Judged:
1
Apr 5, 2008
Adoptees deserve to have rights to records April 3, 2008 Under legislation pending in the state Senate and Assembly, adoptees will have the same right to their birth records and early health histories as every ... via Star-Gazette.COM
Comments
|
Judged:
1 |
|
|
Judged:
1 |
|
|
Judged:
1 |
|
|
Joined: Nov 16, 2007
Comments: 16
ISP Location:
Dallas, TX
|
Judged:
2 NY has had a "mutual consent registry" in place for over 20 years, in all that time less than 10% have been matched. Not all adoptees want a reunion in order to obtain basic genealogical and medical history information. And most (80-90% in surveys and statistics in other states) first parents would like contact with the sons and daughters they relinquished. What is holding NY back? Other than Sheldon Silver's refusal to allow the bills out of committee, that is. |
|
Judged:
1 |
|
|
Judged:
2 And DO NOT cite implied Birthmother's confidentiality issues. I am a Birthmother. I was never promised confidentiality nor was it ever implied. On the contrary, I was laboring under the mistaken belief that my son would be able to contact me when he reached the age of 18. Wake up NY State- you can save lives! Let's turn this around NOW. |
|
|
AOL
|
Judged:
2 |
|
AOL
|
Judged:
2 NO problems have arisen in these other countries, NOBODY'S lives have been shattered, and in fact, it has proven to be a great benefit to everyone involved. It is time for the United States to stop treating adopted adults like perpetual children and stop meddling in our personal lives. |
|
Judged:
1 |
|
|
Judged:
1 |
|
|
Judged:
1 It's their information, not the state's. Non-adopted people don't have to question this right. Why, under any circumstances, should adopted people? It's nonsense for them to be denied rights that are the prerogative of others -- unless of course, one believes that there are two classes of citizen. |
|
|
Judged:
2
1
1 |
|
|
Judged:
2 Why is the state protecting 3rd parties who have no right to promise any surrendering parent privacy? A review of the adoption and surrendering rights laws PROOVES there is NO RIGHT TO SECRECY. NONE. Check out the Adoptee Access Report the Evan B. Donaldson Insititute did on access to records for adult adoptees. http://www.adoptioninstitute.org/research/200... They are a non invested research institute. They don't get funded by agencies, they don't get funded by adoptees, THEY HAVE NO INVESTED INTERESTS IN OPENING RECORDS. THE ONLY people who have "interests" in keeping our records sealed are: 1) the agencies ( who did the unlawful promising and took part in the black market adoptions ) and they want to keep that covered up as long as possible. 2) right to lifers - and the right lifers really need to BUTT OUT. They have NO BUSINESS being involved in open records. They advocate for women to "keep their babies and not chose abortion" and then they wont BUTT OUT when it comes time to GIVE US OUR INFORMATION. Unfortunately they've been too busy advocating against us to LOOK AT THE HISTORY OF OPENING RECORDS. Statistics show that all of the states who have opened up their records ( and oregon had NO change in "right to life bills" around the time of opening the records eg: parental consent pre-abortions laws took place in a couple open records states where the RTL'ers are claiming that those bills are the reason the abortions decreased) ALL of the states who've opened records have had abortions DROP. Adoptions INCREASE. When are people going to just GET IT. There is no right to privacy. Opening records does NOT increase abortions. 1 + 1 = 2 |
|
|
Judged:
3
2
2 At one point in history, no one was denied the right to his or her own birth record, adopted or not adopted. Sealing records began in the 1930's to hide the shame of out-of-wedlock pregnancy and infertility, as well as provide a means allowing adoptive parents privacy from birth parents. Some states did not seal records until much later, while Alaska and Kansas never sealed records. For anyone who believes records are sealed in order to protect the anonymity of the natural parents, consider the actual law. 1. It is highly notable that records only seal upon the finalization of an adoption. They only stay sealed if an adoption remains intact. They do not seal upon relinquishment, are not sealed while the child is in foster care and are not sealed while the child is in an adoptive placement that is not yet finalized by the court. 2. If an adoption fails, i.e. the adoptive parents "return" the child, the original birth record with the natural parents' names on it, is unsealed and re-established as the child's only legal birth certificate. 3. Adult adopted citizens in states with sealed records, such as New York, can gain access to their birth records as long as they petition the court and get a court order. 4. No one has ever been able to bring forth a relinquishment document that promises anonymity. Even the greatest opponents of open records, such as the National Council For Adoption, has ever been unable to produce such a document. Clearly, there is no guarantee of anonymity or confidentiality, nor can such be promised under the law as written. Although this is not truly an issue about reunion, the topic always brings with it discussion of reunion. Therefore, I shall briefly cover this issue. Reunions happen all the time under sealed records laws. Like other citizens, adopted persons and natural parents are capable of handling their own relationships, without state interference. They do not need others speaking for them or deciding what is best for them as though they were children incapable of doing so themselves. This is an infringement of the free association enjoyed by other citizens in our society. New York is practicing discrimination when adopted citizens are the only citizens denied access to their own factual, recorded documents of their OWN births. Because there is no right to anonymity in our society, natural parents are not being denied any right others have. However, ALL other citizens except adopted citizens are granted the right to access their own actual, original birth certificates. Even those given up for adoption but not adopted have that right. Why should the act of someone ADOPTING a relinquished child remove this right to equal treatment under the law? |
|
|
Judged:
1
1 |
|
|
AOL
|
Judged:
1
1 NY join the 21st century, restore rights to adopted adults! |
|
Judged:
3
1
1 |
|
|
Judged:
3
1
1 |
|
Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.
| Topic | Updated | Last By | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|
| New York Business Hall Of Fame Selects 2008 Ind... | Wed | Pat Morgan | 1 |
| Wholesale Shoes Distributor Adds 300 New Shoes,... (from Apr '07) | Aug 2 | kata | 98 |
| Hey guys and girls look at this video plz :) | Aug 1 | Chaddy | 1 |
| I think my website, PEEKFACE.COM, sucks? (from Oct '07) | Jul 28 | LeafBuilder - | 2 |
| Seidel Enterprises Performing All Gannett Mailr... | Jul 25 | Jack Henry | 4 |
| Dispute Leads To Triple Stabbing In Brooklyn | Jul 24 | JACKIE | 2 |
| Ex-Teacher Arrested Again for Having Sex With Teen | Jul 22 | LevittownStu... | 2 |