The other day I got an email from the National Council for Adoption announcing its new and improved website. Sort of a launch into its 30th anniversary celebration capped off in July by its annual conference (Note to Chuck Johnson: I’ll be there. I promise to behave if you promise to keep adoption attachment whacko Karyn Purvis from speaking again–and please–no baby massage this time!) The conference is followed in November by The Bow Tie and Pearls gala at the Willard where the Congressional Coalition on Adoption Institute will be given NCFA’s Friend of Adoption Award. I can already hear Dr. Pierce jumping on heaven’s trapdoor over that one. Me, too.
The website announcement included this curious greeting from NCFA’s acting CEO Chuck Johnson:
Whether you are a birthparent, an adoptive family, adoption agency, a representative of the government, the media, or you are simply a person interested in adoption, you will know exactly where to click to find the information you’re looking for.” –Chuck Johnson, NCFA vice president and chief operating officer
Thank you Chuck for admitting finally that after 30 years of posturing to the contrary, NCFA, offers nothing to bastards and adoptees. (“Birthmothers” will have to take up their inclusion with you personally.)
Under the History –or shall we say Revised History–tab we learn (my emphasis):
For 30 years, NCFA has been the authoritative voice for adoption. Our research and education programs have led the way in promoting sound, ethical adoption policies and practices that have enabled children to find nurturing, permanent families through adoption.
I realize there’s a whole NuNuNCFA (staff changes faster than Tommy Manville changed wives) that has no idea of their employer’s own lunatic history. Just how “sound and ethical” is sealing public records and pathologizing the product on whom you owe your very existence? Maybe I should remind NCFA of its past and mission and overnighg it a copy of its incorporation papers and other documents (like confidential correspondence from Dr. Pierce) which states quite clearly that NCFA’s mission, in response to the Carter Administration initiative, is to keep birth certificates sealed from the snoopy bastards they claim (or claimed) want to destroy the grand beneficient institution which created them. Give ’em a birth certificate, and the next thing you know, they’ll want the keys to the adoption agency’s safe deposit box. Then, there’s the Wild Wild West NCFA Factbooks 1, 2, and 3 (4 was really boring) which portrayed bastards demanding their rights back, and those who support them, as ungrateful homewrecking flag burning psychos. Calling Dr. Kirschner! Calling Dr. Kirschner!
Bastards don’t make it into the NCFA Adoption Advocate 2010 Adoption Legislative Issues (January 2010), either. The big concern there is tax credits and other big government hand-outs and bail-outs, foster and international child redistribution, “birthmother” bribes and surrender tax breaks, and “birthfather rights” through putative father registries. Maybe if bastards came to NCFA and its friends in high places with our hands out for taxpayer boodle we’d be farther along.
Finally! Under Achievements, we come in #5, just above a lukewarn endorsement of “safe havens”:
While we are not opposed to open adoptions, reunions, or the exchange of identifying information when parties to adoption mutually agree, we are opposed to laws that empower one party to adoption to receive confidential identifying information about the other without the other party’s consent. Openness in adoption can be healthy when both parties to adoption choose it voluntarily; but it can be traumatic and disrupts lives when one side forces him or herself on the other.
For 30 years, we have demonstrated our commitment to protecting the option of privacy in adoption by repeatedly initiating efforts to educate state legislatures across the country about the harmful effects of legislation that would allow an unrestricted right of access to birthparent identifying information in lieu of requiring mutual consent of birthparents and adult adopted persons prior to release. As early as 1983, we drafted a model mutual consent bill and began educating state legislatures about the advantages of using mutual consent registry laws to safeguard privacy and enable mutually desired contact between adult parties to adoption.
Even if this section were worded better, it still wouldn’t explain how NCFA has achieved anything regarding bastards. There may have given us some minor setbacks on unrestricted access, but our biggest enemy is our NCFA-lite friends in places like New Jersey, California, and Illinois–those useful idiots, (bastards gone good) whimpering for reunion, not demanding restoration of civil rights. Come to think of it, I can’t remember NCFA ever actually addressing rights in any meaningful manner. Maybe it’s cuz they can’t.
Give NCFA a few more years and it and the deformers will be on the same “playing field.”
NCFA would like us to go away. It would make the organization’s life so much easier. But we won’t go away. The only solution, then, is for NCFA to give it up and let us be.