Recently, Minnesota Senate File 3193 passed the legislature. It would have opened original birth certificates to all adoptees unless a disclosure affidavit (veto) is on file. Currently anyone adopted before 1977 is blacklisted. Anyone born after that date has access unless a birth parent has filed a veto–a very active veto. In Minnesota, you see, whenever an adoptee requests their original birth certificate, the state (or its contractor) hunts down natural parents to see if they consent or object to their bastard’s request. If they object, or if the state’s super sleuths can’t track them down–then their poor bastard gets nothing, unless he or she….goes to court for a “review.” The veto remained in 3193.
Governor Tim Pawlenty vetoed the bill. Of course, Bastardette is happy that he did. But not for the same reasons. Pawlenty isn’t happy when the state breaks promises to desperate and hiding middle aged natural parents. Bastardette doesn’t like it when the state forges government documents about her friends.
Pawlety’s veto message is in pdf form, and I’m not sure if this will get you there, but try it: Ch.%20330%20Veto%20Message.pdf Here’s what Pawlenty (or NCFA) wrote:
This bill would erase the long-standing presumption of confidentiality for adoptions occurring before 1977 and make those records accessible in the same manner as more recent adoptions….sealed and confidential…. Although many birth parents may not object to the release of the pre-adoption birth certificates a significant number choose to preserve confidentiality. Statistics available from Lutheran Social Services indicate that, on average, 23 percent of the birth mothers contacted declined to release identifying information,. Releasing this information without their knowledge or consent has the potential to undermine the law and promises that existed for pre-1977 parents….Before 1977, the law supported a birth parent’s expectation their identity and birth records would be forever sealed and confidential. Breaching the promise of confidentiality previously given to these birth parents is not appropriate. Any change of their legitimate expectation of confidentiality must include meaningful notice of the change to the law and an opportunity to protect confidentiality.
Two quick comments:
(1) I’m unsure if Minnesota contracts out search and destroy missions to Lutheran Social Services or if Pawlenty is using their “statistics” as an example. But, why would anybody want to talk to a stranger–a snippy social engineer with a fancy job title from Lutheran Social Services? Why perpetuate the harm done 20 or 30 or 50 years ago by another snippy stranger social engineer?. Natural parents and adult adoptees are all grown up. We can handle our own affairs. Why don’t you go handle yours? Maybe you’d like it if I told your husband about you and Guy Noir.
(2) What promise of “confidentiality”? Did NCFA plunk its magic twanger and produce some promissory document signed by a functionary placing parents in the Minnesota Birth Parent Protection Program?
Good riddance to bad bills, but let’s be realistic!
Outside of compromises that give favors to some, not restoration of rights to all, there’s a little practical matter. It still won’t pass muster with the Axis of Evil. No matter how much deformers remain compliant, roll over, and take whatever they think they can get (but won’t) why do they continue this Kabuki show? The Axis of Evil finds disclosure vetoes, contact, vetoes, white outs, black outs, CIs or anything else you can come up with to subvert your own mission, unacceptable and will continue to kick sand in your face. Maybe a Charles Atlas makeover would help.
Thanks to J for the update!
I’m happy that the governor vetoed this bill, but positively dismayed by his reasons! The governor and his social service helpers with thier 73% stats are another generation down (at least) from the original groups of “do-gooders” who wanted to help all us little homeless babes and our wayward mamas way back after WW II.
Do you suppose it’s in their genes?
Anita
(2) What promise of “confidentiality”? Did NCFA plunk its magic twanger and produce some promissory document signed by a functionary placing parents in the Minnesota Birth Parent Protection Program?
EXACTLY!!!!! I surrendered two children and the ONLY items regarding confidentiality that I read was a veiled warning to me not to seek my children out and DESIGNED, SPECIFICALLY TO PROTECT THEIR ASOPTERS. It was intimated to some of us Sluttos that searching for our children would cause legal repercussions, such as imprisonment, etc. I am so sick of people like this speaking for us mothers when we are perfectly capable of speaking for ourselves. The mothers in the closets are a minority. I’d bet my SSI on it!
Good move for all the wrong reasons.
LOL…Excuse me, but I think that should have read “TO PROTECT THEIR ADOPTERS” not “asopters.” Senility strikes again.
I surrendered my firstborn to the Lutherans in 1964. I have my surrender doc from LCFS and not a word exists on it that speaks to or even implies ‘confidentiality & privacy’. In the late 90’s when I contacted LCFS in Addison, Illinois, in hopes of gaining some info on my lost daughter, I would have the most unpleasant misfortune in having to deal with 2 c**ts in that office..the adopter lady that answered the phone and was in charge of adoption questions and the Director herself. They were nothing but dismissive, curt and rude. I truly believe that LCFS’s stats are nothing but a figment of their rotten imaginations.
I figured ‘fuck’em’…I’ll find my daughter myself, with nothing but a birthdate and a hospital name…and I did, with the help of a ‘search angel’..I would then be talking to my daughter on the phone within 6 days.
These people working in these agency offices are not there to help any adoptee or mother.. They are the Gatekeepers and their job is to keep adults separated. O! unless you want to go on some waiting list, fork over several hundred dollars, with them acting as intermediary, contacting the adoptive parents first (for permission)and no guarantees. They will not give up their control, not even when the mother is now a senior citizen and the child is now middle-aged. I am quite sure any mother who is contacted by one of these agencies, is told nothing but negative opinions and basically intentionally scaring the shit out of the mother..so that once again she will go ‘quietly into the night’! LCFS needs to suck some massively filthy, stinking socks!! And I am being polite here, I could think of better things to shove in their lying ass mouths!
Here in Australia the adopters were given a letter to take to the hospital”to view the baby with a view to adopt” and it included the natural mothers name and the name she gave her child .
The adopters have always known our names and most didn’t pass it on to the adopted adults. When the law changed to openess in all states our State of Queensland allowed for both natural parents and adult adoptees to place an objection to information release and it has been in place for 17 years causing such pain that at least three male adoptees that I know, have taken their own lives upon finding mothers had placed objections.Mothers too have had strokes and heart attacks on learning the news and some just up and left family and friends and wandered off .
The opposition to the openess for everyone at the time of the legislation being framed only came from adopters who wrote letters to press and members of Parliament stating that they were against the law change because “they signed a contract” with the government when they took the babies to have the child forever with no interfearence from the natural mothers.They stated that the mothers were promised confidentuality at the time of taking the consent and used the American N C F A as their research.
I have been helping mothers for over 20 years and have never heard one tell me that they wanted or were promised that their child would never be allowed to find them. In fact most hoped fervently for a reunion even if they were not proactive in searching.
[email protected]
As an adoptee from minnesota, born in 1965, I am totally disgusted with the veto on this Bill. I did not ask to be put in this position……it was chosen for me by people who wanted only to protect themselves without any regard for my feelings at all. Now, adoptees are forced to live the lies and secrets of these birth parents because they don’t have the balls to stand up and admit to our existence. We are not equal……we do not have all the rights of regular Americans..and i think a law suit should be filed against our government for witholding our birth right information from us. The bill of rights says i shall have rights to my heritage and parentage. This clearly shows that my rights are being violated and I would like a show of hands on who is willing to sue? I don’t care if these birth parents want to hide…..I care as much about them as they care about me. I just want to know who i am and where I came from. Plain and simple. And it would be nice to get up one morning, look in the mirror and know where I came from. This is a luxury that the birth parents take for granted.