Independence for Adoptees?

My natural Mother, Norma Carol, was a social activist and author who wrote articles for a local newspaper. One of my treasured possessions is an article she wrote about Alice Paul, a women's activist who fought for the right of women to vote in the early 1900's.

If my Mother were alive today we'd be standing arm-in-arm speaking out about the closed record system in adoption.
She could have been one of the brave women interviewed by Ann Fessler in "The Girls Who Went Away".

She registered on the ALMA Registry, and told her family never to forget that I would someday come looking. All the while, she searched for a "son" because the hospital and attorneys told her that she had given birth to a boy by c-section, when truth was, I was a daughter. That saddens me.
In 1968 it was almost impossible for a young, unmarried mother to keep her child. In 2015 it is very possible, but the same adoption issues that were prevalent in 1968 are still in force today.

Sealed records, secrecy, lies, coercion, and unethical practices permeate the adoption system.  When will our society realize and acknowledge the researched and proven fact that separating mother and child brings life-long consequences, and should never be done simply to build another family for those willing to pay. 

A humane society would never legalize "marketing" strategies to encourage the increase of children and babies "available" for adoption ~ yet here we are.  Sealed records benefit no one except those who profit from this unethical and unregulated system in the transfer and stripping of human identities.  Our nation will never have a truly honest discussion about adoption ethics unless money is removed from the adoption system (even in the form of federal adoption "incentives") and the inhumane practice of "amending" and "sealing" birth certificates is ended.   

One of my favorite movies is called "Iron-Jawed Angels", about the women's suffragist movement at the beginning of the 20th century ~ the story of Alice Paul and Susan B. Anthony. They fought for women's right to vote, even though many, including politicians and other women, thought they were "radical" and even "angry". Thanks to their hard work, determination, and refusal to give in, every American woman enjoys the right to vote in every election.

"Women in the Voting Booth", an article in the Daily Record, begins with...

"It was 90 years ago this month that women across the nation got the right to vote through ratification of the 19th Amendment in 1920. This was 144 years after the Declaration of Independence — proclaiming that "all men are created equal" was signed, and 50 years after African-American men were given the right to vote."

When will adoptee's be given the simple right to their own identity? 

Adoptees deserve the same right as every other American citizen to access their own original birth certificate and court records upon adulthood.

It will be a wonderful day when ALL Adoptees can proudly walk into the Bureau of Vital Statistics office and request their own original, unfalsified birth certificate without "good cause", without shame, and with equal standing.

Adoption Reform Speech: "THIS TIME MUST COME"

By Sandy Musser

Presented at the First March on Washington Adoption in August of 1989, by Sandy Musser, a natural mother who went to federal prison for helping people search:

"I stand here before you today as a civil rights activist for the adoption reform movement. But I want to talk about three well-known activists of other eras who loudly and clearly proclaimed the need of freedom for their people."If a man named Moses were standing here before us today, I believe he would be speaking on our behalf and say to our present government - Let My People Go! Because Moses was not only the leader of the Jewish nation- he was also the most famous adoptee - one who had been adopted outside of his Jewish heritage and Jewish faith.But when he became aware of the bondage his people were in, he fought and persisted to see that they were set free. The Bible says that God heard the heart cries of His people. Our heart cries are now beginning to be heard around this country. We fight against the plagues of the adoption and child welfare system - the plague of the sealed record, which always equals cover-up; and the great plague of all - a corrupt system that has become a billion dollar business!" But I believe that we're well on our way to the Promised Land, and that most intelligent, caring individuals really want truth and openness - not secrecy and lies. This will be a land that will not see the need to sever birth roots nor eradicate the family name; a time when guardianship is a more cherished role than ownership. It will be a land that will not require the control of the social work profession, nor legislated rules and regulations; a land where no money need exchange hands (known as "fees") in order to adopt a child. Our Promised Land will be a land where adoptees, birthparents, and adoptive parents can come together and form a circle of love that will be immersed with openness, honest; and heartfelt caring."

If Susan B. Anthony were standing before us today - she, too, would be speaking out on our behalf. She, too, would be saying, let these people go. She knew what it meant to be denied rights - rights that her male counterparts enjoyed. She fought and led the women of America through the streets and halls of justice so that they too could have a voice at the ballot box. In 1873, she and 15 other women marched to the voting booth and exercised their God-given right to vote - and for this she stood trial. She was prosecuted and fined - a fine she refused to pay. How many of us are going to have to stand trial, pay fines, and be prosecuted for demanding or exercising our God-given right to our original birth certificate or other records concerning our own lives?"

If Martin Luther King could be here today, he would most likely be at the forefront of our March. He would be raising his hands, his head, and his voice, heavenward and shouting to the world - Let these people go! In one of his famous speeches, Martin Luther King said, "I have a dream that someday our people will not be judged by the color of their skin" We share a similar dream - that the day will soon come when we will not be judged or branded because we bear the name of 'adoptee,' birthparent' or adoptive parent.'

"We pray for the day that we will not have to bargain, plead, beg, petition or pay for what is rightfully ours. We anticipate the day when legal documents called birth certificates will no longer be falsified - when birthmothers are no longer signed into the hospital under an assumed name, given them by an agency or attorney - we look toward the day when a simple request for information will be granted - and when Big Brother no longer stands over us with folded arms guarding our most prized possession - our BIRTHRIGHT!"

Finally, I want to share the words of a poem written by MaryAnneCohen, a birth mother with great insight and foresight. It's entitled 'THIS TIME MUST COME'

"TIME WILL COME when our tragedy will not be replayed, When no child will be torn out of the arms of love into the arms of money. When all births will be blessed, all equal. And there will be no word remembered to brand a child born outside society's ties, no recording of legal lies…When love is more lasting than papers, and no child is deprived of either heritage or nurturing, even when they come from separate places. And it is finally seen that blood and home are not the same, And neither replaces the other, and there is no quota for love…

"TIME WILL COME when social workers are to serve, not sever; When they know it is better to unite than separate, To be true than to lie, to be seen than to hide, To accept than renounce, that the give and nurturing of life are both sacred and deserving of respect; That all parents are real parent, not rivals. That love is stronger than fear of laws or time,and cannot be terminated, cannot be legislated, cannot be denied…

"TIME WILL COME when all children can grow, become real, cast off shadows, renew or sever ties by their own choice, be responsible, BE FREE! When our bondage ends, and we answer to our children; Answer with the gift of sight, gift of words, gift of sorrow…When every person has the right to trace their roots in their mother's face, their father's eyes…When nobody is condemned to eternal childhood,and no mother cries forever…

"THIS TIME MUST COME"Copyright © 1989, 2001 Sandy Musser.Visit Sandy's website at http://www.angelfire.com/fl2/musser

Santa's Antithesis?

© Photographer: Aguirre_mar | Agency: Dreamstime.com

(Originally published in 2010...we ate at the same restaurant today and I was reminded of this day...)

Something happened today that I still can't believe...the timing, especially.

I had been wanting to pay the attorney that was involved in my adoption way back in 1968 a visit for a long time, but it was one of those things I just kept putting off. I knew he was still "in business" and wanted to talk to him personally while I still had the chance...to see if he might remember something...anything...about my original mother. She died at the age of 32 while looking for me but was somehow under the impression she had given birth to a son.

The only other contact I had with this attorney was several years ago when I was trying to get my adoption records opened at the court house. I had already obtained a court order for my obc and reunited with my entire original family years before. But I wanted the adoption records themselves...

The Judge had approved my request, but every time I called to see if the records were available yet, the clerk stated that they could not find my file. Finally, after several calls I started to panic. They kept saying it could not be found...

So...I called this attorney to see if there might have been a chance that the adoption was finalized in a different county. As soon as I told him that I was reunited with my family and explained the situation about the file not being located at the court house, he became defensive. He asked how I ever got the information to find my original mother and then said, "If I had done my job right, you would have never been able to find out anything." Needless to say, he wasn't much help.

I made one last attempt at the court house and finally they found my file "in the basement." It was so surreal reading my own file...my parent's home study (barely 2 typed pages), and my mother's signature on the consent.

I had to give all that background information to get back to my story...So today my husband and I had met for lunch at one of our favorite Thai restaurants. The tables in this place are really close together and it was packed. I noticed a nice-looking older gentleman at the table next to us, but didn't pay any attention to him. He even offered to share his table with another man who needed a place to eat (it is a great buffet), and I guess my husband overheard them introducing themselves to each other.

He didn't mention this to me until we were up at the cash register paying for our meal...casually, he mentioned, "Does the name O.G. mean anything to you?" What?

Why yes...immediately I told my husband I had to go back and find out if he was THE O.G. who had done my adoption...

Sure enough, he was. He invited me to sit down and we had a wonderful conversation...I'm sure it was a huge surprise when I pulled out of my purse a picture of my first Mom...He slowly took his glasses off and examined the picture, but said he couldn't remember that far back. He said he did 35 adoptions a year back then...and "did everything possible to keep things secret."

He said he wrote the same non-identifying information on every file...all his "birthmoms" were 5'3, weighed 120 pounds and were Baptist. It hit me that is what was in my file, and I always wondered why my first Mom's pictures made her look taller than that. Now I knew.  I was so flabbergasted that I forgot to ask him why my First Mother thought she had given birth to a boy.  She was awaiting the return of her son, up till the day she passed away.  That makes me so sad.

I have heard other reunion stories where the first mother had been told she had given birth to the opposite gender as well.  Some have been livid that their names were changed on the birth certificate, and dates of birth as well.  All to prevent the first mother from "interfering" or "coming back". 

He admitted that back then he "didn't even think about" the consequences of his actions. He said he gets calls all the time from adoptees and first mothers, but cannot help them at all. That's when I gave him my card...he seemed genuinely pleased and said he would definitely give them my name. It felt so good to "come full circle" yet again and have this chance encounter. Especially right now...the week of a great conference being held in our state..."Life...Adopted!"  

(This is now 2014 and I have yet to receive one call from anyone he referred to me for search help.)

As he drove away in his shiny, white Lexus, I tried hard not to be judgemental.

How could a man, so polite and warm (he reminded me of a small-statured, sweet-mannered Santa Claus) have done what he did so many years ago...I have to believe it was ignorance. Society dictated so much (see "The Girls Who Went Away")...and yet was so wrong.

He is still a practicing attorney and has been for 52 years he said. I'm sure for many adoptive parents O.G. WAS Santa Claus...at some point, however, we all must grow up. Santa Claus and sealed records create quite an illusion, one more innocent than the other.

One has to wonder WHY the adoption industry fights so hard against restoring the civil right of adult adoptees to obtain their birth records...especially when we find story after story of past and current unethical practices being perpetuated against first mothers, adoptees, and even adoptive parents in adoption. (See "The Girls Who Went Away" by Ann Fessler, or "The Baby Thief" by Barbara Raymond.

I can only pray that as adoptees and original mothers continue to tell our stories that laws will be changed so the actions of ignorance cannot continue to affect those "touched" by adoption. We can't rely on piece-meal legislation and adoption codes that fail to protect the identity rights of adoptees (both the generations of the past, as well as today).

We need laws to ensure ethical practices are being followed...not just hope against hope that adoptees will even have a factual birth certificate on file. Ensure that right for every adoptee and individual born through assisted reproduction...genetic truth, heritage, and history.

Amazing day indeed.

"Personhood" for Whom?

“The laws of this state shall be interpreted and construed to acknowledge on behalf of the unborn child at every stage of development all the rights, privileges, and immunities available to other persons, citizens, and residents of this state." ~ language in the newly passed Oklahoma "Personhood" bill

* As a pro-life Oklahoman and an adult adoptee, I am saddened by the lobbying effort of the Right to Life groups against ethical adoption reform and adoptee access legislation.  See "When It Is Illegal To Know Who You Are."

Think about it. Adoptee's very identities are aborted when their birth certificate is sealed. No matter how much they love their adoptive family, they live their entire lives asked to fulfill the legal role of someone they were not born as. They are human beings who have a right to know their truth. 

I would like to address pervasive myths regarding Adoptee Access Legislation currently
being passed in several states across our nation. Restoring the
unconditional right of adult adoptees to obtain their original birth
certificates is a human right supported by The Child Welfare League of
America and several other child advocacy and adoption groups. Statistics
in the states that have restored this right show that abortion rates do not increase and adoption rates do not decrease.
(See American Adoption Congress at http://www.americanadoptioncongress.org/reform_adoption_data.php)

The Supreme Courts of both TN and OR (both adoptee access states) have ruled that birthmother's were never promised confidentiality under the law, but instead, archaic
"sealed records" laws in adoption were only enacted to
protect the newly formed adoptive family. In fact, if a birthmother
relinquishes her child for adoption, but for some reason the child is
never adopted, that child's original birth certificate is never amended
or sealed. This alone proves that "sealed records" was not enacted to
protect the "privacy" rights of birthmothers. It was enforced upon them.

The true story of Philomena Lee shares the plight of millions of women during the "Baby Scoop Era" who lost their children to adoption. 
(See Jan Baker's article, "Open Records: Do Birthmother's Need Protected? at http://adoption.about.com/od/adoptionrights/a/openbirthmompro.htm) 
Kansas, our neighbor to the north, has never sealed original birth
certificates to adult adoptees. Restoring the right of adult adoptees to
obtain their original birth certificates is a basic human right.

Birth certificates of American citizens should never be "sealed" or "amended" (falsified) from the very person they belong to, yet the adoption industry continues these practices. This is unethical and violates the very core beliefs that the "right to life" movement claims to support.  Whose interests do we serve?      

True "personhood" mentality would not permit this to happen to millions of fellow human beings. Yet, these very organizations lobby against adoptee access legislation.  They lobby against ethical adoption reform measures that would ensure human-rights protections for the very ones they claim to serve (OK HB 2442 & HB 3011).  See "Veronica Case Leads to Adoption Reform Proposals".   

Their powerful lobby reduces adopted individuals to a commodity; our very identities sealed and amended for the fulfillment of an economically driven supply & demand based system.(See "Shotgun Adoption" in The Nation ~
http://www.thenation.com/article/shotgun-adoption) or "Giving Away Baby".

Legislators can prove themselves as "pro-life" by extending the SAME rights and privileges of "personhood" to adult adoptees. 

Currently, in all but 7 states, adoptees remain "perpetual children" in the eyes of the law, without the rights and privileges afforded to every other American citizen to access their own record of birth. Archaic "sealed records" law strips adopted citizens of their human dignity, identity, and history.
(For information about the states that have enacted this legislation see Adoptee Rights Coalition at http://www.adopteerightscoalition.com/p/for-legislators.html)

It Was As If You Were Expecting Victory

© Photographer: Rtimages | Agency: Dreamstime.com

It worked for Luper ~ Maybe some 'sit-ins' are in order at the Vital Stats office regarding the "sealed records" system in adoption?

In honor of Martin Luther King Day I'd like to repost this article about civil rights hero, Clara Luper ~ what an inspiration!

I so wish my beautiful Mom and first Mother were here to help celebrate their grandson's birthday this weekend.  What an honor for him to share a birthday near Dr. King's. 

It was as if you were expecting victory: Luper took front seat in segregation fight
by: NORA FROESCHLE
World Staff Writer 7/15/2007

The battle for civil rights in Oklahoma had perhaps its most defining moment in 1958 at a drugstore counter in Oklahoma City. A history teacher named Clara Luper captured the attention of local and national media by organizing what is thought to be one of the first publicized sit-ins. "It was as if you were expecting victory, just waiting on time," Luper, 84, said in a recent interview at her Oklahoma City home. "I just think that it happened yesterday; it's that fresh in my mind."

Sit-inners, as they were called by those in the movement, would gather at Katz Drugstore in Oklahoma City, find an open seat and order a soda. The drinks never came. Sometimes five hours would tick by at Katz and other segregated establishments in Oklahoma City and around the state. Luper, then a history teacher at John Marshall High School, led the student sit-ins with her three children in tow.

"I must have been 11 or 12," said her son Calvin Luper, 60. "It definitely had an effect on my entire life. It made me walk the line straighter than a lot of teenagers." Calvin Luper recalled a cross-country trip to New York City to perform a play for the youth council of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. For the first time in their lives, the young people sat at cafe counters in cities and towns along a northern route. "That was a feeling that to this day I cannot adequately describe," Calvin Luper said.

The group was hit with the reality of segregation when they returned home through the South. "I wanted the kids to see segregation in other places than Oklahoma," Clara Luper said. Often referred to as the mother of the civil rights movement in Oklahoma, Luper was arrested 26 times during the six years she led sit-ins in Oklahoma City and around the state. Luper said her father inspired her to believe things could change. Calvin Luper becomes emotional when he talks about his grandfather. "My grandfather never had the opportunity to take us to a restaurant. You know how your grandparents bring you to Furr's . . . he never had the opportunity because of that 'lady' segregation," he said.

But Clara Luper said she always knew a change was going to come. "The majority of blacks never accepted segregation as a way of life. They believed it was a temporary situation," Luper said. In 1964, one sit-inner finally got his drink order. "I didn't worry because I believed in a God that I'd never seen. I just believed," she said.

Stolen Identities

© Photographer: Drx | Agency: Dreamstime.com

The issue of humans rights for adults who were adopted as children ~ whether domestically or internationally, affects millions of Americans and their families.

Adopted individuals are the only group of American citizens who are NOT afforded the RIGHT of owning their OWN original birth certificates and identity information.  Unless you are personally affected by these archaic "sealed records" laws ~ it probably doesn't seem very important. BUT IT IS.

You see, there are proven life-long issues for individuals who are separated from their family of origin. AND there is a billion-dollar BUSINESS of separating children from their family of origin, in order to fulfill another family's desires.

This same business lobbies state governments to keep all these transactions SEALED permanently, even to the PRODUCT of these transactions ~ the adoptee. Since when should HUMANS be allowed to be the PRODUCT of an industry? Most instances of this happening are fought against vehemently in society ~ child-trafficking, slavery, etc. So why are sealed and amended (falsified) birth certificates accepted without question?

Why are adults prohibited from knowing their PERSONAL identity, history, origins, genealogy, medical history, and roots ~ FOREVER? These are some extremely important HUMAN RIGHTS issues that need answers ~ here in our own 50+ states. It affects millions of individuals, families, and decendents of adoptees.

Several U.S. states (most recently New Hampshire, Rhode Island & Oregon) have passed legislation which RESTORES the RIGHT of adult adoptees to their original birth certificate.  Kansas and Alaska have NEVER sealed original birth certificates from adult adoptees.  

Adoptees have been working diligently for DECADES to make this issue known and to educate lawmakers. The sad, sad story ~ we are being silenced, shamed, contradicted, and refuted by the VERY "professionals" who SAY they were working on our behalf ~ the adoption agencies & attorneys ~ the situation remains that adopted children DO NOT REMAIN CHILDREN FOREVER. Yet the laws treat us as perpetual children with NO rights to our own identity and birth information. It affects us personally on a primal level, it affects our spouses, our children, our grandchildren, and all those who come after us.

Adoption law can best be explained as state-sanctioned identity theft.

I've been attending an Adoption Task Force at my state's Capitol recently where the State Dept. of Health reasoned that it would be too expensive to keep count of the number of adoptions completed in our state ~ not fiscally possible. They even mentioned to one Task Force member that they are receiving original birth certificates for babies targeted for adoption (those in "open" adoptions, which by the way, are not legally enforceable and could become "closed" adoptions at the adoptive parent's will) where the potential adoptive parent's names are ALREADY being listed on the obc, before the adoption is even finalized and a new "Amended" birth certificate is issued.

When the legislators present expressed concern about this practice and the Task Force was questioned, one adoption professional spoke up saying "it is the birthmother's 'choice' to put whatever she chooses on the original birth certificate". This just happens to be a representative from an adoption agency who has been in business for many years and is notorious for using "alias" names for first mothers who were shamed into placing their babies during the "Baby Scoop Era" of the 50's, 60's and 70's (see Jan Baker's article, "Do We Really Need to Be Protected.") 

One adoptee I know found her first mother only because she paid this agency several hundred dollars to act as an intermediary. They were the only ones with the information to match the alias name on her obc with her first mother's true name. Once they were reunited, her first mother could not believe there was an alias name on her daughter's birth certificate and was under the impression her daughter would be able "find her" easily once she turned 18. So untrue. 

Without a true and factual (unfalsified) government document "Certificate of Live Birth", and an adult adoptee's right to access this important information, our civil rights continue to be violated.

Myths perpetuated by the adoption industry fighting to keep records sealed are simply not true.

We continue to dispel common myths surrounding adoptee access, sharing the good news that in the states which have implemented this law, abortion rates have actually declined more than the national average, and that birth mother "confidentiality" was also a myth perpetuated by the adoption industry. In fact, birth mothers were never promised (nor asked for) confidentiality in the law. It was enforced upon them.

The TN and OR Supreme Courts have both ruled on this issue. "Sealed records" were not implemented until 1939 in OK ~ to protect the newly formed adoptive family, not birthmothers.  In fact, even today, if a birthmother relinquishes her child for adoption, but for some reason the child is never adopted and remains in foster care, his/her original birth certificate is never sealed or amended.
   

Please read more ("Birthright" by Jean Strauss; "The Baby Thief" by Barbara Raymond) about this important HUMAN RIGHTS issue and come along side adult adoptees (along with their families) who are simply asking for the same right as every other American citizen. 

In August of each year, adoptees and their families from around the nation come together and share this important information at the National Convention of State Legislators during  Adoptee Rights Day.  Consider how you can personally help to "open the wells" for adoptees and their families. 

Please contact your local state Legislator today and let them know about this important issue!

"Mr. Caterpillar": The Saga

© Photographer: Mkoudis | Agency: Dreamstime.com

It's amazing how every day "life" shares wisdom, if I am just open to listen.

One of my favorite times of the day is when I get to pick my son up from school. We are so blessed that he attends what I consider the BEST preschool in our hometown. Truly. He loves it, is growing and developing, feels loved, and shines the biggest smile both when he walks in the classroom each morning, and when I pick him up in the afternoon. I so wish he could get his college degree from this school! lol

Anyway, this afternoon, after my brief bask in feeling his little arms around my neck in our "pick me up from school hug", my son eagerly lifted his index finger to my face, proudly displaying a smiley face that had been carefully drawn with a marker. "Look Mommy", he excitedly said. "Mr. Caterpillar!" I drew my head back to focus on this tiny miracle of a finger he was so proud of, brought it to my lips, and gently kissed the smiling "caterpillar", which matched the smile on both our faces. What a joy he is.

We hurriedly made it down the hall and to the bathroom for our traditional "potty" stop before heading home. And that's where this tragedy began. In the stress of trying to hurry through the routine and make sure our hands were washed, I failed to take the time to really listen. You see, being premature, my son struggles with communication. He tries so hard, and is doing an amazing job. But it takes extra patience to encourage his voice, his words, for him to get his complete thought out, instead of being overcome with frustration and emotion in trying. Any time we are pressed for time or feeling the least bit stressed, it complicates this for him. That alone motivates me to grow as a person and parent. I take nothing for granted. Nothing. Because he was so small.

But in trying to get out of the bathroom quick, to let the next person in, I hurriedly "helped" him wash his hands and couldn't understand why he was so frantically protesting. "It's just dirt and we have to wash it off," I impatiently exclaimed, as Mr. Caterpillar's eyes and mouth (too tiny and unrecognizable to even jog my memory of the loving moment of our introduction just moments ago in the classroom) disappeared down the drain. Finally able to spit it out, "But Mommy, his eyes!", it was too late. "Mr. Caterpillar" was gone. In the minutes that ensued of anger and rebuke, I knew my son's heart was broken.

I so pray he will learn to more easily cry when he is hurt or disappointed. For his own sake. It hurts (understatement) to imagine what he must have endured those months in the NICU, along with the pain of being separated from his Mother. Jesus, fill him with Your "intensive care" to completely heal his heart and emotions, I pray.

After profusely apologizing, we finally made it out to the car. I rejoiced inside to see Andrew's sweet smile erupt as we artfully re-discovered "Mr. Caterpillar", his beloved friend. Not only did we draw "Mr. Caterpillar", but Mr. Caterpillar's Mommy & Daddy! What a love-fest as they all hugged and kissed in sweet reunion. MMMAUH!

This not so insignificant incident reminded me in so many ways of adoption.
Adoptee's very identities are legally washed down the drain, through "sealed records", yet how many times are they dismissed in the struggle to communicate, when this is such a primal (even preverbal) part of their experience?

Why aren't they heard when protesting "sealed records", or the unethical practice of "adoption" in today's society, which essentially equates to selling humans and sealing their identities from them? The outrageous financial transactions, unethical practices & laws surrounding adoption (fees, marketing and "incentives", and "sealed records") are screaming this truth, if only someone will listen. Thank God for the six US states who have listened (even The Child Welfare League of America supports adoptee access legislation) and passed laws restoring the civil right of adult adoptees to obtain their original birth certificate.

Is it too hard to hear because we are trying to accomplish a different agenda?

Even "Mr. Caterpillar" needed a little help to find himself out of the drain. Maybe now he can become a butterfly!

"A little child shall lead them."

Thank you, God, for such great teachers! Help us all learn to listen, I pray.

Let the "Sunshine" In

© Photographer: Jiaodan | Agency: Dreamstime.com

Every year, on the third week of March, advocates of open government celebrate Sunshine Week around the March 16th birthday of President James Madison. One of Congress' top lawmakers in the realm of the Freedom of Information Act says there is a lot of work to do in beefing up the most important open government laws. In 2009, Senator Patrick Leahy was a guest on "Federal News Radio" and said this:

"The right to know is a cornerstone of democracy. No democracy exists unless the people know what the government is doing in their name. If you're kept in the dark about key decisions that affect your lives, then that democracy fails.

Without access to public documents, officials can make decisions in the shadows, and often in collusion with special interests, they can escape accountability for their actions. And once eroded, the right to know is very hard to win back." (Senator Patrick Leahy)

* Original birth certificates and adoption records were not "sealed" in the United States until the 1930's and 40's. In her book, "The Baby Thief: The Untold Story of Georgia Tann, The Baby-Seller Who Corrupted Adoption", Barbara Raymond wrote about the chilling effect Georgia Tann had on influencing "sealed records" laws in adoption.

"How much power can one person have to make social change? In this fascinating account, author (and adoptive mother) Barbara Bisantz Raymond presents a compelling look at the social phenomenon of adoption in the United States, shaped as it is by Tann's crimes. Before the 1920s, few adoptions occurred...but Tann realized there could be a market...especially if she falsified and fabricated birth records and used her influence to close adoption records. Raymond recounts this astonishing and horrifying true story with tremendous self-awareness and intrepid research into Tann's ongoing legacy." - Tampa Tribune

The Child Welfare League of America supports legislation restoring the right of every American adoptee to obtain their original birth certificate. It is simply the right thing to do, to protect the rights & integrity of all Americans.

Falsified Original Birth Certificates

© Photographer: Katn1999 | Agency: Dreamstime.com

Here are two articles on the same case in Florida which describes a very common practice in adoption ~ the falsification of the name of a natural mother on an original birth certificate. As in these cases, it was common for an adoption facilitator, agency, or attorney to encourage this practice.

In today's "open adoptions" the name of the potential adoptive parents are sometimes being listed on the child's original birth certificate, rather than waiting until the adoption is finalized and an amended birth certificate created.

This is a human rights violation and legislation should ensure that every American citizen has access to their own non-falsified original birth certificate, for identity, genealogical, and medical history.

Genealogists have concluded that because of archaic "sealed records" laws in adoption and fraudulant practices like this, a large percentage of all American's family genealogy will be inaccurate in another four generations. When we deny the human rights of one, it affects everyone.

Adoption in America will not be ethical and void of gross conflict of interest issues and civil rights violations until ALL adult adoptees are restored the unconditional right to obtain their obc; until legislation is passed to ensure unethical practices of falsifying birth certificates is stopped; and the almighty dollar is no longer the driving force in a supply/demand business of adoption.


MAN, 47, SUING TO ANNUL HIS OWN `BABY SALE' ADOPTION
http://poundpuplegacy.org/node/27405

Relates to: Winnie Faye Higginbotham Yarber (now Winnie Faye Whitaker)
Date: 1999-06-09
Miami Herald, The (FL)
Author: KAREN TESTA, Associated Press
Dateline: BOCA RATON

For nearly 20 years, Michael Chalek was tormented with unfulfilled questions of his birth, his adoption and his true parents.

Now, at age 47, he's condemned to know the answers.

Chalek discovered he'd been sold for $200 by a baby broker after his young mother was coerced into giving him up under an assumed name, state records unsealed recently show. Chalek claims that was the beginning of a childhood marked by sexual and verbal abuse.

His adoptive parents and the baby broker cannot defend themselves - they are all dead. But Chalek hopes a lawsuit filed this week in Alachua County will right some of the wrongs: he's asking to annul his 1953 adoption and get a new birth certificate with his true mother's name.

``By me doing that, it's making a statement that ought to be made,'' said Chalek, who moved a few months ago from Boca Raton to Estes, Colo. ``I think the individuals involved in this ought to be exposed.''

That has been Chalek's lifelong quest. He has been aided by investigators, including Virginia Snyder.

Chalek was born Jan. 25, 1952, in Jacksonville to Winnie Faye Higginbotham Yarber, a barroom waitress who had separated from her husband and became pregnant by another man.

Eight days later, the child then known as Baby Barnwell went home with Alex and Adela Chalek, who had contacted baby broker Lenora Fielding when they were not successful at having their own child, records show.

Florida adoption laws were not as strict then, and adoptions could be arranged by doctors or lawyers, said Josette P. Marquess, coordinator of the Florida Adoption Reunion Record. Adoptions such as those arranged by Fielding were not really legal - but that was largely ignored.

About a year after his adoption, Michael Chalek said, the Chaleks had their own son. Michael claims he began to suffer sexual abuse by his mother as he grew up in Gainesville and later in Atlanta. There is no record of any abuse being reported.

At age 11, he found out he was adopted and he became obsessed with wanting to know about his birth family, he said.

``It burned in my lower gut all the time,'' he said Tuesday. ``I always wondered every single day who I really was.''

A vital document
In 1981, Chalek found a document that named the hospital where he was born.

Seven years later, a judge listened to one of Chalek's repeated petitions to unseal his confidential records - something rarely done in Florida without a compelling medical need, Marquess said.

Judge Robert P. Cates allowed Chalek access to 100 pages of his early life's history. The revelations were startling, Chalek said.

Notes from state case workers showed Fielding coerced his birth mother into using a false name. The record also showed his mother asked a state worker if she could get the baby back.

The mother - Winnie Faye Whitaker - welcomed the telephone call this past December when Chalek finally found her. His birth father died sometime in the 1970s.

``I didn't want to give him up - but I was so young,'' said Whitaker, now 70, who added she supports Chalek's court request. ``I asked if I could just get the baby back, and they told me no. I'd already signed the papers.''

Those are the papers Chalek hopes to have annulled by his petition.

Madelyn Freundlich, executive director of the Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute in New York, said annulments of adoptions are extremely rare. And of those, most are sought by the parents, not the children. She's never heard of a new birth certificate being issued.

``This is really an unbelievable set of circumstances,'' said Freundlich, whose institute studies adoption issues.

Anger over payment
Attorney Mallory Horne, former Florida Senate president and House speaker who filed the petition on Chalek's behalf, said Chalek was angered by the fact his parents paid his birth mother for him.

``He took it more in the nature of a buying him, which really was an insult to him,'' Horne said.

Chalek hoped to sue the attorney who brought his adoption to the court and the judge who approved it - both now elderly men. Horne advised him he'd have no case.

Instead, Chalek has turned his efforts to mobilizing other adoptees in similar situations and has set up a website, www.adoption-fraud.com. He hopes if the annulment is successful it will pave the way for others to follow suit.

Marquess fears a chilling effect if he's successful.

``What happens then when adopted children are disgruntled for whatever reason? . . . I say disgruntled, certainly not abused as Michael said he was,'' she said. ``. . . We are a litigious society, and I think we are litigious about things we don't need to be litigious about.''

Chalek is beyond litigious. He's writing a book and is showing no signs of letting this chapter of his life rest easily.

``I have covered every inch in this,'' he said. ``I am going all out with this.''

Oklahoma legislative task force on adoption completes work

Oklahoma legislative task force on adoption completes work | NewsOK.com

Adult adoptees in OK appreciate the work Representative Nelson has done in ensuring better financial over sight in adoption. It was gravely needed, based on the findings of this Oklahoma Grand Jury investigation . Interestingly enough, the task force consisted mostly of those who make their living in the business of adoption.

Six U.S. states have passed legislation restoring the UNCONDITIONAL human right of adult adoptees to access their original birth certificate. The legislation recently passed in both Maine and New Hampshire, for example, is strongly supported by The Child Welfare League of America. The states that have passed this legislation, as well as the Tennessee Supreme Court, determined that birth parents were never guaranteed "perpetual anonymity" under the law. Sealed records were not even enacted until the 1940's to protect newly formed adoptive families, not birth parents. Mothers were given no choice but to relinquish their children under sealed records laws, and a whopping 97-99% WANT to know where their child is. "Birth parent privacy" is a myth of the adoption industry. In fact, mother's who surrendered their babies for adoption are also asking for records to be unsealed. Kansas has never sealed obc's of adult adoptees. Abortion rates do not go up, and adoption rates do not go down in states which have done the right thing and restored the dignity and rights of adult adoptees.

In state law now, a Judge can open adoption records for "just cause". Adding any mention of "birth parent privacy" into the law is a farce, because state after state is realizing that it didn't/doesn't exist. If a birth mother relinquishes her child for adoption, but for some reason the child is not legally adopted and lives in foster care, for example, their original birth certificate is never sealed from them.

The Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute has an excellent report on their website entitled "For the Records" which explains this issue in depth. This is a civil rights issue for millions of adoptees in America. There is more work to do.

In the task force meeting, it was made to sound as if the intent in the new bill would be that a Judge should always determine the adult adoptee's right to obtain their records as a right that outweighs "privacy rights" of a birth parent.

We tried to explain that:

1) Adoptee's don't request medical records of a birth parent ~ they request their OWN original birth certificate or adoption file, and

2) In states that have passed unconditional access legislation, it has been found that "birth parent privacy" rights is a myth, because birth parents did not ask for, nor were they promised "perpetual anonymity" under the law.)

However, the language that made it to Oklahoma Senate Bill 510 was this:

I. In consideration of a request for the disclosure of birth-parent medical records to an adult adoptee, the court shall authorize the disclosure of such records only if the rights of the adult adoptee outweigh the privacy rights of the birth parent.

Every other American citizen has the right to obtain their original birth certificate, and adoptee's should have that right restored also.

We are thankful that the OK Legislature commissioned the OK Adoption Review Task Force and that it was open to the public. They heard the voices of adult adoptees, first parents, and adoptive parents who attended the meetings, and SB 510 will help to provide better recording and financial oversight in OK adoptions.

The author of the bill and several other legislators we've spoken with understand the issue of adoptee's accessing their records in adulthood, and have agreed to remove the language. The OK Adoption Code currently allows a Judge to grant adoptee access to their file/obc with "just cause", and until OK joins the growing list of states who pass true Adoptee Access legislation, it is better than the language recommended from the task force.

•Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed.
-- "Letter from Birmingham Jail," April 16, 1963 ~ Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

A Civil Right

A Civil Right: Adoptees Should Have Access to Their Birth Certificates
Posted by: Adam Pertman, Executive Director, Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute
Posted: January 12, 2011 10:54 AM

At the beginning of the 1900s, grim predictions punctuated the debate over women's suffrage. Everyone in the family unit would be damaged in innumerable ways if this outrage were allowed to happen, argued the critics, some of whom went so far as to predict the end of civilization itself.

Half a century later, another historic social change was in the offing, and the warnings of impending disaster were at least as dire. Indeed, some opponents of the movement to extend civil rights to people of color in our country were so sure that personal and social ruin were lurking around the corner that they fought with filibusters, nooses and guns to maintain the status quo.

Forecasting the future evidently is a difficult thing to do. Looking back is obviously easier, and it leads to two unambiguous conclusions. First, whether the effort is to give women the vote, provide African-Americans with equal rights, create access for people with disabilities -- or level the playing field for any other discriminated-against segment of the population -- there will be nay-sayers who insist that horrible things will occur if the sought-after change is allowed to transpire. Second, they will be wrong.

No, this is not a commentary about "don't ask, don't tell" or any other gay rights issue, though the identical observations would certainly apply. Rather, it's about providing legal and moral equality for a segment of our population that is not generally perceived as deprived of any rights: the approximately 7 million Americans who were adopted into their families. And the right denied to most of them is so basic that it almost sounds like a joke: access to their own original birth certificates.

There are lots of reasons that adopted people want the same documents, containing the same information, that the rest of us take for granted. Some have medical motives, including individuals who need a matching organ or information about an inherited disease; others want to know about their heritage or genealogy (anyone remember Alex Haley?) or why their eyes are green or what their original names were; and many yearn to see the faces of the women and men who gave them life.

At the bottom line, however, those are not the reasons it should matter to everyone that adopted people, on reaching the age of majority, cannot automatically obtain their own original birth certificates like the rest of us. We should care, and we should feel outraged, for the same reason so many men supported suffrage for women and so many white Americans joined the civil rights struggle -- because we should find it offensive when any minority group in society is deprived of equal rights.

Here's where the nay-sayers come in. Honest-to-goodness, the following are among the consequences they say will occur if state legislatures give adult adoptees the right to access their original birth certificates: The number of adoptions in our country will fall, the number of abortions will rise, the lives of women who were promised lifelong anonymity when they placed their children for adoption will be ruined and, yes, adoption itself will be in peril.
Research in the field, including by the independent, nonpartisan think tank that I head, refutes or calls into serious question every one of those claims; here you can read the latest report on the subject.

Equally important, this is not a guessing game or a social experiment. During the last decade, more than a half-dozen very diverse states in terms of geography and politics -- from Oregon to Alabama to Maine -- have done what the nay-sayers warned them not to do, and two states -- Alaska and Kansas -- never sealed these documents, as most of the nation did in the last century. Guess what calamitous fallout there has been in these states.

None.

Will some people face difficult or unexpected situations, or even get hurt, as a result of extending this right from coast to coast? Almost certainly, but we know from research, experience and official statistics (in the above states) that the numbers of those adversely affected will be tiny -- and we should do all we can for them by taking steps such as providing public notice, offering counseling, and giving women who placed their children for adoption the ability to officially declare if they do not want to be contacted.

Is this issue as important as women's rights or civil rights or disability rights or gay rights? Maybe or maybe not, but it's not a contest to see which group should get rights and which should not. Besides, this much is certain: Every additional day, month and year that original birth certificates remain sealed, some more adoptees and birth parents who want or need to find each other will give up instead, and some more will die, without ever filling the hole in their hearts.

So it sure does feel important to the people who are deprived. And if we understand that it's about equality and social justice for another group of Americans -- 7 million of them -- maybe we'll feel it, too.

Adam Pertman is Executive Director of the Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute and author of "Adoption Nation: How the Adoption Revolution is Transforming Our Families - and America," which is scheduled for release in April and has been reviewed as "the most important book ever published on the subject."

Vital Records

Vital Records - the debate on adoptee access from Jean A. S. Strauss on Vimeo.

We're Birthparents Promised Confidentiality?

Pam Hasegawa's testimony on behalf of the NJ Adoptees' Birthright Bill 6/14/2010 from Jean A. S. Strauss on Vimeo.

Adoptee's Rights Day ~ Louisville, KY

Make photo slide shows at www.OneTrueMedia.com

For The Records II

FOR THE RECORDS II: AN EXAMINATION OF THE HISTORY AND IMPACT OF ADULT ADOPTEE ACCESS TO ORIGINAL BIRTH CERTIFICATES

Authors: Dr. Jeanne A. Howard, Susan Livingston Smith, and Georgia Deoudes.
Published: 2010 July. New York NY: Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute
Document Type: Policy Brief (46 pages)

http://www.adoptioninstitute.org/research/2010_07_for_records.php

"For the Records II: An Examination of the History and Impact of Adult Adoptee Access to Original Birth Certificates" is based on a years-long examination of relevant judicial and legislative documents; of decades of research and other scholarly writing; and of the concrete experiences of states and countries that have either changed their laws to provide these documents or never sealed them at all.

The Institute's report suggests that, while a growing number of states have restored OBC access to adopted people once they reach the age of majority, efforts to accelerate the trend have been impeded by misunderstandings about the history of this controversial issue, misconceptions about the parties involved (especially birthmothers), and mistaken concerns about the impact of changing the status quo – e.g., legislators often assume that negative consequences will occur but, in fact, they do not.

Among the findings in the 46-page Policy Brief, which updates and expands the Institute's November 2007 report, "For the Records: Restoring a Right for Adult Adoptees," are:

•Barring adopted adults from access to their OBCs wrongly denies them a right enjoyed by all others in our country, and is not in their best interests for personal and medical reasons.
•Alternatives such as mutual consent registries are ineffective and do not meet adoptees' needs.
•The vast majority of birthmothers don't want to be anonymous to the children they relinquished.
The recommendations in the Institute's new Policy Brief include:

•Every "closed" state should unseal OBCs for all adult adoptees, retroactively and prospectively.
•States that already provide limited OBC access should revise laws to include all adult adoptees.
•No professional should promise women anonymity from the children they place for adoption.
------------------

Executive Summary
At a time when an array of complex adoption-related concerns are being discussed from Haiti to Moscow to Beijing, within the adoption community in our country, one seemingly simple question continues to receive the most consistent, intense attention: Should adopted adults, like all other Americans, be allowed to have their original birth certificates? Indeed, for over a generation, no other adoption issue has generated more debate or caused greater division.

Today, more efforts to restore adult adoptee access to original birth certificates (OBCs) are being mounted than ever before. In the three legislative sessions that have begun since the Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute's November 2007 publication of "For the Records: Restoring a Legal Right for Adult Adoptees" (of which this report is an update), OBC legislation has been introduced from coast to coast. In the 2009-2010 sessions alone, lawmakers in at least 11 states considered the issue - and in at least one, Illinois – they have enacted a statute in recent weeks significantly expanding OBC access, making theirs the seventh state to do so in the last decade. During the same period, Massachusetts has implemented a narrower OBC access law, while activists in several more states, including New Jersey and Rhode Island, have been organizing, fund-raising, and taking other steps intended to result in yet more legislation.

Though support is clearly growing for the "open records" movement, as it is often called, proponents are hardly declaring that victory is on the horizon. Most of their efforts have been unsuccessful, and many of the OBC laws that have been enacted are compromises that grant access to some adoptees but not to others; these compromises open an emotional divide among advocates on whether they are championing the majority or betraying those left behind.

A major reason such compromises are offered – and why more states have not enacted access legislation – appears to be that much of the debate has been muddied by misunderstandings about the history of the issue, misconceptions about the parties involved, and mistaken concerns about the consequences of changing the status quo. It is commonly argued during the legislative process in every state, for instance, that OBCs are sealed to protect the anonymity that birthmothers were promised, and that changing the rules now would undermine their lives and be harmful in other ways (such as increasing the number of abortions). An examination of the research and other evidence, however, shows that all those assertions are flawed or incorrect.

This paper examines the most current evidence related to restoring adult adoptee access to original birth certificates, updating the Adoption Institute's 2007 For the Records report.

A lengthy examination and analysis of the arguments on both sides of the debate leads to these primary findings:

•Barring adopted adults from access to their original birth certificates wrongly denies them a right enjoyed by all others in our country, and is not in their best interests for personal and medical reasons.
•Alternative solutions to providing adopted adults access to their OBCs, such as mutual consent registries, are ineffective and do not adequately address the needs of adopted persons.
•The overwhelming majority of birthmothers do not want to remain anonymous to the children they relinquished for adoption and support (or do not oppose) those children's access to their OBCs.
•Providing adult adoptees with access to their original birth certificates does not threaten the integrity of adoptive families or the institution of adoption; indeed, the evidence suggests that the opposite is the case.
•In other countries and in U.S. states that have restored adopted adults' access to OBCs, or never sealed these records at all, there is no evidence of any of the significant negative consequences critics predict.
Based on these findings, the Adoption Institute recommends significant changes in current adoption law and policy in order to restore adopted persons' rights to information about their origins and heritage - and to achieve equality for the members of all families, regardless of how they are formed.

RECOMMENDATIONS
•Every state should restore unrestricted access to original birth certificates for all adult adoptees, retroactively and prospectively. The experiences of many other countries, of U.S. states where birth certificates have never been sealed from adopted persons, and of those states that have restored access, all indicate that there are few if any problems when access is granted. There is no significant legal, experiential or factual rationale for denying adopted adults the right to access their OBCs – a right that is enjoyed by all non-adopted Americans. Allowing access with the provision for contact preference forms is a practical solution that affords birthparents a greater opportunity to express their wishes – and therefore greater "protection" than they currently have with sealed records.


•State laws that provide access to original birth certificates to a limited number of adult adoptees should be amended to enable them all to obtain these documents and thereby be treated equally. Allowing some adopted citizens access while denying it to others is inequitable on its face. The evidence in states that place restrictions on who may obtain OBCs is the same as it is in states that allow universal access; i.e., none of the predicted negative consequences occur. So there is no substantive reason to prevent an expansion of their laws to include all adopted persons once they reach the age of majority.


•No agency, attorney, social worker or other adoption professional should promise birthparents that their identities will remain concealed from their children. There is no constitutional, legally enforceable "right to privacy" for birthparents from the children they created. Some states that sealed OBCs in the past have opened them and more are likely to do so in the future. Moreover, courts may open records upon petition and, finally and most pointedly, it is becoming increasingly possible for birthparents (among others) to be found via the internet, through search professionals, and with other modern resources. As a consequence of all those factors, it is clear that anonymity cannot be assured with any certainty; promises of lifelong confidentiality are therefore contrary to best adoption practices.


•A national adoption registry should be implemented to enable all adopted persons and their birthparents, no matter where they reside, to participate. Registries should not ever be viewed as an alternative to access to OBCs, and the evidence is clear that state-specific mutual consent registries are generally ineffective. A well-publicized national registry, however, would allow adoptees, birthparents and other family members to find each other across state lines, thereby mitigating some current problems and playing an important role until all states restore the right of adopted adults to access their original birth certificates.


•Confidential intermediary services should be available throughout all states, even after original birth certificates access is restored. Many if not most adopted persons, birthparents and other involved parties prefer to search and make contacts themselves - but some want or need help. Confidential intermediaries can be valuable resources to provide guidance and support for those who are unsure about making contact to obtain information or to arrange a reunion. Ideally, these services should be either subsidized by the state or made available at a very reasonable cost to participants.


CONCLUSION
Some opponents of restoring access to original birth certificates cast adult adoptees' desire for this basic information about themselves as a matter of curiosity, a simple interest that can be satisfied through other means, while others express seemingly substantive concerns about the implications of altering current law. Some proponents of unsealing OBCs focus on search, reunion and medical information as the key issues, while others say the bottom line need not include any of those issues because the debate is really about equal rights and social justice.

Wherever one stands, this much is clear: The laws on the books in most states do not benefit the vast majority of the affected parties, and therefore should be changed. Modern adoption practice, with its emphasis on openness, honesty and family connections should be the operating model. It is time to end the secrecy that has not only resulted in shame and stigma for nearly everyone concerned, but also has undermined the institution itself by sending a signal from the very start – at the time a birth certificate is issued – that adoption has something to hide.

Wo Ai Ni Mommy (Review)

Just sat through a premiere screening of an enlightening new documentary by Stephanie Wang called "Wo Ai Ni Mommy" ("I Love You Mommy") and can't even put into words the thoughts spinning through my head...

It's about a Jewish family from New York as they travel to China to adopt an 8 year old Chinese girl who has lived with her beloved foster family most of her life, mainly to fulfill the role of "big sis" to the "baby" of the family, a 3-year old "daughter", also adopted from China.

The first time this little girl laid eyes on her new "Mother" was caught on tape at a busy airport (or somewhere chaotic) that was so noisy you could barely hear the words being spoken. It all seemed so rushed and hurried, almost in a panic. What words you do hear are translated into English subtitles...phrases like, "You are no longer...your new name is "Faith"..."Don't call your foster mother, this is your new "Mommy"...Do you understand?

All this was overwhelming the little child whose tear-filled eyes resembled those of a scared animal more than a human. When asked if she had any questions, her only comments were that "the new 'Mommy' didn't look like the lady in the picture", and "Do you like fish?"

The horror-show only got worse...back at the hotel...the same hotel we had watched the adoptive mother as she sat on the bed nervously counting out stacks of crisp bills; commenting about how she really "didn't mind" the necessity of paying the expected "fees" necessary to seal the deal.

Almost immediately upon return, the English flash-cards came out and the tutoring began...this child HAD to learn English and fast. Giggles were heard throughout the auditorium as Faith (in her adorable accent) struggled to please and sound like her new Mommy's voice as she carefully sounded out words like "haaamburrger" and "iiiiscream" (how appropriate).

Days later they were still at it, when Faith finally fell over on the bed exhausted and made the plea that she didn't want to continue. Suddenly it became all about the adoptive Mother who insisted she "sit up, NOW!"

"How hard can this be Faith, is it really torture?", she chided.

The torment escalated to the point of what seemed like watching an interrogation of the little girl about "love", comparing her to the other "daughter" back home and asking if she thought her new "Mommy" was ugly because she was white and not Chinese!?!?

The most telling part of the documentary was when the adoptive mother and Faith met her foster family for one last lunch before their trip to America. The love in that family was tremendous and it was so painful to see the gradual "letting go" and self-explanation (It IS all for the best, isn't it?) this child and family were having to force themselves to believe in order to survive their painful separation.

Weeks later, back in America, when "Faith" would act out, the adoptive mother would hold her face...taunting her with, "HOW can I help you if you won't tell me what's wrong, "Faith"? The entire movie was full of subtle and not-so-subtle double-messages, typical of adoption in our society.

As the months went by, much to every one's relief, Faith appeared to "acclimate" to her new country, home, identity, and family. The "hissy fits" came further and further apart; the darling smiles and hugs intensified. She looked and acted more and more like your "typical" American girl...fighting over toys & lovin' "Hannah Montana". Much to every one's surprise ??? she even lost most of her Chinese language.

By the end of this raw "journey", the adoptive parents (at least temporarily) got exactly what they wanted, and the adoption system intended...an Americanized "daughter" who has completely shut herself off emotionally through disenfranchised (disallowed) grief.

What choice did she have?

As everyone (it seemed) RAVED about "how FAR she had come", I sat there in disbelief, wondering how far she's gone...numb to her feelings, identity and congruent self...forced to survive in her new world, being TOLD how to feel and act. Living the adoptive role she is expected to fulfill.
The name of this documentary could just as well be "Sit up, Shut up, and Suck it Up."

It is scheduled for premiere on PBS the end of August...

*I know there are different "points of view" when people watch this and mine is just one. What I am able to express is just the tip of the iceberg regarding the thoughts and feelings I'm still mulling through the day after...
I realize the girl will have "benefits" through adoption; I realize she is considered "special-needs" because her hands and feet are "weak" and that she may not have had as many "opportunities" in China, but...really? NOW her heart may be dead to her true self...which is worse?

The way adoption is accomplished is abuse...beginning with traumatic separations...to being "coached" (either directly or indirectly through societal expectations) how to feel and act about them (hence, survive)...amended birth certificates, sealed records, and disenfranchised grief through-out an adoptee's lifetime. All this because of the fact adoption is driven by the economic principles of supply & demand. The money involved corrupts the way countries view children and provide needed support (or lack thereof) for them and their families of origin. We can never really know WHY a child is "abandoned" or becomes "available" for adoption because of the almighty dollar.

There is NO REASON ethically for our society to keep tolerating this...the first step is to open all records (reveal truth) for adult adoptees and remove ALL MONEY from the transaction...it only sets the climate for conflict of interest and corruption. Children are not commodities...adult adoptees are not perpetual children.

Original Birth Certificate a BIRTHRIGHT

Original birth certificate a birthright
by Peggi Sturmfels
May 19, 2010.

Within the next few weeks, legislators in the Assembly
will once again vote on whether many New Jersey residents have the
right to access their origins and be granted the right to have their
original birth certificate.

Sealed by court order when we were adopted as infants and children, we
as adults are told that we still do not have a basic right afforded
all other New Jerseyans. Opponents of S799/A1406 talk of protecting
birth parents and honoring so-called contracts of confidentiality.

But the truth is that no such lawful contract was made. No such
statutory language exists. Many of these birth parents were forced
into agreements at a time of desperation, fear and grief. Many of
these women, some of them unwed, under-aged mothers, signed away their
rights.

In those few terrible moments when they were faced with giving away
their children, many did not realize that not only were they handing
over their babies to strangers, they were agreeing to never knowing
whether or not their children were placed in loving homes or left to
languish in foster care. In those remaining minutes of unbearable
stress, they were asked to trust authoritative figures with no
knowledge of their motives or integrity. And in those final steps, as
they left the hospital empty-armed, those same strangers told them to
move on, to forget and time will heal.

Records are sealed upon adoption, not relinquishment. The absurdity of
this practice is that most of the adult adoptees who now search and
find their roots find out that so many of their birth mothers have
been searching for them as well. My sister tells me that when my birth
mother died two years ago, she told her how she always thought of me.
My sister and I have been in contact for four months. Finally found
after a 40-year search, I will get to share my children and
grandchildren.

This policy of so-called protection is particularly sad when played
out to the extreme, such as when siblings who are put into the system,
records are not sealed until a finalized adoption takes place.

The case of my daughter and her sister, placed into the system as
teens, shows the idiocy that has been the practice in this state for
more than five decades. Unable to adopt our daughter until after she
reached adulthood because of parental rights termination issues, her
records were sealed when the adoption was finalized. She now has no
access to her original birth certificate. Her sibling placed with
another family and never adopted has access to hers.

Two sisters, raised together until the ages of 13 and 14, have kept
contact into their adulthood. One sister can access her family health
history, one cannot. One can renew her passport, one (since 9/11)
cannot. So the argument that adoption seals the birth records for the
sake of confidentiality for the birth mother is asinine. Many adoptive
parents were given the name of the birth mother by the agency at the
time of placement.

So what's in a piece of paper? Our identity. Our health history, Our
ethnic background. Our heritage. Our legal right to be the same as you.