Open Records
Open Records While much of what was said has been heard before, the symposium had some surprises to offer.
Law Professor Joan Hollinger (long associated with the Uniform Adoption Act) made several points supporting adult adoptees and the quest for birth records:
- She noted that adoptees are not a "wounded" group of individuals, implying that they would not be any more prone to intruding where they aren't wanted than any other group of persons;
- she pointed out that contact vetoes are, in effect, restraining orders without due process, and
- she believes that the burden should lie with birth parents to prove that individual records should not be opened, rather with adoptees to prove that they should, as is current practice.
Allan Hazlett, President of the
American Academy of Adoption Attorneys, practices law in Kansas and confirmed that in 25 years, the state:
- has not had any reported problems,
- has seen no increase in abortions, and
- has seen no decrease in the number of adoptions
relating to its open records policies. Kansas allows adult adoptees to receive copies of their original birth certificates on request, and offers search and reunion intermediary services to those who wish to use them.
Shay Bilchik, Executive Director of the
Child Welfare League of America, confirmed the organization's official policy supporting open records and cited a report prepared by the Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Insititute (which is
posted on the CWLA Web site) presenting research supporting claims that an overwhelming majority of adult adoptees and birth parents do indeed wish to be found.
Many of these words and sentiments have been heard before, but they've generally come from triad members and not from academia, adoption advocates and the legal establishment. Implied, as well as voiced support for the intimate and intrinsic need for individuals to have knowledge of the facts of their births (along the lines of the
Tennessee Supreme Court and
Oregon Appeals Court rulings) was, for me, a clear indication of a shift as the law, practitioners of the law and drafters of laws begin to acknowledge the social and psychological impact of the adoptive family structure.
But differences of opinion do exist about whether consent for contact should be
legislated (vetoes, mandatory intermediaries) or
voluntary, presuming that adoptees and birth parents alike will respect an expressed wish for no contact (see Oregon's HB3194 below).
Next page >
Access to Records > Page
1,
2,
3,
4,
5,
6,
7,
8,
9,
10,
11,
12
Home
Add Your Comments!
We want to know what you think. Your comments are important to us and the other readers. You are what makes this site special.