LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
PORTLAND PRESS HERALD
Under a section called
Voice of the People and the sub title “Adoptees deserve right to know,”
these 5 letters (below) were published in the Portland Press Herald/Maine
Sunday Telegram on May 15, 2005. These were not included in their online
editorial section for that day. All five are all Maine residents. Four were from
adopted persons and one from a mother who lost a child to adoption. Although up
to 50 letters were sent to the Editor (emails sent only to Ms Grape are not
considered for publication), the rest were not published because the letter was
over 250 words and/or the submitter could not be reached by phone for
verification, according to the person who did the layout for this section. She
also indicated that no letters of opposition were received. Ms Grape, however,
has emailed me that she received many emails from people who do not agree with
us – no way to disprove her statement.
Thanks to all of you who took the time to write the Editor or MS Grape
on this human rights/social justice issue.
Bobbi Beavers
ACCESS 2006 – OBC for ME
www.OBCforME.org
__________________________________________________________________________
In her column "Should state open adoption files," Nancy Grape asks, "Is it
really as simple as that?" To this day, shame and secrecy surround many
adoptions. But even if you desire nobleness, as Grape does, and insist on the
concept of "privacy," then why should a person's privacy supercede another
person's right to know who they were when they were born? Adult adoptees whose
records are sealed in 43 states in the union are the only citizens in this
country who have no right to unencumbered access to their original birth
certificates. Being put up for adoption by no choice of their own becomes an
immutable characteristic of their personhood, like race or sex. Don't these same
citizens, therefore, deserve the equal protection under the law that every other
citizen has as guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution?
Absolutely. Therefore, the answer to Grapes question: "Just as women who choose
to terminate a pregnancy have a court-sanctioned right to abortion, do not women
who choose to give birth and place their child for adoption, in expectation of
confidentiality, deserve the full protection of the law as well?" is an
unequivocal no. The women who abort don't bring children, who grow up and have
their own rights, into the world. As an adult adoptee, my right to know who I
was when I was born supercedes any person's right to keep her past a secret. It
really is that simple.
Craig Hickman
Author of "Fumbling Toward Divinity: The Adoption Scriptures"
Winthrop
__________________________________________________________________________
Thanks go to Nancy Grape for providing an opportunity to educate her and
all the citizens of Maine on the subject of original birth certificates (OBC).
Except for citizens who happen to be adopted, all other citizens of Maine may
freely obtain this basic document. This is true for all other states in the US,
excluding Alaska and Kansas, who never sealed this document from adopted
persons, and Alabama, Delaware, New Hampshire, Oregon and Tennessee, who have
recently enacted laws to allow such access.
As a mother whose first born son was conceived during a sexual assault and lost
under duress to adoption, as the Maine State Representative for the American
Adoption Congress, and as one of four co-founders of ACCESS 2006, I can testify
to you that parents of children lost to adoption have never had their privacy
protected by the law and do not want to be protected from their own
children. This fact is substantiated by the fact that thousands of reunions are
occurring every year in spite of sealed birth certificates. Some parents of
children lost to adoption, perhaps many, may not want this known by the general
public or even their friends and relatives, but they certainly do not need
“privacy” from their own child. These parents have a responsibility to that
child to provide whatever information affects who that child is – ethnic,
genetic and medical heritage. THE CHILD FIRST!
Please stop this discrimination and allow our Maine born adult adoptees
to become adults, to become first class citizens, to have the basic human
right to their OBC.
Roberta Bampton Beavers
South Berwick
_______________________________________________________________________
This letter is in response to Nancy Grapes’ editorial ‘Should state open adoption files?’
I want to clarify the issue. We are not looking to open our adoption files. We just want our original birth certificates. After all, whose birth certificates are they? Not the state, not the birth parents, not anyone but ours.
It also means more than getting our medical histories. It means gaining our full identity. I don’t know what time I was born, or how much I weighed at birth. I have another name, and I have the right to know what it is. If I have other siblings, I have to the right to know who they are. I do know that I did not sign any paperwork indicating my approval in sealing my records. Yet somehow it is legal to keep this information from me.
As for privacy of the birth parents, the agency did not provide it to my birth mother, as her name is all over the documents my adoptive parents signed. The ’privacy’ issue seems to be a smokescreen, and is not the real reason for keeping this document from me. Adoption is a billion dollar industry, and rocking that boat isn’t good for business.
One day, adoptees in this great state of Maine will hopefully be able to enjoy the unrestricted access to their birth certificates that adoptees in the states of Alaska, Oregon, Kansas, Alabama, and New Hampshire have. Original Birth Certificates - It’s the right thing to do!
Catherine Robishaw
Falmouth
_________________________________________________________________________
I would like to comment regarding the article, "Should State Open Adoption Files", Maine Sunday Telegram, May 1, 2005.
Maine has outdated and prejudiced law regarding an adopted person's right to access their original birth records. An adopted person's original birth record is sealed forever and at inquiry, may or may not be opened by the court. Birth records are a civil right to all, but not to an adopted person, whose birth account remains in secrecy and shame.
A parent who relinquishes a child to adoption has a right to privacy. So does the adopted child. Seeking an original birth certificate is about the right to do so, whereas, contact with the birth parent is another issue. So, it becomes a question of rights, not contacts! Should the relinquishing parent or adoptee wish contact, then allow it, either directly, indirectly with a mediator, or made known there will be no contact.
Whether or not the parties want to make contact, medical information should be included in the birth certificate file, to be accessed by the adoptee. This information, for obvious reason of medical history and predisposition, has relevant value to an adopted person.
It is time to rewrite Maine's outdated law. The adoptee should have the same right as others. The right to an original birth certificate. It is also about choice. Current law allows no choice. Choice for the adoptee and the birth parent to decide if they want contact for reunion.
Kenneth L. Severn
Falmouth
______________________________________________________________________________
Recently, Nancy Grape attempted to tackle an issue in adoption that is
far more complex than her discussion. As an international adoptee, former
adoption social worker, and now a university faculty member who studies
adoption, I encourage all readers to use Nancy Grape's discussion as a beginning
point for deepening one's understanding.
Nancy Grape is way off base and does not understand that the proposed
legislation includes a contact preference option for birth parents. If birth
parents select no contact, they must update their medical history. Adult
adoptees in Maine are not asking that the state open adoption files which is the
title of Nancy Grape's column. Adult adoptees are asking that they have access
to their original birth certificates.
Access to birth family medical history is a right that non-adopted people take
for granted and thus retains the quality of an unearned privilege. Access to
birth family medical history is a right that has been denied adoptees for much
too long a time. This legislation is necessary to clarify what are basic human
rights for all people versus unearned privileges. The persistence and favoring
of unearned privilege in our laws and social relations undermines democratic
ideals.
Elizabeth KimJin Traver, PhD
Assistant Professor/Social Work
University of Southern Maine
Portland