Rhode Island #7: Governor Signs Law! Another Brick Falls

It's been a long 67 years!

Around noon today, Rhode Island Governor Lincoln Chafee, without ceremony, signed S478 Sub AA into law. The bill restores the right of all Rhode Island adoptees, abrogated in 1944, to claim their original birth certificates, without restrictions or conditions, upon request. The law will go into effect July 1, 2012.

It has been a pleasure to work in an advisory and support capacity with Access Rhode Island: the Little Engine That Could. Through sheer perseverance, clarity of purpose, and a refusal to back down from its core principle of access for all without restriction, Access Rhode Island defeated incredibly strong opposition in the Senate. I don't personally know all the people involved in this victorious campaign, but in alphabetically order, these are some of the who who led the way: Kara Foley, Nancy Horgan, Christine Lachapelle-Miller, and Paul Schibbelhute.

A former activist once told me that states like Rhode Island didn't really count. He wanted the key states. Of course, we all want them, but I argued that all states count. All are important. Small states can bring down key states in the end. Rhode Island just knocked another brick out of the wall!

Kansas: never sealed

Alaska: never sealed

Oregon: unsealed

Alabama: unsealed

New Hampshire: unsealed

Maine: unsealed

Rhode Island: unsealed

Who's Next?

I want to reiterate that a campaign is already in progress to lower the age of access from 25 to the age of majority. It may take a couple years, but this unacceptable barrier will fall.

Rhode Island: S 478 Sub AA Passes House!

A few minutes ago, Kara Foley with Access Rhode Island, posted on her FB page that S 478 Sub AA passed the House.

Now on to the governor.

No details yet.

Rhode Island S478 Sub AA: Support Letter to Full House

Bastard Nation, the Adoptee Rights Organization, the largest adoptee civil rights organization in North America, urges the passage of Rhode Island S478 Sub AA, which restores the right of all Rhode Island adoptees to access their original birth certificates without restriction, upon request.

We, however, reject the age qualification of 25, set by the Senate,. The House earlier had voted 66-0 for H5443 Sub A which authorized the access age at 18, the state's age of majority. with which we agree.

That said, lawmakers in both Houses have already decided that all Rhode Island adoptees, without condition and restriction, have a right, as they did until 1944, to their original birth certificates. It is, therefore, imperative to restore that right now, and get a clean law on the books and working.

We believe that in the near future, the access age set out in S478 Sub AA should be and can be reduced to the age of majority in order for the adopted and not-adopted to be treated the same under law and policy regarding public document access. The age discrepancy sets a bad precedent, and treats the adopted and no adopted differently.

We are grateful for the support Rhode Island House Members have shown in the past for adoptees and our rights. We trust this support will continue, even with a flawed bill.

We urge you to vote DO PASS on S478 Sub AA. It's passage will put Rhode Island in the forefront of adoption reform in the United States today.

Yours truly,
Marley E. Greiner
Executive Chair,
Bastard Nation: the Adoptee Rights Organization

rep-mccauley@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-blazejewski@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-ajello@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-fox@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-desimone@rilin.state.ri.us,
ep-hull@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-cimini@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-tarro@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-williams@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-slater@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-diaz@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-medina@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-carnevale@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-lima@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-mattiello@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-palumbo@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-jacquard@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-handy@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-mcnamara@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-bennett@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-naughton@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-ferri@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-flaherty@rilin.state.ri.us,
reptrillo@aol.com,
rep-nunes@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-morgan@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-serpa@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-guthrie@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-tomasso@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-watson@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-costa@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-ehrhardt@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-lally@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-tanzi@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-dickinson@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-walsh@rilin.state.ri.us,
ep-azzinaro@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-kennedy@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-valencia@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-chippendale@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-marcello@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-ucci@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-fellela@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-petrarca@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-menard@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-ogrady@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-keable@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-newberry@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-baldellihunt@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-brien@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-phillips@rilin.state.ri.us,
ep-macbeth@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-winfield@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-schadone@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-corvese@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-silva@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-mclaughlin@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-sanbento@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-oneill@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-ecoderre@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-johnston@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-messier@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-dasilva@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-melo@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-savage@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-hearn@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-malik@rilin.state.ri.us,
ep-morrison@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-gallison@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-edwards@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-gordon@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-reilly@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-jackson@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-ruggiero@rilin.state.ri.us,
rep-martin@rilin.state.ri.us

Rhode Island: S 478 Sub AA Passes Committee!

No details, but Kara Foley, from Access Rhode Island reports on her FB page that S478 Sub AA passed the House HEW Committee today. A full floor vote is scheduled for Wednesday.

Rhode Island: Bastard Nation Letter to Rhode Island House: Support S478 Sub AA

Bastard Nation, the Adoptee Rights Organization, the largest adoptee civil rights organization in North America, urges the passage of Rhode Island S478 Sub AA, which restores the right of all Rhode Island adoptees to access their original birth certificates without restriction, upon request.

We are, however, disappointed by the age qualification of 25, set by the Senate, since the House earlier had voted 66-0 for H5443 Sub A which authorized the access age at 18, the state's age of majority.

That said, lawmakers in both Houses have already decided that Rhode Island adoptees have a right, as they did until 1944, to their original birth certificates, so it is imperative to restore that right now, and get a clean law on the books and working.

We believe that in the near future, the access age set out in S478 Sub A should be and can be reduced to the age of majority in order for the adopted and not-adopted to be treated the same under law and policy regarding public document access. The age discrepancy sets a bad precedent.

We are grateful for the support Rhode Island House Members have shown in the past for adoptees and our rights. We trust this support will continue, even with a somewhat flawed bill.

We urge you to vote DO PASS on S478 Sub AA. It's passage will put Rhode Island in the forefront of adoption reform in the United States today.

Yours truly,

Marley E Greiner

Executive Chair

Bastard Nation: the Adoptee Rights Organization

www.bastards.org

Office: PO Box 1469, Edmond, OK 73083-1469

Bastard Nation is dedicated to the recognition of the full human and civil rights of adult adoptees. Toward that end, we advocate the opening to adoptees, upon request at age of majority, of those government documents which pertain to the adoptee's historical, genetic, and legal identity, including the unaltered original birth certificate and adoption decree. Bastard Nation asserts that it is the right of people everywhere to have their official original birth records unaltered and free from falsification, and that the adoptive status of any person should not prohibit him or her from choosing to exercise that right. We have reclaimed the badge of bastardy placed on us by those who would attempt to shame us; we see nothing shameful in having been born out of wedlock or in being adopted. Bastard Nation does not support mandated mutual consent registries or intermediary systems in place of unconditional open records, nor any other system that is less than access on demand to the adult adoptee, without condition, and without qualification.

Good News from Rhode Island - YES!

No details yet, but the Rhode Island Senate this afternoon passed S478 Sub A, reportedly 36-0, with a amendment to lower the age of access from 30 to 25. No sunset provision unfortunately.

The bill now goes to the House. I doubt the House will balk since a few days ago it passed the similar H5453 Sub A with the access age of 18.

Obviously, we are not happy that access age remains above the age of majority. We also urged a sunset to the higher age be added. That said, lowering the age will be a much easier than getting rid of a prospective only access, a disclosure veto or any other measure that codifies less than full disclosure,which Rhode Islanders were facing only a few days ago.

Access Rhode Island, Bastard Nation (who has been working in an advisory capacity with ARI) and other Rhode Island activists have made it clear that this law will not be "complete" until every Ocean State adoptee can get their OBC at the age of majority.

We'll update you when we are.

New Jersey Update: Christie Will Conditionally Veto; Will Offer "Compromise"

According to New Jersey ACLU Director Deborah Jacobs, Gov. Chris Christie is conditionally vetoing He reportedly has created a hybrid bill that is somewhere between the bad deform S799/A1399(Vitale) bill and the badder adoptoin indusry A3672 (Quigley) bill. Contents of Christie's compromise won't be known until tomorrow.

This was just what I was afraid of.

The nightmare continues. I believe everyone in involved in this battle just want it over with It won't be.

More information when released.

Rhode Island: Bastard Nation Letter to RI Senate in support of S478 Sub A

Dear Senator:

Bastard Nation, the Adoptee Rights Organization, the largest adoptee civil rights organization in North America, conditionally supports Rhode Island S 478 Sub A.

Bastard Nation is happy that S 478 Sub A is clean, bill that makes the OBC available to all Rhode Island adoptees without restrictions. We do not, however , support the age qualification, which limits access to adoptees 30 years of age and older. We believe that adopted adults should be treated the same under law as the not-adopted. We, therefore, urge the Senate to extend access to all adoptees when they reach the age of majority.

The age of majority is defined as "adulthood in the eyes of the law." After reaching majority, a person is permitted to vote, make a valid will, enter into binding contracts, marry, enlist in the military, and purchase alcohol. Also, parents may stop making child support payments when a child reaches the age of majority. In most states, including Rhode Island, the age of majority is 18, but this varies depending on the activity. In no state does age of majority exceed the age of 21.

Rhode Island Code: § 15-12-1: Persons of full age. – (a) Notwithstanding any general or public law or provision of the common law to the contrary, all persons who have attained the age of eighteen (18) years shall be deemed to be persons of full legal age.

The not-adopted of Rhode Island (or any other state) are not required by statute to be 30 years of age to access their own birth certificates. Likewise, in states where adoptee rights are in force, the age of majority holds. We believe that the 30 year qualification in S 478 Sub A is discriminatory and unnecessary. Since the Rhode Island House passed a similar bill, H 5453 Sub A, 3 66-0, a few days ago, (which will not now receive a Senate hearing) with the age of access set at 18, and with all arguments against access refuted in the Senate through the Do Pass recommendation of Health and Human Services sub bill, this burden makes no sense.

We urge the Senate to reconsider the age qualification, and amend S 478 Sub A to match Rhode Island's age of majority statute, 18. If the bill cannot be amended this session due to time constraints with end-of-session voting, we urge the legislature to pass the bill as currently written, but to return next session to amend the age qualification to align not only with the Rhode Island code, but with states across the country where OBCs are open unconditionally. While we prefer to see the bill amended to majority now, a sunset, which would lower the age of access within a reasonable time, which we understand will be proposed by Sen. Rhoda Perry during the floor vote, is acceptable, but regrettable. Without knowing the specifics of that amendment, we can only qualify our support of it and defer comment.

If the age qualification is not changed to conform with age of majority, a bad precedent will have been set, segregating OBC access qualification well into adulthood. No one should be forced to wait until the age of 30 to acquire the public documentation of his or her birth.

Please vote DO PASS on S478 Sub A. We also urge you to support an amendment to lower the age of access to conform with Rhode Island age of majority statute, sunset or not. Make Rhode Island a pioneer voice in the restoration of adoptee civil rights! It's the right thing to do!

Marley E. Greiner
Executive Chair,
Bastard Nation, the Adoptee Rights Organization
www.bastards.org

Rhode Island S 478 Sub A: Bastard Nation Statement of Support

Bastard Nation, the Adoptee Rights Organization conditionally supports Rhode Island S 478 Sub A. This bill is an amended version of the earlier S 478, which included a disclosure veto. The bill also had provisions that limited original birth certificate (OBC) access to adult adoptees born after Jan. 1, 2012, or to those who are 40 years or older after the effective date of the bill. None of those provisions restored the right of OBC access guaranteed until 1944, for all Rhode Island adoptees. Senate Majority Whip Maryellen Goodwin, whose sister has two adopted children, and supported this bad bill, took a lot of heat after she told the Providence Journal she wanted to limit OBC access to older adoptees because "I want them to be able to find their records in an appropriate and meaningful kind of way, not because they want to get back at their adoptive parents."

After heavy public and private criticism from the Rhode Island adoption community and reformers, Goodwin backtracked, the prospective provision and vetoes were removed and the age limit reduced to 30. On Wednesday the bill passed the Senate Health and Human Services Committee unanimously with a Do Pass recommendation to the full Senate. Committee members also showed support for a floor amendment to lower the age of access. Sen. Rhoda Perry says she will introduce an amendment to sunset the age qualification and lower the age to 25. The floor vote is scheduled for Wednesday, June 23.

Bastard Nation is happy that S 478 Sub A is clean, but does not support the current age mandate. We believe that adopted adults should be treated the same under law as the not-adopted.

The Age of Majority
The age of majority is defined as "adulthood in the eyes of the law." After reaching majority, a person is permitted to vote, make a valid will, enter into binding contracts, marry, enlist in the military, and purchase alcohol. Also, parents may stop making child support payments when a child reaches the age of majority. In most states the age of majority is 18, but this varies depending on the activity. In no state does age of majority exceed the age of 21.

Rhode Island Code: § 15-12-1: Persons of full age. – (a) Notwithstanding any general or public law or provision of the common law to the contrary, all persons who have attained the age of eighteen (18) years shall be deemed to be persons of full legal age.

The not-adopted of Rhode Island (or any other state) are not required by statute to be 30 years of age to access their own birth certificates. Likewise, in states in where adoptee rights are in force, the age of majority holds. We believe that the 30 year mandate in S 478 Sub A is discriminatory and unnecessary. Since the Rhode Island House passed a similar bill, H 5453 Sub A, 3 66-0, a few days ago, (which will not now receive a Senate hearing) with the age of access set at 18, and with all arguments against access refuted in the Senate, this burden makes no sense.

We urge the Senate to reconsider the age qualification, and amend S 478 Sub A to match Rhode Island's age of majority statute, 18. If the bill cannot be amended this session due to time constraints, (the session closes in a few days), we urge the legislature to pass the bill as currently written, but to return next session to amend the age qualification to align not only with the Rhode Island code, but with states across the country where OBCs are open unconditionally. While we prefer to see the bill amended to majority now, a sunset within a reasonable time frame is not a deal breaker. Otherwise, a bad precedent has been set, segregating OBC access qualification well into adulthood. No one should be forced to wait until the age of 30 to acquire the public documentation of his or her birth.

Bastard Nation has worked in an advisory capacity with Access Rhode Island throughout this campaign. We commend the organization for holding the line during this very complicated negotiation and for deconstructing all opposition arguments in such a sweeping and swift manner. Unlike other "adoptee rights organizations" that toss away the actual right of access "to get something passed" Access Rhode Island has stood firm to restore the right to all of its state's adoptees, not just some. If the age is not amended down this session, Access Rhode Island, Bastard Nation and other Rhode Island activists will work until it is.

Bastard Nation is waiting for information from Access Rhode Island and will issue an action alert very shortly. In the meantime, please go to Adoptee access to birth certificates passes hurdle published in the June 16 edition of the ProJo and voice your opinion. Rhode Island legislators are reading and paying attention to comments.

Bastard Nation's Letter to Missouri Governor Jay Nixon: Please Veto SB 351. This is not an adoptee rights bill!

Dear Governor Nixon:

Bastard Nation: the Adoptee Rights Organization is the largest adoptee civil rights organization in the United States. We support full, unrestricted access for all adopted persons, upon request, of their own true, unaltered original birth certificates (OBC). We do not support SB 351 and ask that you veto this badly flawed legislation.

Under current Missouri law, the original birth certificates/identities of all Missouri adoptees are sealed and generally cannot be released to the adoptee except by court order and only with the consent of both the biological and adoptive parents. This 4-signature consent is the most restrictive OBC/identity access law in the United States. For as long as we can remember, Missouri adoption reform advocates have been attempting to free the state's adoptees from these onerous restrictions.

Unfortunately, SB 351 is not the bill to overturn the current law. SB 351 makes superficial changes to access structure, removing adoptive parent sign-offs, while maintaining retrospectively and prospectively the other restrictions which keep Missouri adoptee birth records and identity a state secret. The bill also allows adoptees under certain conditions to access identifying information about siblings, and permits adoptees' lineal descendants, under certain conditions, to access identifying information if the adoptee is deceased. The bill, in fact, does not even mention the term "original birth certificate" nor does it clarify what "identifying information" or "record" could be released and in what form. A letter from the court? An original birth certificate? What?

SB 351 is misleading and inimical to the rights of all Missouri adoptees. The measure is promoted as an “adoptee rights” bill. It is not. SB 351 reinforces out-dated adoption secrecy through the disclosure affidavit for “birthparents.” SB 351 does not restore the right to the original birth certificate access once enjoyed by all Missouri adoptees. Instead, it makes adoptee access to identifying information a state/third party-conditioned privilege separate and unequal from the right enjoyed by Missouri's not adopted who can receive their birth certificates with no conditions and questions.

Adopted adults, especially since 9/11, are increasingly denied passports, drivers licenses, pensions, Social Security benefits, professional certifications, and security clearances due to discrepancies on their amended birth certificates, and their inability to produce an original birth certificate to answer the problems.

Adoptees without a genuine original birth record could soon be barred from running for public office.‭ ‬At least‭ ‬10‭ ‬states, including Missouri (HB 283; sp Lyle Rowland, Mike Kelly) have introduced legislation requiring presidential and vice-presidential candidates to present their original birth certificates to appropriate authorities to prove citizenship eligibility for office.‭ Bills in some other states go‬ further,‭ ‬mandating anyone running for office to prove citizenship through an original birth certificate.‭ ‬It is no stretch to think that someday soon adoptees could be barred from voting due to lack of‭ “‬legal‭” ‬identity over problematic amended birth certificates,‭ ‬and the perpetual sealing of the originals.‭

Kansas and Alaska have never sealed original birth certificates. Since 1999 four states have restored to adoptees the unrestricted right to records and identity access: Oregon through ballot initiative, and Alabama, New Hampshire, and Maine through legislation. No statistics are available for Kansas and Alaska, but approximately 17,000 OBCs in the latter four states have been released with no reported ill consequences.

Rights are for all citizens, not privileges doled out to some. Missouri does not segregate rights by religion, ethnicity, age, or gender. It should not segregate rights by birth, adoptive status, or third party preference.

Please veto SB 351. All of Missouri adoptees must enjoy equal protection, due process, and dignity. Missouri adoptees deserve better than SB 351!

Yours truly,

Marley Greiner
Executive Chair

Bastard Nation is dedicated to the recognition of the full human and civil rights of adult adoptees. Toward that end, we advocate the opening to adoptees, upon request at age of majority, of those government documents which pertain to the adoptee's historical, genetic, and legal identity, including the unaltered original birth certificate and adoption decree. Bastard Nation asserts that it is the right of people everywhere to have their official original birth records unaltered and free from falsification, and that the adoptive status of any person should not prohibit him or her from choosing to exercise that right. We have reclaimed the badge of bastardy placed on us by those who would attempt to shame us; we see nothing shameful in having been born out of wedlock or in being adopted. Bastard Nation does not support mandated mutual consent registries or intermediary systems in place of unconditional open records, nor any other system that is less than access on demand to the adult adoptee, without condition, and without qualification.

Sad Day for New Jersey Bastards: A1406/1399/S799 Passes. Adoptees Sold Down the River

A few minutes ago, the New Jersey General Assembly, as expected, passed A1406/1399/S799:

44 Yay
26 Nay
2 Abstain

The Speaker chastised NJ Care proponents for applauding.

Shame on NJCare for selling out the rights of those it claims to represent.

Shame on NJ Care for creating new classes of anonymized adoptees: those wiped clean by third party vetoes and state-pimped "safe haven" victims.

Shame on NJ Care for protecting the state's adoption industry from liability for illegal and unethical practices.

We do not begrudge anyone who accesses their Original Birth Certificate under this abomination, but they need to remember that their privilege is built on the continued disenfranchisement and erasure of their fellow Bastards.

We have no idea what Governor Christie will do when the bill hits his desk. Bastard Nation will be in contact with his office again. We urge those who object to the legislative quarantine of non-qualifying bastards to contact him as well. More information shortly.

Bastard Nation thanks everyone who saw this through with us and wrote and called the NJ General Assembly with our objections.

Read about the bill here and here.

Bastard Nation's Letter to the New Jersey General Assembly - May 7, 2011 - VOTE NO on A1406

RE: Please vote NO on A1406/S700: Adoptees' Birthright Bill


Privilege is the opposite of right

Bastard Nation: the Adoptee Rights Organization is the largest adoptee civil rights organization in the United States. We support full, unrestricted access for all adopted persons, upon request, of their own true, unaltered original birth certificates (OBC). We oppose A1406/S799: the Adoptees' Birthright Bill.

A1406/S799 permits some New Jersey adopted adults to receive their true and accurate original birth certificates. Others, through the compromise language of the birthparent disclosure veto, will receive only a false and mutilated government document with the name and address of the parent(s) bureaucratically excised by the Department of Health and Senior Services by order of the birthparent(s).

Bastard Nation rejects this special veto privilege of “birthparents” to remove their names from the birth certificates of their own adult offspring. No other parent has that right. Why should “birthparents,” whose parental rights were terminated decades ago, have different rights,privileges, and rules?

A1406/S799 is promoted as an “adoptees' birthright” and OBC “access bill.” Unfortunately, it is neither. The bill reinforces out-dated adoption secrecy through the disclosure veto. It also seals by default, the OBCs of babies surrendered under the state’s “safe haven” program (apparently whether they are adopted later or not) even though a good number of these children are born to identified parents. What name and “official” state identity papers those never adopted will have is not addressed in the bill.

A1406/S799 requires "birthparents," under specific circumstances, to submit a medical and health history to the state, a requirement that may be illegal under HIPAA and other privacy laws. No one has a right to anyone’s medical history. Medical histories have nothing to do with birth certificates and have no connection to the right of all adopted persons to their own OBC.

Finally, A1406/S799 includes a fiscal bill of $90,000 to advertise the law if it is passed. At a time when Governor Christie is proposing massive cuts in education and social welfare programs and instituting wage caps, this advertising campaign is an unconscionable waste of taxpayer money.

For nearly three decades we have heard the claim that biological parents have been promised anonymity from their own offspring who were placed for adoption, yet not one document has ever been presented in New Jersey or any other state to show that so-called promise.

In fact, courts have found that “birthparents do not have any legal expectation of anonymity.” (Doe v Sundquist, 943 F. Supp. 886, 893-94 (M.D. Tenn. 1996)) (06 F.3d 703, 705 (6th Cir. 1997)) (Does v Oregon, Summary Judgment Oregon State Court of Appeals) (Does v. State of Oregon, 164 Or.App. 543, 993 P.2d 833, 834 (1999)). Moreover, OBCs are sealed at the time of adoption finalization not surrender, and the birth certificate of any child not adopted is left unsealed and available to him or her. If an adoption is disrupted, the birth certificate is unsealed.

Kansas and Alaska have never sealed original birth certificates. Since 1999 four states have restored to adoptees the unrestricted right to records and identity access: Oregon through ballot initiative, and Alabama, New Hampshire, and Maine through legislation. Of the four states that have repealed sealed records laws, approximately 17,000 OBCs have been released with no ill consequences. Why should New Jersey buck the tide and pass a bill that continues to treat adoptee access to their own birth certificates as a privilege not a right--a right that the non-adopted enjoy without a second thought?

Rights are for all citizens, not privileges doled out to some by government and special interest groups. A1406/S799 does not restore the right to the OBC once enjoyed by all New Jersey adoptees.

Please vote DO NOT PASS on A1406/S799. New Jersey does not segregate rights by religion, ethnicity, age, or gender. It should not segregate rights by birth, adoptive status, or parental preference All of the New Jersey's adoptees must enjoy equal protection, due process, and dignity. New Jersey adoptees deserve better than this current legislation. The all deserve their original birth certificates without restriction.

For the record, Bastard Nation does not support an alternative bill, S2586/A3672, bills introduced in January which also restrict OBC access.

Yours truly,

Marley E. Greiner
Executive Chair, Bastard Nation: the Adoptee Rights Organization

614-571-2999 (cell)

Bastard Nation is dedicated to the recognition of the full human and civil rights of adult adoptees. Toward that end, we advocate the opening to adoptees, upon request at age of majority, of those government documents which pertain to the adoptee's historical, genetic, and legal identity, including the unaltered original birth certificate and adoption decree. Bastard Nation asserts that it is the right of people everywhere to have their official original birth records unaltered and free from falsification, and that the adoptive status of any person should not prohibit him or her from choosing to exercise that right. We have reclaimed the badge of bastardy placed on us by those who would attempt to shame us; we see nothing shameful in having been born out of wedlock or in being adopted. Bastard Nation does not support mandated mutual consent registries or intermediary systems in place of unconditional open records, nor any other system that is less than access on demand to the adult adoptee, without condition, and without qualification.

Rhode Island: Bastard Nation Testimony in Support of H5453

TESTIMONY

SB 5453

an act to permit adoptees to obtain

a non-certified copy of their original birth certificates

Rhode Island House Judiciary Committee

April 12, 2011

SUPPORT

Privilege is the opposite of rights

Bastard Nation: the Adoptee Rights Organization is the largest adoptee civil rights organization in the United States. We support full, unrestricted access for all adopted persons, upon request, of their own true, unaltered original birth certificates (OBC). We fully support HB 5453 and its companion S0361. We support no other bill in either chamber.

******

Bastard Nation is delighted to endorse and support SB 5453, a bill that restores the right of all Rhode Island adopted persons, without restrictions or conditions, to access their original birth certificates upon request.

• SB 5453 is inclusive. The bill, as written, is a simple-to-understand measure that recognizes the presumed right of all Rhode Island adults--adopted and not adopted-- to unrestricted access and ownership of their true birth certificates.

• SB 5453 is about rights not reunion. It is about the relation of adoptees to the state. Search and reunion are personal matters outside of government control and mediation.

• SB 5453 maintains the current level of adoption "confidentiality"" and practice. Adoption records are sealed upon finalization, not relinquishment. If an adoption petition is rejected by the courts, or the petition is withdrawn, the birth certificate remains unsealed. If an adoption is overturned or disrupted, the birth certificate is unsealed. Even in traditional closed adoptions first parent identities are often recorded on court documents given to adoptive parents without first parent consent. Similarly, legal advertisements with identifying information are often published, and courts may open adoption records for “good cause” without first parent consent. Most significantly, if a child is never adopted the birth certificate is never sealed. Thus, if sealing birth certificates was meant to hide parental identities absolutely, records would be sealed upon relinquishment, not finalization

SB 5453 does not open original birth certificates to the public. Original birth certificates are unsealed only to the adoptees and designated persons, not the public.

Access Access to original birth certificates guarantees that adopted persons can prove their citizenship status and "legal identity." Adopted adults, especially since 9/11, are increasingly denied passports, drivers licenses, pensions, Social Security benefits, professional certifications, and security clearances due discrepancies on their amended birth certificates, and their inability to produce an original birth certificate to answer the problems.

Adoptees without a genuine original birth record could soon be barred from running for public office. At least 10 states have introduced legislation requiring presidential and vice-presidential candidates to present their original birth certificates to appropriate authorities to prove citizenship eligibility for office. Some of these bills go farther, mandating anyone running for office to prove citizenship through an original birth certificate. It is no stretch to think that someday soon adoptees could be barred from voting due to lack of “legal” identity over problematic amended birth certificates, and the perpetual sealing of the originals.

Kansas and Alaska have never sealed original birth certificates. Since 1999 four states have restored to adoptees the unrestricted right to records and identity access: Oregon through ballot initiative, and Alabama, New Hampshire, and Maine through legislation. No statistics are available for Kansas and Alaska, but approximately 17,000 OBCs in the latter four states have been released with no reported ill consequences.

Rights are for all citizens, not favors or privileges for some. Rhode Island does not privilege rights by race, religion, ethnicity, age, or gender. It should not privilege rights by adoptive status.

SB 5453 gives Rhode Island lawmakers the opportunity to lead the country in positive adoption reform by restoring adoptee civil rights in the state. The bill will harm no one, but will restore equality, dignity, and fairness to adopted persons and their biological and adopted families Please vote YES on SB 5453. It's the right thing to do!

Bastard Nation is dedicated to the recognition of the full human and civil rights of adult adoptees. Toward that end, we advocate the opening to adoptees, upon request at age of majority, of those government documents which pertain to the adoptee's historical, genetic, and legal identity, including the unaltered original birth certificate and adoption decree. Bastard Nation asserts that it is the right of people everywhere to have their official original birth records unaltered and free from falsification, and that the adoptive status of any person should not prohibit him or her from choosing to exercise that right. We have reclaimed the badge of bastardy placed on us by those who would attempt to shame us; we see nothing shameful in having been born out of wedlock or in being adopted. Bastard Nation does not support mandated mutual consent registries or intermediary systems in place of unconditional open records, nor any other system that is less than access on demand to the adult adoptee, without condition, and without qualification.

Missouri SB 351: Passes Senate; Bastard Subservience in the Name of Protection and Shame Continues

Really bad SB 351 passed the Senate yesterday. I don't have the count right now. While the passage of this bill is enough bad news for one day, new language has been added to the perfected bill to make the day even darker:

If the biological parents have consented to the release of identifying information under subsection [11] 10 of this section, the court shall disclose such identifying information to the adopted adult or the adopted adult's lineal descendants if the adopted adult is deceased. If the biological parents were married to each other at the time of the request for identifying information or at the time of death of one of the biological parents, the information shall not be released until the death of the surviving biological parent, unless the surviving biological parent consents to such release.

In other words: more restrictions, more red tape, and more third party consents to keep bastards subservient to the state and our birth records locked up.

It's worth noting that SB 351 and its companion HB 427 are supported by Missouri Catholic Charities. Below is a comment we received on Bastard Nation's testimony entry posted on the Daily Bastardette:

Yes, SB 351 and the HB 427 companion bill are both search-based not rights bills crafted by MO's Catholic Conference and MO paid searcher, Laura Long, and sponsored by lawmakers who, no surprise here, happen to be Catholic.

Laura Long is a court CI and has her own search business on the side with a different email addy from her court business with a "pay now" link. She's announced at her blog if law is passed it will be like winning the lottery. For her, of course.

At the Senate hearing this week the sponsor, an adoptive father of 3 kids all adopted from abroad, stated while the bill referred to us as adult adoptees he wanted us to be known as "adult orphans". (Honestly, you can't make this stuff up). He began by saying we want information about our adoptive parents LOL then later changed it to bpars.

For the past decade MO's CWLA agencies have done nothing to help change MO law, and one in particular has supported keeping the vetoes. On OBC bills, I no longer think CWLA has any credibility.

Signing out as a MO Adult Orphan though I wasn't.

SB 351 has moved to the House where it received it's first reading on April 7.

For more about about SB 351 read Bastard Nation's testimony.

Rhode Island: Providence Journal Supports Clean Bill S0361/H5453!

From the editorial page of today's Providence Journal:

People in the Senate have been blocking change on a number of fronts. For instance, the Senate leadership last year absurdly wanted to change the bill to allow access to original birth certificates only to those 18 or over and born after Jan. 1, 2011! That largely defeats the purpose of the clean bill above...

We implore the Senate to stop holding up this legislation. It should promptly pass Senate Bill 0361 (the sister House version is H 5453) and let adoptees know this vital information about themselves.

Read the entire editorial and voice your support at the link above!

H5453 will be heard in RI House Judiciary on April 12. Bastard Nation will submit our support testimony this week and later post it on Daily Bastardette and the Bastard Nation blog page.

For more information on submitting your own written testimony for H5453 contact:

Roberta Di Mezza

Committee Secretary

401-222-2258

Also contact Judiciary Committee members. Go here now for our action alert and committee contact information.

Make Rhode Island #7!

ADDENDA: I was in a hurry yesterday and forgot the add the caveat that the editorial stresses medical history--again. It is imperative that medical history never be used in any argument for records access. It has no relation to our right to our own OBCs. No one has a right to someone else's medical history. Stressing this potential "benefit" of OBC access dilutes the rights message, and can end in laws that create anonymous registries and other anti-rights legislation.

Medical history arguments are as specious as opposition claims that adoptees will "track down" parents and harm them. All rights have consequences, but cannot be restored, "granted" or denied on grounds of potential reactions.

Missouri HB 351: Bastard Nation Submitted Testimony - OPPOSE

Tuesday, the Missouri Senate Health, Mental Health, Seniors, and Families Committee held a hearing on it's greatly flawed SB 351. (text, status/history) Bastard Nation, through our long-time member Carla McBrine as able to submit our opposition testimony in person. Unfortunately, the committee voted the bill out of committee (I haven't been able to find the roll call vote) and the bill is headed for the Senate. At this time, we don't know if it will be scheduled for a vote. The session ends May 13.

TESTIMONY

SB 351:

access to identifying information for adoptions original birth certificate

Missouri Senate Health, Mental Health, Seniors and Families Committee

March 29, 2011

OPPOSE

Privilege is the opposite of rights

Bastard Nation: the Adoptee Rights Organization is the largest adoptee civil rights organization in the United States. We support full, unrestricted access for all adopted persons, SB 351.

Under current Missouri law, the original birth certificates of all Missouri adoptees are sealed and cannot be released to the adoptee except by court order and only with the consent of both the biological and adoptive parents. This 4-signature consent represents the most restrictive OBC access law in the United States. For as long as we can remember, Missouri adoption reform advocates have been attempting to free the state's adoptees from these onerous restrictions.

Unfortunately, SB 351 is not the bill to overturn the current law. SB 351makes superficial changes to the OBC access structure, removing adoptive parent sign-offs, while maintaining retrospectively and prospectively the other restrictions which keep Missouri adoptee birth records and identity a state secret.

SB 351 is misleading and inimical to the rights of all Missouri adoptees. The measure is promoted as an “adoptee rights” and OBC “access bill.” It is not. SB 351 reinforces out-dated adoption secrecy through the disclosure affidavit for “birthparents” The bill even authorizes a natural parent to not only order the state to withhold the OBC from the adoptee, but to override the wishes of the other parent that it be released! SB 351 does not restore the right to the OBC once enjoyed by all Missouri adoptees. Instead, it makes adoptee access to their own birth certificates a state/”birth family” conditioned privilege separate and unequal from the right enjoyed by Missouri's not adopted.

Sooner or later Missouri and every other state that has not opened OBCs unconditionally to adoptees are going to be forced to. The issue isn't going away. This is not a matter of if, but when.

Adopted adults, especially since 9/11, are increasingly denied passports, drivers licenses, pensions, Social Security benefits, professional certifications, and security clearances due to discrepancies on their amended birth certificates, and their inability to produce an original birth certificate to answer the problems.

Adoptees without a genuine original birth record could soon be barred from running for public office.‭ ‬At least‭ ‬10‭ ‬states, including Missouri (HB 283; sp Lyle Rowland, Mike Kelly) have introduced legislation requiring presidential and vice-presidential candidates to present their original birth certificates to appropriate authorities to prove citizenship eligibility for office.‭ ‬Some of these bills go farther,‭ ‬mandating anyone running for office to prove citizenship through an original birth certificate.‭ ‬It is no stretch to think that someday soon adoptees could be barred from voting due to lack of‭ “‬legal‭” ‬identity over problematic amended birth certificates,‭ ‬and the perpetual sealing of the originals.‭

Kansas and Alaska have never sealed original birth certificates. Since 1999 four states have restored to adoptees the unrestricted right to records and identity access: Oregon through ballot initiative, and Alabama, New Hampshire, and Maine through legislation. No statistics are available for Kansas and Alaska, but approximately 17,000 OBCs in the latter four states have been released with no reported ill consequences.

Rights are for all citizens, not favors doled out to some Missouri does not segregate rights by religion, ethnicity, age, or gender. It should not segregate rights by birth, adoptive status, or third party preference.
Vote DO NOT PASS on SB 351. All of Missouri adoptees must enjoy equal protection, due process, and dignity. Missouri adoptees deserve better than SB 351!

Submitted by Marley Greiner
Executive Chair
Bastard Nation: the adoptee rights organization
March 27, 2011

Bastard Nation is dedicated to the recognition of the full human and civil rights of adult adoptees. Toward that end, we advocate the opening to adoptees, upon request at age of majority, of those government documents which pertain to the adoptee's historical, genetic, and legal identity, including the unaltered original birth certificate and adoption decree. Bastard Nation asserts that it is the right of people everywhere to have their official original birth records unaltered and free from falsification, and that the adoptive status of any person should not prohibit him or her from choosing to exercise that right. We have reclaimed the badge of bastardy placed on us by those who would attempt to shame us; we see nothing shameful in having been born out of wedlock or in being adopted. Bastard Nation does not support mandated mutual consent registries or intermediary systems in place of unconditional open records, nor any other system that is less than access on demand to the adult adoptee, without condition, and without qualification.

Texas: Bastard Nation Testimony in Opposition to SB 287

Tomorrow the Texas Senate Jurisprudence Committee will hold a hearing on SB 287, the newest attempt by legislators to torture that state's Class Bastard. There are more things wrong with this bill than the special effects in Spiderman. Below is the 3-minute testimony Bastard Nation submitted to the committee.

Texas Senate Jurisprudence Committee, March 22, 2011

SUBMITTED TESTIMONY

SB 287 access to identifying information for adoptions original birth certificate access

OPPOSE

Privilege is the opposite of right

Bastard Nation: the Adoptee Rights Organization is the largest adoptee civil rights organization in the United States. We support full, unrestricted access for all adopted persons, upon request, of their own true, unaltered original birth certificates (OBC). We oppose SB 287.

SB 287 is egregious in extremis. SB 287 is prospective. It contains a misnamed, linguistically confusing "contact preference form" (which has nothing to do with "preference" or "contact")that authorizes a natural parent to not only order the state registrar to withhold the OBC from the adoptee, but to override the "preference" of the other parent that it be released. Moreover, treating adult adoptees and their natural parent(s) as children at best, dangerous criminals at worst, SB 287 forces mandatory social service or mental health counseling on both parties simply because they want the OBC released.

SB 287 is a dirty bill.

• Clean bills, unlike SB 287 with its conditions and restrictions, provides equal OBC access to all adoptees retrospectively and prospectively, with no conditions or exceptions.
  
  
• Clean bills, unlike SB 287, contain no third party disclosure and contact vetoes.
  
  
• Clean bills, unlike SB 287, contain no mandatory counseling, registries, confidential state intermediaries, and other conditions that limit the free flow of information and treat the adopted differently from the not-adopted.
  
  
• Clean bills, unlike SB 287, have nothing to do with search and reunion, matters best left to individuals to act on without state mediation and control.

• Clean bills unlike, unlike SB 287 with it's "anonymous" medical registry, have nothing to do with adoptee/parent medical histories. The OBC, in fact, contains no medical information. A state demand for natural parent medical history, as included in SB 287, may be in violation of federal HIPAA provisions.

Clean bills, unlike SB 287 simply let the adopted person receive their own birth certificate with no government intervention, like the not-adopted. A clean bill in Texas, unlike SB 287 would restore the right of OBC access that all Texas adoptees enjoyed until the mid-1970s.

When adoptees are denied the right to their own birth certificates our other rights can be endangered. Since‭ ‬9/11,‭ ‬especially,‭ ‬we are increasingly denied passports,‭ ‬drivers‭’ ‬licenses,‭ ‬pensions,‭ ‬Social Security benefits,‭ ‬professional certification and licenses,‭ ‬and security clearances due to discrepancies on our falsified government-created amended birth certificates,‭ ‬and inability to present true documents sealed by the state to remedy the problems.

Adoptees without a genuine original birth record could soon be barred from running for public office.‭ ‬At least‭ ‬10‭ ‬states, including Texas (HB 295) have introduced legislation requiring presidential and vice-presidential candidates to present their original birth certificates to appropriate authorities to prove citizenship eligibility for office.‭ ‬Some of these bills go farther,‭ ‬mandating anyone running for office to prove citizenship through an original birth certificate.‭ ‬It is no stretch to think that someday soon adoptees could be barred from voting due to lack of‭ “‬legal‭” ‬identity over problematic amended birth certificates,‭ ‬and the perpetual sealing of the originals.‭

‭If passed, ‬SB 287 with its restrictions and exclusionary rules, will guarantee that Texas adoptees will never be treated on an equal plane with the not-adopted. If passed, the damage done by SB 287 will take decades--if ever-- to untangle.

‭The Texas legislature should take action now to assure that its adopted population is not subjected to public and private scrutiny and discrimination due to birth certificate irregularities and seals; that all Texas adoptees receive equal treatment, protection, and due process ‬Vote DO NOT PASS on SB 287. Kill this bill. Then come back with a clean bill that guarantees that all Texas adoptees will enjoy equal protection, due process, and dignity.

Submitted by Marley Greiner
Executive Chair
Bastard Nation: the adoptee rights organization

March 21, 2011

Bastard Nation is dedicated to the recognition of the full human and civil rights of adult adoptees. Toward that end, we advocate the opening to adoptees, upon request at age of majority, of those government documents which pertain to the adoptee's historical, genetic, and legal identity, including the unaltered original birth certificate and adoption decree. Bastard Nation asserts that it is the right of people everywhere to have their official original birth records unaltered and free from falsification, and that the adoptive status of any person should not prohibit him or her from choosing to exercise that right. We have reclaimed the badge of bastardy placed on us by those who would attempt to shame us; we see nothing shameful in having been born out of wedlock or in being adopted. Bastard Nation does not support mandated mutual consent registries or intermediary systems in place of unconditional open records, nor any other system that is less than access on demand to the adult adoptee, without condition, and without qualification.

A Modest Proposal: Guest Blogger Maryanne Cohen

Long-time activist Maryanne Cohen was with Bastard Nation at the Hard Rock last week (see below).After the event, she sent A "Modest Proposal" to Adam Pertman, director of the Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute and posted the same on a couple lists. Her proposal is simple: clean up the mess you've made with your bad bills that leave people behind before you lecture the rest of us about the uselessness of working on good bills that don't. As she reminds them, "In contrast to the fact of some clean bills being passed, no bad adoption legislation has ever been successfully revisited and "fixed" to make it unconditional access legislation."

I liked what Maryanne wrote and asked if I could post it here. Maryanne agreed, but first expanded her thoughts, which you'll find below. Please feel free to forward.

I recently attended an "Adoptee Rights" event where it was said over and over that while we would really rather support clean adoptee rights legislation, clean bills cannot get passed so we must support compromised bills. Never fear though, we will go back and fix those bad bills soon so it's all good. Smiley faces and applause all around.

My challenge to those who feel this way is to stop introducing compromised bills of various sorts in states where no adoptee access legislation has been passed yet, and go back and put all your efforts into fixing one of the several states that have already been compromised so that not all adoptees there can get their OBC by asking. You have several to choose from, Ohio and MA with black hole legislation, IL which is too complicated to figure out, DE, CO. all come to mind.There are a few others. Pick one. Ohio's black hole law has been in place for decades, that might be a place to start. Go to work on it. Report back when it is repaired. I'll buy you a beer!

The fact is that clean legislation HAS passed in several states, New Hampshire, Maine, Alabama. Was it easy? No. Will it be harder in some states than others? Sure! is it nearly impossible to pass anything in some states like NJ where I live? Yes. Is legislative reform frustrating, exhausting, cynic-making, sometimes disgusting, sometimes fruitless work? Yes, absolutely. But it has been done and can be done again. We have to be in this for the long haul, not quick dirty Band Aid patches.

In contrast to the fact of some clean bills being passed, no bad adoption legislation has ever been successfully revisited and "fixed" to make it unconditional access legislation. I do not think it honest to promise something nobody has yet delivered as a condition to pass something/anything on your watch. It is more difficult to go back and fix flawed legislation than to hold out for a clean bill. One reason is that many veto bills give birthmothers a right under law to request confidentiality that they never had before. Another is that our cause is not important to politicians, and their attitude is "we already dealt with that little issue" when we try to come back and amend existing laws.

Veto, black hole, compulsory intermediary legislation is not adoptee RIGHTS legislation, and should not be called such. It is an admission that adoptees have no rights, which would be across the board, no exceptions, but can only ask permission from Mom and the state to please see their OBC. It may be search and reunions legislation, which some would support as their main goal, and I can understand that, but do not say it is about rights when it is not. A "Right" applies to all in a named group. Blacks, Gays, Women, Adoptees. If it does not apply to all it should not be called a right. Clear enough? Some laws for various groups pass that help some of that group, and may be a good thing for some, but they are not "rights" laws. "Rights" either apply to all in a class or it is not a right but a privilege granted by the state and Mom. A right stands on its own. A privilege can be taken away. You HAVE a right. Someone GIVES you a privilege or favor.

I would be a little less upset about badly compromised adoptee access legislation if those supporting it were honest and did not refer to it as "adoptee rights" or "adoptee birthright" legislation, because it is not. Such legislation admits this is not about civil or human rights for all adoptees, but about granting a favor to some. Call it "search and reunion" legislation, or "something is better than nothing legislation" but don't say it is about rights. There are no "Rights Lite".

The point has been made that "99%" of adoptees will still be able to get their OBC because only 1% mothers will file vetoes, so what's the harm?

Another point also made is that "adoptees are dying" in large numbers without being reunited or getting their medical history because mean people like BN insist on only clean bills. There is also a lot of sentimentality about senior citizen adoptees, as if they mattered more than the rest or deserved more.

These assertions are distortions and exaggerations. Even if your point of view is about reunions, not rights, certainly more than 1% of birthmothers do not welcome contact, based on the experience of search results for many years, Yes, a majority want to be found, but nothing in
the real world indicates that high a majority. Self-selected surveys are skewed, always. And surrendering mothers gave up all rights over the adoptee, why give us rights we never had and mostly do not want with veto laws?

As far as search and reunion go, something I totally favor as a personal choice, there are so many ways to search and reunite now that do not depend on legally obtaining an OBC that very few adoptees who want to search actually die without finding. The OBC is not the one golden key to reunion. Sadly some of those who do have the OBC or all the information on it, never find their families either, because the information was all false at the time of surrender so is
useless for searching. Many adoptees who have already reunited still would like the right to their OBC, as would some who have no intention of searching. Search, reunion, medical and agency records access just further cloud and obscure the issue of adoptee rights to their own original birth certificate, to do with as they please.

I would ask the proponents of various kinds of compromised legislation to stop calling it adoptee rights, and stop promising to go and fix laws that you cannot or will not fix. Tell people up front, what you see with a compromised bill is what you get, for decades to come, and some adoptees will be left out. You don't know how many, but be upfront if what you care about is even a few adoptees getting their OBC now, not adoptee rights. If you think that legislation that cuts out some adoptees is ok because other adoptees get their OBC, say so, don't be crying crocodile tears about how you would really rather have clean legislation, BUT.......

Some of this is of course my opinion. But keep in mind two facts, not opinions. Several states HAVE passed clean legislation, despite the heavy obstacles. No compromised adoptee access legislation has ever been revisited and fixed to be a true adoptee rights law. Make what you will of that, but remember it when you decide what to do legislatively and what to support.

Hard Rock "Event:" Bastard Nation's Four Points on NJ A1406

On March 10, the Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute held a 3-hour "event," Learning the RIGHT Lessons about Adoption: What the Oprah Winfrey Reunion Story Teaches Us" Seven Bastard National and friends attended the "event"--witnesses to the truth as it turned out, in a room full of adoption deformist contortionists weaned on NewSpeak.

I am publishing Bastard Nation documents, commentary, and video from the Hard Rock on the BN blog and the Daily Bastardette. I will also post the documented words and actions of deformers at the event backslapping and trading off the rights of Class Bastard for permission and privilege for some. You know, the vetoed, the 'safe havened," the tiered--maybe YOU--tossed in the black hole.

Below is the Bastard Nation flyer we distributed before the "event." We wanted to document the "event" and hold the feet of the sheep to the fire, so flyer distribution was limited. We did, however, manage to give out a larger number of buttons and stickers.

During the Q&A with the "panel of experts," (no promised scholar showed up) two of us brought up points from the flyer. The "experts" denied and dismissed our questions as someplace not to go. Below our flyer are portions of the New Jersey A1406 bill and the state's current "safe haven" law that provide more or less footnotes to our four flyer points. They are not a legal analysis, but we can read. After all, we've actually passed clean bills."

(Click on image for enlargement or go here for an even larger copy.)

1. Flyer text: "Seal the records of all children passing through the state’s legalized child abandonment (“safe haven”) scheme" Bill: page 5. This is all new language. 7 e. Notwithstanding the requirements of this section to the 8 contrary, in the case of a child who was surrendered pursuant to 9 P.L.2000, c.58 (C.30:4C-15.5 et seq.) and upon receipt of 10 notification from the Division of Youth and Family Services in the 11 Department of Children and Families pursuant to subsection f. of 12 this section, the State Registrar shall deem that the birth parent of 13 the child has requested nondisclosure and shall not provide the birth 14 parent's name or home address, if the name or address is recorded 15 on the child's birth certificate, upon receipt of a written, notarized 16 request for an uncertified, long-form copy of the adopted person's 17 original certificate of birth pursuant to R.S.26:8-40.1. 18 f. The Division of Youth and Family Services in the 19 Department of Children and Families shall notify the State Registrar 20 when a child is surrendered pursuant to P.L.2000, c.58 (C.30:4C- 21 15.5 et seq.) to enable the Registrar to identify the certificate of 22 birth of the child who was so surrendered and deem that the birth 23 parent of the child has requested nondisclosure, as provided in 24 subsection e. of this section. This is in a part marked "New section" and this language does not appear in the current law. Note that "surrendered pursuant to " is a determination of surrender under safe haven law and is assumed that the parent requested nondisclosure. === 2. Flyer text: "Segregate out a new class of adoptees locked behind vetoes and other restrictions, barred from gaining access to their state confiscated OriginalBirth Certificates (OBCs)" Bill page 4, veto prohibiting the state to provide parent name and address: 13 2. (New section) a. During the 12-month period beginning on 14 the date of adoption of regulations by the Department of Health and 15 Senior Services to carry out the purposes of this act, a birth parent 16 of a person adopted prior to the date of enactment of this act may 17 submit to the State Registrar a written, notarized request for 18 nondisclosure or may make such a request to the State Registrar in 19 person. The request for nondisclosure shall prohibit the State 20 Registrar from providing the birth parent's name and home address, 21 as recorded on the adopted person's birth certificate, upon receipt of 22 a written, notarized request for an uncertified, long-form copy of 23 the adopted person's original certificate of birth pursuant to 24 subsection b. of R.S.26:8-40.1 from an adopted person, direct 25 descendant or adoptive parent or guardian authorized by that statute 26 to make such a request. also from page 5: 35 b. If the birth parent of the adopted person has submitted a 36 request for nondisclosure pursuant to section 2 of this act, the State 37 Registrar shall delete the identifying information of the birth parent 38 from the uncertified, long form copy of the original certificate of 39 birth and the family history form submitted by the birth parent with 40 the certificate of birth, and thereafter provide both to the requester. also from page 7, this regards the adoption file as opposed to OBC: 17 Prior to providing any identifying information about a birth 18 parent or the parent's family, the agency or intermediary, as 19 applicable, shall contact the State Registrar to receive written 20 notification if the birth parent has submitted a request for 21 nondisclosure. If such a request has been submitted, the agency or 22 intermediary shall not disclose any identifying information about 23 the birth parent or the parent's family. note that this bill has both a nondisclosure veto, *and* a contact preference, submission of either requires medical/family history form completion. === 3. Flyer text: "Create an adoption industry liability shield, stripping adopted people and their families of their ability to sue agencies" Bill page 8: 10 7. (New section) a. A person, firm, partnership, corporation, 11 association or agency that has placed a child for adoption shall not 12 be liable in any civil or criminal action for damages resulting from 13 information provided by the State Registrar pursuant to this act. 14 b. An employee, agent or officer of the Department of Health 15 and Senior Services who is authorized by the Commissioner of 16 Health and Senior Services to disclose information relating to the 17 certification of birth pursuant to this act, shall not be liable for: 18 (1) disclosing information based on a written, notarized request 19 submitted in accordance with this act; and 20 (2) any error or inaccuracy in the information that is disclosed 21 after receipt of a written, notarized request submitted in accordance with this act, and any consequence of that error or inaccuracy. === 4. Flyer text: " Coerce some mothers into handing over their medical histories to the government, a gross violation of women’s medical privacy" Bill, in the part explaining the disclosure veto process, page 4: 27 b. The State Registrar shall acknowledge, by mail, or if the 28 request is made in person, at the time the request is made, receipt of 29 the request for nondisclosure and shall enclose with the receipt a 30 family history form requesting medical, cultural, and social history 31 regarding the birth parent, which the State Registrar shall require 32 the birth parent to complete to the best of the parent's knowledge 33 and return to the State Registrar within 60 days. The birth parent 34 may update the family history form, as necessary. Failure of a birth 35 parent to complete the form and return it within 60 days, upon 36 requesting nondisclosure, shall nullify the birth parent's request for 37 nondisclosure. Bill, in the part explaining the contact preference, page 6: 8 c. The State Registrar shall require a birth parent who submits 9 a document of contact preference pursuant to this section to 10 complete a form providing updated family history information, 11 which includes medical, cultural and social history information 12 regarding the birth parent. all the bolding in above text is mine. ==== "Safe Haven" Current law: http://goo.gl/FNuqb and http://goo.gl/BRcQL This is the "C.30:4C-21 15.5 et seq." that is referenced in the bill I quote above, aka "P.L.2000, c.58." while the word "confidentiality" is used twice, there is nothing in the law enforcing it. The Division of Youth and Family Services is not required to search for parents or relatives, but is not prohibited from doing so. quote: "The division, after assuming the care, custody and control of a child from a licensed general hospital pursuant to section 4 of P.L.2000, c.58 (C.30:4C-15.7), shall not be required to attempt to reunify the child with the child's parents. Additionally, the division shall not be required to search for relatives of the child as a placement or permanency option, or to implement other placement requirements that give preference to relatives if the division does not have information as to the identity of the child, the child's mother or the child's father. The division shall place the child with potential adoptive parents as soon as possible. "

We can only wonder if NJCare (and its best friend, the EBD) has read their own bill as well as current NJ laws which it is trying to affect. In case you think I'm exagerating, documentation to verify these tete a tetes will be posted in a a few days.