Just what in the hell is going on in Maine?

That’s what we’re all wondering. The latest directive out of Access 2006 is a request for supporters, especially adoptees, to ask their doctors to write up a brief statement on the importance of medical histories for adoptees and fax it off to Access 2006. Undoubtedly for future legislative discussion–which isn’t gonna happen.


One more time: 1805 IS NOT ABOUT MEDICAL RECORDS. LD 1805 is–or rather was–about the restoration of the civil right of adopted persons in Maine to access their original birth certificates and identities. Rep. Deborah Simpson and Sen. Sean Faircloth and their adoptee-hating thugs in office have gutted the bill and its intent. Neither will suddenly get a message from God and change their minds. These politicians hate us.

PLEASE GET THIS THROUGH YOUR HEADS: No one is entitled to anybody else’s medical records or histories. Your parents (natural or adoptive) are not required to tell you their medical histories. You are not required to tell them your medical history. A medical history belongs to you and whoever you chose to share it with. No one can force anybody to do otherwise.

Do you guys really want to go down in history as the folks who let politicians gut adoptee rights in Maine?

KILL LD 1805 NOW !
Do you really want to go down in history as the folks who let politicians turn the clock back 50 years on adoptees?

KILL LD 1805 !
Do you really want to deal with the nationwide consequences of your pie-in-the-sky faith in the goodness of politicians who obviously hate you?

This is not “damage control” It’s damage creation!

Walk away with your dignity and ethics in tact.


A Bastard Nation KILL HD 1805 NOW alert will be out shortly.

Read it and act!


4 Replies to “MAINE: KILL THE BILL!”

  1. Dear Cathy–

    I know you perceive your arguments as rights based, but the majority of testimony and your current request for doctors to fax Access 2006 statements about the importance of medical histories says differently. Your entire platform is now based on access to medical records and history–a platform that is disastrous whenver and wherever it has been promoted. The medical records access argument fundamentally flaws the bill, giving it an entirely different meaning. When a bill is fundamentally flawed you need to withdraw it.

    There are no amendments posted on the Maine leg. page as of today. And no fiscal note. Yet Simpson and Faircloth have been quoted in the press repeatedly about their amendments. Emails from Access 2006 have described the same amendments. There is no difference in these descrptions.

    Bastard Nation cannot be mistaken in what we have witnessesed, heard, and read. Our legislative committee has nearly 10 years of lobbying experience. If you think you will get amendments removed on the floor you are sadly mistaken. That is extremely risky and seldom happens.

    If the amendments you are sending out to the public and that we are reading about in the press are not the “real”amendments, then tell us what the “amendments” are.

    We have 3 other questions:

    *how do 3 amendments go to the House floor?

    *which amendment would be voted on first?

    *isn’t it true that the only way for the other amendments to be voted on is for the first one to be voted down

    *which amendment would hold the most weight

  2. Marley,

    Our platform is not based on medical history, but it has been misconstrued as such. Testimony certainly went that way, although it was not intentional. We were told that our personal stories would be enough to sway the committee; if we knew then what we know now about certain members of the committee it would have been different. When we talk with legislators, we speak about the importance of the right to one’s original birth certificate; we also speak about the lie of promised privacy. Our 1953 law clearly states no such confidentiality.

    The bill is still in work session, so the amendments probably won’t hit the Me. Leg website until they leave, which should be very soon. We have no power to kill this bill, as once it leaves our hands and enters the Legislature, we have no control over it. As the amendments stand in the 13 member committee, Simpson has 6 votes, we have 5, and Faircloth has 2. These amendments will go to the House floor for a vote as LD 1805 A (Simpson),B (ours), and C (Faircloth). We have many supporters ready to speak in opposition (on the floor and in caucus) to versions A and C, and they are also ready to speak (in caucus and on the floor) in favor of version B.

    I do not think we will get amendments removed on the floor, as I’ve said it is not in our power to do so. We have legislators ready to do what is right. They have said they believe this is a human, civil right, and is the right thing to do.

    All amendments will go to the House floor and be voted on. A report to the House from committee will state that the majority of the committee believes that an adoptee has the right to his/her original birth certificate. (versions B & C both state this, although we differ on when it happens; we want it now, vs when an adoptee turns 40).

    You have the amendment information except for the retroactivity of the 1953 records. Everything will remain the same for the adoptees prior to 8/8/1953. These amendments do not change that. You were missing the fact that our original bill still remains, with minor changes (We struck the medical history requirement for some of the contact preference choices).

    I don’t feel that any amendment holds weight more than any other. Although Simpson received 6 votes, she is going with the ‘It’s a vote against women’ spiel; Planned Parenthood is working in the background against us. I’m not convinced it will fly with all the women democratic reps, as she thinks it will.

    As for the doctor statements, with the 3 amendments and time getting short for these legislators, some are not sure how they’ll vote. Many are still on the fence, with the opposition looking to do anything to push them off. Word is out that someone with pretty good authority is actually going to stand up and say that adoptees can go and get a battery of genetic testing done, so they have no need to reveal a birth parent (or no need to have the contact preference form with the medical history form attached.) Legislators will listen to this person, and the ones on the fence may fall to the opposition if they believe this tripe. Our statements will refute this person’s argument. I can’t imagine letting this person’s argument go unanswered, just because of the medical history and it’s play within the BN group. We are doing what we can. I, as well as others, have been in Augusta at least once a week talking with legislators. We have been told by more than one legislator that they’ve never been lobbied so hard on an issue. If version B doesn’t go through, we will be actively pushing for a kill of whatever remains.

    I will certainly update you on what happens tomorrow (5th work session). I have been told that it may go to the floor this week sometime. The legislature is in double sessions this week to get their work finished before adjourning – and it would not surprised me in the least to see us scheduled for a vote in the wee hours of the morning. With the committee chairs working overtime to get this issue put to the last minute, anything is possible.

    I hope I answered your questions. This issue will not die after this session, if things go awry. We have power of referendum in this state, as well as other ideas. Thanks.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *