I was adopted in Colorado in the late 1960s. At the age of 20, I had a serious illness that required access to my medical history, including my family history of birth. I regret to say that I have discovered that I have no legal right to receive my original birth certificate.
Americans generally consider their right to be truthful about birth certificates natural. That’s not the case for the nearly 5 million adoptees in this country. After adoption, courts replace our biological parents’ names with our adoptive parents’ names and then seal the original record. Access is provided only by court order.
As it stands now, adopted children face a confusing web of different state laws and policies. And this is only for US-born children. Foreign nationals are a completely different matter.
Patching of restrictions
Currently, only 10 states in the country offer US-born adopters and their actual parents unrestricted access to their original birth certificates: Alabama, Alaska, Colorado, Connecticut, Kansas, Maine, New Hampshire, New York, Oregon, and Rhode Island.
But 18 states, from Arizona to North Carolina to Wyoming, require a court order to allow adoptees to access the originals. A compromise is being reached in the remaining 23 states. In some, including Delaware, Iowa, and Pennsylvania, the original birth certificate can only be obtained by correcting the names of actual parents. The other twelve states have restrictions that allow access only to foster-borns; for example, before 1968 or after 2021.
In other states, including Indiana, Vermont, and Washington, biological parents, veto the adopter’s access request.
In Pennsylvania, an adopted person must have a high school diploma or GED to access their birth record.
The practice of making changes to birth certificates was first introduced in the 1940s. prevent birth parents from mixing with the child’s adoptive family.
Still, child welfare officials recommended that birth registrations of adopted children should be made. “It cannot be seen by anyone other than the person adopted when he is old or by court order”. Popular opinions suggested another reason: privacy of biological parents, especially single mothers who face condemnation for giving birth to children out of wedlock.
American culture has changed dramatically in the 70 years since altered birth certificates became the norm in adoption. Single-parent families have become commonplace, and children born out of wedlock are no longer labeled as “illegitimate.”
The question then is: Has the importance of sealing original birth certificates and replacing them with altered ones been overtaken by time and cultural change?
Adherents and other advocates of legislative changes allowing access to original birth certificates argue that it is a fundamental human right to know one’s own identity.
In response, many legislatures are changing their policies. Tennessee, Connecticut, and Rhode Island have recently passed laws promoting access. Tennessee legislation, The law, which went into effect in April 2021, revokes the biological parents’ power to veto the right of adopters to contact them based on information on the original birth certificate. Connecticut lawEnacted in July 2021, it closes a loophole that restricts access to those born before 1983. And Rhode Island law lowered the age at which the adopter can obtain an original birth certificate from 25 to 18.
Proposed legislation in Wisconsin and Massachusetts would provide unrestricted access. Wisconsin Senate invoice 483 It would allow adopters aged 18 or older to access “confiscated” birth certificates. Massachusetts’ HB 2294 if approved, it will close a loophole that restricts adoptees born between 1974 and 2008 from accessing their original birth certificates.
But there are also recommendations that restrict full access for every step forward. arizona recently passed a bill that excludes adopters born between 1968 and 2022 from the right to original birth certificates. And in Iowa in May 2021 birth parents were allowed to remove their names from their original birth certificates.
To close the gap, secret intermediary services run by the state now available in many states. Services allow adoptees and biological family members to call each other. If the called person does not want to contact the caller, all records are resealed and no information is given. Fees vary from state to state, and many are outrageously expensive. Colorado costs $875, E.g.
Cost isn’t the only downside. Mediation services are often cited by those who oppose legislation allowing access to original birth certificates.. They argue that the originals are not needed, as agents offer a legal alternative to finding biological relatives.
Another argument against barrier-free access is: birth families who believe they will remain anonymous would receive unwanted contacts from those placed for adoption.
But there is evidence to the contrary. In states that offer unlimited access, such as New HampshireLess than 1 percent of birth parents – 0.74 percent – said they did not want to be contacted by their abandoned children.
Gregory Luce, founder Adoptive Rights Law Centersays there is a trend in favor of unlimited rights, especially among young legislators.
“They really don’t see this as a big problem,” Luce said in a recent email exchange with her, “especially since DNA and other tools developed over the years can publicly “put out” the biological parents of a person’s own birth. publication of the record.”
I was almost 50 when Colorado changed its laws in 2016 to allow adoptees to access their original birth certificates. Thirty years ago, shortly after my medical scare, I embarked on a long and winding search for my birth parents. After ten years of research I finally found them and we were happily reunited.
I had given up on the idea of ever holding my birth certificate with their names on it again. A month ago I became aware of the law change in Colorado and submitted the necessary paperwork to obtain my birth certificate.
I look forward to your arrival. I can’t wait to show it to my biological family.
[Get the best of The Conversation’s politics, science or religion articles each week.Sign up today.]