children are hurt by these unnecessary separations. If you haven’t yet read them, her comments on The Daily Bastardette, Adoption and its Triad, and my own,Musing-Mother are worth reading. Her head is clearly spinning on her shoulders about now, and her veneer is slipping! Thank you for your very impassioned and lucid comments. I hope she gets a chance to read them. heidi.hess.saxton@gmail.com

… …

2008/11/14 at 9:20pm  jimm

Excellent post. Like Pennegal, I doubt they will print your comment; they wouldn’t print mine. Truth and the Catholic Church don’t go hand-in-hand.

… …

 

2008/11/14 at 7:42pm  triona

Joan, thank you for speaking out against this load of drivel. I bet they won’t post it, either, but at least by posting it on your own blog you will be heard.

… …

2008/11/14 at 7:34pm  Web2.0PRDude

You might want to cross-reference this article with the reference material by John Syrtash, a Toronto based Family and Divorce Lawyer http://www.freemychild.com/fl_articles.html

… …

2008/11/14 at 6:41pm  Pennagal

Excellent commentary, Joan. I seriously doubt they will allow this to appear on the website because it countradicts the rosy picture they have of adoption as the cure for all ill. But it needed to be said and, I hope, that Ms. Saxton will read it.

Keep the Birth Certificate Discussion Going

OBC edited

It is important to keep the dialogue going concerning adoptees’ birth certificates and our natural parents’ rights to the birth certificate of the daughter or son they lost to adoption. This post is a reminder to read and leave a comment on the Page titled “True Birth Certificates”.