Search and Notify
By Shea Grimm - sheag@oz.net
(This article first appeared in the Winter 1999 issue of the Bastard Quarterly.)
In 1998, over the objections and outrage of
Bastard Nationals and
others in the adoptee community, Delaware lobbyists, including
new AAC Legislative Chair Carolyn Hoard, passed into law a
disclosure veto bill. While the AAC celebrated and adoptees
fumed, the news leaked that the Governor was only signing the
bill
under the stipulation that yet more amendments be added before
it went into effect. Those amendments included provisions
that the birthparent be notified when the adoptee applies for a
copy
of their original birth certificate, and be given an opportunity
to veto
access.
During the 1998-99 legislative session, other
AAC compromisers
have suggested provisions that would notify birthparents when the
adoptee applies for their original birth certificate, although
not allow
them a disclosure veto. We are appalled at such notification
provisions, whether they allow for a veto or not. An adoptee's
decision to access their own record of their birth is a private
matter.
Some adoptees may only seek information that
will identify them or
their birthparents, and will never attempt to make contact with
their
birth family, or will delay contact for months or several years.
Even
though these adoptees do want their original birth certificates,
for
whatever reasons, they may want to delay contact or to avoid it
altogether. Notification provisions, in addition to perpetuating
a
system of unequal treatment under the law, may set up
expectations in a birthparent that they are being sought out,
when
that may not be the case. Such provisions continue to put the
issue of open records for adult adoptees in the "search and
reunion" realm, rather than conform to a civil liberties
analysis.
We also note that search and notification
procedures, while
ostensibly in force to "protect" birthparents who want
anonymity,
do a fair job of causing the reverse to happen. Sending certified
or
registered letters, and in the case of recent proposed
legislation in
Connecticut, publishing notices in newspapers, are clearly
intrusive
provisions with the potential to disrupt the lives of and/or
embarrass birthparents. The best thing the government can do to
protect its adult citizens is to stay out of their lives
altogether,
particularly in the instance of birthparent searches.
Good Cause turned on its head
Many adoptees are familiar with "good
cause" provisions, which
allow a judge to unseal records to an adoptee upon petition if
the
adoptee shows "good cause". Interpretation of this
standard is as
varied as the judges themselves, with some judges opening
records to any adult adoptee upon petition, and others refusing
even in situations of dire medical need. In Connecticut, a
legislative
review commission has proposed opening records to all adoptees
adopted prior to the sealing of records (1977), as well as all
adoptees adopted in the future. However, birthparents who
relinquished between 1977 and 1999 would be notified when an
adoptee applies for access to their original birth certificate,
and
would have the option of appearing in court to convince a judge
the
record should remain sealed, upon a showing of "good
cause".
Such a provision produces a combination of our
objections to
notification amendments, as described above, as well as our
objection to any system that would give judicial discretion over
something that, in fact, should be unequivocally unburdened,
access
to one's government document of birth.
Shea Grimm is a reunited adoptee of mixed Native ancestry who serves as Bastard Nation's Legislative Chair. Shea is an expert in adoptee-rights issues and has written and presented on these issues in a wide range of public fora. She resides with her husband and three children in the Seattle area.
(This article first appeared in the Winter 1999 issue of the Bastard Quarterly.)
Copyright 1999 Bastard Nation
All Rights Reserved