An Important Update to Georgia HB524
The Georgia Adoptee Rights bill HB524 has been sent to subcommittee to work on the amendment to the language of the contact preference form. The hearing with the subcommittee is on Monday, Jan. 27 at 4pm. If you can possibly attend, PLASE DO SO! Bring friends. The more people that show up, the more the legislators wills see that this is an important matter! Directions: take the east/west MARTA line and get off at Georgia State. Subscribe to the GEAR email list for future updates.
THE CONTACT PREFERENCE COUNTER PROPOSAL PROBLEM:
The Chairman Representative Welch will have a proposal on Monday to:
1. Give an option on the Contact Preference Form for a birthmother name redaction on the OBC
and
2. If there is no CPF on file, the adoptee will NOT get an original birth certificate!!!
Immediate help is needed in contacting the following 11 subcommittee members to reiterate that HB524 is a civil rights issue and urging them to vote ‘Do Pass’ on Monday on the GEAR supported language of the original opposed legislation as introduced by Buzz Brockway.
IMPORTANT: Make sure you state that you do NOT agree to the Welch proposal. There will be a counter proposal which sticks to the CPF already agreed to so if people are writing letters, they must specify to NOT AGREE to the Welch proposal for anonymity.
Aside from the fact that a redaction of the birthmother’s name is not necessary and overkill, making the actual release of the OBC upon the necessity of a contact preference form to be on file is just not feasible.
The great majority of birthmothers do NOT keep track of such things like a change in legislation. Plus it is not like the government is going to notify them that they must get a contact preference on file.
What other legislation change does any government advise personally a party subject to such laws?
And even if the government was to personally notify ALL birthmothers who relinquished in Georgia, what address and names are they going to use? The decades old address on ay available adoption records and the names used by mothers in maternity homes are not going to be the same or valid in most cases. Plus are the agencies and private lawyers going to open up their files to try to help mothers be informed?
The Georgia government does not have the record keeping or manpower to search out all these mothers.
And if “privacy’ is a concern, is it not still better to allow the actual CHILD of the mother to be given the name and let to make contact should they choose to PRIVATELY with their mother? How are government workers BETTER able at contacting birthmothers and being allowed privy to files? They are not!
The result will be that adoptees will NOT be restored access to their Original Birth Certificates.
In addition, how are the rights of one party to be decided according to the will of another? A right cannot be taken away based on another’s desires. It then is not a right, but some sort of privilege. Adoptee Rights Are CIVIL RIGHTS!!!
That is just insane.
PLEASE CONTACT the members of the Welch Subcommittee –HB524
ALL EMAILS IN ONE LINE; copy and paste in one fell swoop!
awelch@swblawfirm.com, simone.bell@house.ga.gov, joyce.chandler@house.ga.gov, pam.dickerson@house.ga.gov, delvis.dutton@house.ga.gov, stacey@staceyevans.org, repjacobs@gmail.com, earnest.smith@house.ga.gov, jason.spencer@house.ga.gov, keisha.waites@house.ga.gov, willie.talton@house.ga.gov
- Representative Andrew Welch, Chairman awelch@swblawfirm.com
- Representative Simone Bell (Has stated she will support HB524) simone.bell@house.ga.gov
- Representative Joyce Chandler joyce.chandler@house.ga.gov
- Representative Pam Dickerson pam.dickerson@house.ga.gov
- Representative Delvis Dutton delvis.dutton@house.ga.gov
- Representative Stacey Evans stacey@staceyevans.org
- Representative Mike Jacobs repjacobs@gmail.com
- Representative Earnest Smith earnest.smith@house.ga.gov
- Representative Jason Spencer jason.spencer@house.ga.gov
- Representative Keisha Waites keisha.waites@house.ga.gov
- Representative Willie Talton willie.talton@house.ga.gov
In a study of American adolescents, the Search Institute found that 72 percent of adopted adolescents wanted to know why they were adopted, 65 percent wanted to meet their birth parents, and 94 percent wanted to know which birth parent they looked like. (American Adoption Congress, 1996)
The psychological literature has established that the desire of 60 to 90 percent of adoptees wanting to obtain identifying information regarding their biological parentsis a normative aspect of being adopted. (American Adoption Congress, 1996)
MY Letter should a sample be needed for anyone to use: It’s been sent!!
Good Afternoon,
I am writing to you in regards to Georgia proposed legislation HB524 to amend Code Section 19-8-23 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to adoption records, and Code Section 31-10-14 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, so as to provide for the issuance of a copy of an original birth certificate to certain adult persons who were adopted.
I am very concerned about the possible changes in regards to the language of the contact preference forms that would veer away from the original non discriminatory purpose of this bill.
While I understand the desire of the government to feel the need of having some aspect of a contact preference, I must reiterate that factual evidence shows that this desire to “protect the privacy of birthmothers’ is not needed;
Adoptees original birth certificates were sealed upon the finalization of their adoption, often months and sometimes years, after the legal relinquishment. Until that time the original birth certificate was unsealed and the hence, there was no privacy that could be protected.
In other countries and in the US where we can see historically the rates of the contact preferences issued by birthparents, across the board less than 1 to 4 % of relinquishing mothers employ the contact veto. The simple fact is that it is less than 1% of all relinquishing mothers desire to never set eyes on their children again. In fact, in New Zealand, after 20 years of open records, they decided to forgo the contact preferences since the numbers were so low. The great majority of mothers desire to know what happened to their babies and, in fact, had never forgotten them at all.
I would also like to refer to Elizabeth J. Samuels’s Surrender and Subordination: Birth Mothers and Adoption Law which examines the common adoption mythology surround “promises of confidentiality” in regards to studying a collection of actual surrender documents from around the country. It is a perfect collection of factual evidence that completely puts an end to the idea that birthmother’s were given any sort of legal protection and privacy. And in fact, it produces evidence to the contrary; 40% of “surrender documents commonly contained a promise by the birth mother that she would not seek out her child”. So any protection implied was to the adoptive family, not the mothers who gave birth.
That all notwithstanding, having the adult adopted citizens access to their own legal documentation being determined on whether or not a birth parent actual files a contract preference form is completely unacceptable.
It has already been established that 99% of mothers welcome contact with their adopted children, but the bigger question is since when does any government legislate the relationships between two parties of adults? And how will be that the Georgia government shall intend to notify the birthparents of their required input?
The great majority of birthmothers do NOT keep track of such things like a change in legislation and if a mother supposedly is in some sort of ‘hiding’ how will she be notified of such a change? What other legislation change does any government advise personally a party subject to such laws?
And even if you do intend to personally notify ALL birthmothers who relinquished in Georgia, what address and names are you going to use? The decades old address on any available adoption records and the names used by mothers in maternity homes are not going to be the same or valid in most cases. Will you require that the agencies and private lawyers going to open up their files to try to help mothers be informed?
The Georgia government does not have the record keeping or manpower to search out all these mothers, nor do adult adopted citizens require such hand holding.
Plus, if we contend that “privacy’ is a concern, is it not still better to allow the actual child of the mother to be given the name and let to make contact should they choose to PRIVATELY with their mother? How are government workers better able at contacting birthmothers and being allowed privy to files? If the hypothetical mother is living in some state of fear that the facts of her relinquished child come to light, how will being contacted by a form letter help her feel better? How would this mother feel knowing that countless workers opened her file, searched for her and sent her this information?
If the Georgia government does not intend to address every mother in Georgia that gave birth and relinquished a child, then how is it that you propose that mothers shall know to file this form? The fact is that countless mothers were already told to “be there” for their children to contact them” when they are ready”. So they are merely waiting patiently and most will never take it upon themselves to make a first move on any account even to file such a form or even to know that their input is required.
In addition, how are the rights of one party to be decided according to the will of another? A right cannot be taken away based on another’s desires. It then is not a right, but some sort of privilege.
The result will be that adoptees will NOT be restored access to their Original Birth Certificates and that will mean that the state of Georgia is still discriminating against adult adopted citizens.
It is a very simple bill that does not need to get muddled up on unfounded fears. Adoptee Rights are civil rights. Treat adopted people the same as the non adopted.Nobody requires additional protections. Please keep the current proposed language of Buzz Brockway’s legislation as it is. Anything less is not helpful and will not be supported by the adoption community.
In truth,
Claudia Corrigan D’Arcy
Birthmother & Adoptee Rights Advocate
http://www.MusingsoftheLame.com
BN’s letter/submitted testimony is going out after I get home from work tonight. *Have to leave in 20 minutes for work. What is the name of the subcommittee. I can’t find it anywhere for the 2014 session (onl2-13 session).
Thanks to Claudia for the sample letter. It’s sent.
As an AP, I think it’s important to help advocate for Adoptee rights as well. My adoptive kids will know everything that is on their OBC anyway, but that doesn’t change their right to hold it. It’s a sham to pretend they were sealed to protect Birth mothers privacy anyway. They were sealed to protect the adoptive parents. Anyone who says otherwise is probably high or deluded.
After both parents passed a few yrs. ago, I was able to obtain a partial record with the customary edited / redacted BC. Did not realize at the time that I was only given
( for $ 150.00 for MY RECORDS )a half truth and critical names, real dates, places , etc. were NOT INCLUDED ! Part of my life is in some dusty banker’s box in GA and I want it. Please keep me apprised of current developments of HB 524.
Thanks for your work and inspiring me to keep pushing the ball up the hill. . .