Tomorrow, I shall get up at the crack of dawn. I have my choice of buses to get on.. 6, 6:15 or 6:30, the latter being the last one I can get on and be in NYC on time. By 9:00 am, I shall be sitting in a meeting with other like minded ones…discussing the EBD Open Records paper that garnished so much media attention and trying to come up with the next step, that as a nation, we can make to get adoptees access to their OBCs.
Kudos to Adam Pertman and the Evan B Donaldson Adoption Institute for putting this on. We have 8 states down and another 42 to go. Sadly, some, like NJ, have been fighting this battle for years! THIRTY! So very sad of us, as a nation, to see this as a good and acceptable thing.
In any case, I am looking forward to going tomorrow. I have the few bits of acceptable winter clothing in the wash right now. I am very limited as to what fits over this dern arm and mutant cast! But, I feel I can pull it off.. long as I bring a small bag that allows use of my good arm! And despite the very early wake up call, I know I can nap on the bus and such. And breakfast awaits me at the meeting! Just give me coffee as I walk through the door!
I anyone has a statement or point you would like me to address or make, now is the time! For me, though it has been said as impossible, I am going to say my usual “Let’s go National!” After all, that’s what I do!
Oh, good for them for doing this!
I actually searched my own blog for some “sound byte” (HA!) to give you. I don’t think my latest with “What The Fuck?!” would be the best quote to use (frustration with this issue going higher and higher), but I think what it boils down to is this:
I think that, in discussions with anyone, including the icky NCFA, the conversation needs to stick to The Issue — civil rights, nothing more, nothing less; that adoptees are made second-class citi
You don’t have to use these at all, but they sum up my thoughts about open records and are from a few of my posts:
— Open Records and privacy
I don’t see as readily the huge link between privacy and open adoption records. I am a huge proponent of the right to privacy; it’s a big issue with my job [as a librarian] . . . . . . HOWEVER, I don’t think privacy can be used in the same way with open records FOR THIS REASON:
ADOPTEES MUST BE PERMITTED ACCESS TO THEIR OWN RECORDS JUST LIKE EVERYONE ELSE HAS ACCESS TO THEIR RECORDS.
In other words, saying that an adult adoptee is invading someone’s privacy by requesting THEIR OWN RECORDS is saying that said adoptee is INVADING HIS/HER OWN PRIVACY.
THE ADOPTEE’S RECORDS SHOULD BELONG TO BOTH THE BIRTHPARENTS AND TO THE ADOPTEE. Just like with other people. There should be NO distinction.
— in my ever-so-humble opinion: when one is born, the record of his/her birth belongs to both the person who was born and the parents to whom he/she was born. There is no privacy issue between those three people.
That is how those of us who end up living with the people who gave birth to us exist in this world.
Am I missing something here? Am I being obtuse? Is there a legitimate, compelling reason for someone who ends up not living with the person to whom he/she was born to not have the same record of his/her birth??
I can’t think of one legitimate, compelling reason. Why is this person treated as a second-class citizen because of the decisions of his/her parents to not raise him/her? It makes no sense to me. To me, the discussion should stop there. As it has been said before, people cannot be forced into having a relationship with others. There are laws for things like that, laws against harassment and laws against stalking. Why someone cannot have some pieces of paper that pertain to HIMSELF or HERSELF is simply beyond me. It does not require the person to talk to or meet his/her first parents. It doesn’t bind the first parents and his or her relinquished child(ren) in any way, shape or form. It is NOT about a relationship. Can that be any clearer? It is about records, and that is ALL that it’s about.
I’m so glad that you’re going, Claud.
ACK, I need to proof my comments better.
That should read:
“that adoptees are made second-class citizens by not having their birth records like the rest of the population does.”
You go girl, and tell us all about it!!!
This video and song says it all for open adoption records.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stAspMlwht8&
You may not get this comment before you leave. good luck with this initiative, Claud. i hope your okay with me adding in an outsider’s POV (from Canada), as to what problems your open records movement might be encountering that might be hindering its progress.
The first one is that 98% of the movement’s impetus is for unilaterally open records. this means that mothers still have to sit passively and “be found,” with the over-riding myth that we “gave away our children” being used as a basis for such discrimination. Legislators thus act instinctively to try to “protect us” when of course we want no such protection! Equal rights in open records should be addressed as well.
The second problem is the huge elephant on the dining room table: reunion. Sure, open records should be a civil right, but most people want their records opened so they can search for their lost family, especially searching for their natural mothers. BN is a great organization and has done a lot of valuable work, but they face an uphill battle to convince legislators that open records is NOT about reunion when for many many adoptees it IS. How many adoptees when they get their records (a) make contact or attempt to, as opposed to (b) just getting their records and not searching for the rest of their lives? BN needs stats on this if they want to prove that open records has nothing to do with reunion. Thus, i think that the topic of reunion has to be addressed.
Here in Canada, we’re hopeful about the 4th province (ON) out of 10 soon opening its records for both adoptees and natural parents. The first province (BC) passed open records laws in 1995. Open records campaigns have only failed in 1 province (NS) so far. The unfortunate part (there is always a grey cloud to the silver lining) are veto provisions. But these were necessary compromises. But (as an example for disclosure vetoes), in AB, adoptees STILL get their original birth names and registrations, just with the vetoing parent’s name erased. The other parents name and all other information is released.
Good luck with your open records movement down in the U.S. It would be nice to see people speaking up for natural parents obtaining the ABC and OBC down there as well, as they do up here.
Anyway, good luck.