Bastardette has gotten very far behind. I’ll be back soon. In the meantime, look for guest blogger Lainie Petersen’s take on the great dumpster toss.

You can read more of Erik’s work here. CASE BRIEF: Homosexuals and Adoption–equal protectionLofton v. Secretary of the Dept. of Children & Family Services No. 01-16723 (11th Cir. 01/28/2004) (Casemaker cite–federal library) FACTS:Florida law prohibited adoption by any “homosexual” person. 1977 Fla. Laws, ch. 77-140, § 1, Fla. Stat. § 63.042(3) (2002). “Homosexual” meant applicants “known to engage in current, voluntary homosexual activity.” Florida law let unmarried people adopt, many of whom had adopted out of foster care. Homosexual foster parents challenged the statute on equal protection grounds, arguing that homosexuals were similarly situated to unmarried persons regarding Florida’s interest in promoting married-couple adoption. [FN1] Neither party disputed that any fundamental right to adopt existed or that Florida’s preference for marital adoptive families was a legitimate state interest. No court has found homosexuals to be a suspect class. Thus the rational-basis test applied. LAW: Unless the challenged classification burdens a fundamental right or targets a suspect class, the Equal Protection Clause requires only that the classification be rationally related to a legitimate state interest. Citing Romer v. Evans, 517 U.S. 620, 631 (1996). ISSUE: “Could the Florida legislature have reasonably believed that prohibiting adoption into homosexual environments would further its Continue Reading →

A few days ago on a private mail list, a discussion started on the anti-adoption movement. The following comments were made by long-time adoptee/birthparent rights activist Maryanne Cohen. They are published here with her permission. **********To the anti-adoption folks lurking here: I think you are sincere in your beliefs and that you do want to accomplishyour agenda of abolishing adoption, in which case you will need to presentyour views convincingly and factually in the political arena, again andagain, as well as to the general public to gain support for any legislationyou may introduce. I know this is the goal of those of us who supportadoption reform; not just to talk endlessly to ourselves and each other,but to actually effect some change where we can. If you are serious about abolishing adoption, which is a legal construct,you have to be ready to deal with the world of politics, which is not akinder, gentler place. As Harry Truman said, “if you can’t stand the heat,get out of the kitchen.” You may be upset at some of the challenges to your beliefs you haveencountered here, but believe me, this is NOTHING to what you willencounter in the political arena and outside world. You Continue Reading →

Last week Masha Allen testified before the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations about her abuse at the hands of the US adoption industry and her adoptive father Matthew Mancuso. Her submitted testimony is below. To read more about Masha and her case go to Bastardette’s Masha postings here ,here, and here. These blogs also contain numerous links for further research. Testimony submitted byMasha Allento theHouse Energy and Commerce CommitteeSubcommittee on Oversight and InvestigationsOversight Hearing on Child Pornography on the InternetMay 3, 2006Washington, DC My name is Masha Allen. I am 13 years old and live near Atlanta, Georgia with my mother, Faith Allen. When I was five years old Matthew Mancuso, a Pittsburgh businessman who was a pedophile, adopted me. I was rescued almost three years ago when the FBI raided his home in a child pornography sting. After I was rescued I learned that during the five years I lived with Matthew he took hundreds of pornographic pictures of me and traded them over the Internet. Thank you for conducting this hearing. Also, thank you for letting me have Nancy Grace here. Nancy is really special to my family and me. She has been Continue Reading →

Bastardette will be away on real life business for a few days. But never fear (if you care!) I’ll be posting one more blog, then co-conspirators Maryanne Cohen and Erik Smith will guest blog. So check in every couple days! BastardetteBastard-at-Large

Today’s Lawrence Eagle Tribune has a story on yesterday’s fiasco in the Joint Committee: Law giving adopted children their birth records gains steam . (The full article seems to be available only for a fee, so I’ll post the text at the end of this blog). For those interested in the response of our Axis of Evil popinjays, however, here are pertinent quotes and comments by Bastardette. (NOTE: Amended SB 959 is still not online.) Bethany Christian Services bloviates: Pam Wood, director of Bethany Christian Services in North Andover, which arranges adoptions, said the legislation reflects an increasing openness. “Older adoptions were in the dark and people hid that they’d had a child,” Wood said. “The trend is toward more openness.” Her agency arranges adoptions where birth and adoptive parents are in touch for years, allowing the children to know their heritage while permitting parents access to important medical information.Excuse me, Pam! So-called “open-adoption” has nothing to do with access to birth certificates or court documents that belong to adults. Amended SB 959 has nothing to do with the natural right of identity–except to selectively abrogate that right. Amended SB 959 just continues the bad old system you pretend to Continue Reading →

MAY 4, 2006–Today the Joint Committee on Families and Children, after early promises that SB 959 was a no-opposition no-brainer, passed a “pragmatic compromise” bill gutting the intent of the original by creating an adoptee class system of haves and have nots. The amended version of SB 959 is not yet online. But, according to the letter from Rep. John Lepper (below) adults adopted in Massachusetts prior to 1974 and after 2008 will be “allowed” to get their birth certificates. The blackholers–those unfortunate enough to have been dumped on the adoption market at an arbitrary inappropriate moment in history–will be denied the natural right to identity and the unrestricted legal right to their own birth certificates if their former parents object. Unless, of course, they want to grovel before a judge and beg to be treated not only the same as the non-adopted, but the worthy adopted. The amended SB 959 is NOT an adoptee rights bill. The amended SB 959 is NOT a records access bill. The amended SB 959 is a table scrap thrown to do-gooding keep-your-mouth-shut deformers to shut them up. After all, if “most” adoptees can get their records, what’s the big deal? ” You can Continue Reading →

In Massachusetts the Cabots speak only to the Lodges and the Lodges speak only to God. The legislature, however, speaks to no one. For weeks adoptee rights organizations and individuals have been trying to find out what’s happening with SB 959, the no-brainer records bill that was expected to sail through. You know, the one that suddenly fell off the radar. Not surprisingly, leggies have not been available to come to the phone or return calls. Finally, a few days ago we learned that, as expected, the Joint Committee on Children and Families is reportedly set to compromise the rights of Massachusetts adoptees: to give access rights to some, but none to others. The bill is reportedly set for a deal making meeting on May 3 and will be voted out of committee the next day. We’ll keep you informed of what transpires and what you can do. In the meantime, here’s the letter Bastardette sent to the committee this afternoon. ********** I understand that SB 959 is scheduled for discussion and probable vote this week in the Joint Committee on Children and Families. I also understand that an amendment will be offered to make original birth certificate access available Continue Reading →

Dear Governor Rell: Please veto SB 0004. The original intent of SB 0004 was to restore the right of birth record access to all Connecticut adoptees no matter when they were born or adopted. The bill on your desk guts that intent. It makes access prospective only–that is, for those adopted on or after October 1, 2006. It denies to thousands of Connecticut adoptees, based solely on their adoptive status and date of birth, the natural right of identity and the legal right of public records access to their own birth certificates. Tiered rights systems such as codified by SB 0004 are open to legal challenge. SB 0004 creates a class system in which adopted persons are segregated and treated different from everyone else (the non-adopted). To add insult to injury, it treats some adoptees better than others. What makes a person adopted before October 1, 2006 less worthy of rights than someone adopted after that date? SB 0004 is a mean-spirited, ugly discriminatory bill. It is a slap in the face of every person adopted in the state of Connecticut. Go back into the drawer! Be grateful! Shut up! Adoption is supposed to be about the “best interests of Continue Reading →

BASTARD NATION: THE ADOPTEE RIGHTS ORGANIZATION ACTION ALERT WRITE TO CONNECTICUT GOVERNOR RELL TO VETO SB 0004 It is imperative that you write or call the Honorable M. Jodi Rell, Governor of Connecticut immediately, asking her TO VETO SB 0004. Email address: [email protected]: Greater Hartford area (860) 566-4840Telephone: Toll free (800) 406-1527 The Connecticut General Assembly, on April 24th, passed SB 0004, a bill that will give adoptees born after October 2006 access to their original birth certificates when they reach the age of twenty-one. This bill went through the general assembly with lightning speed, flying low under the radar. Please ask Governor Rell to send SB 0004 back where it came from so that the General Assembly can instead pass a true open records bill that will benefit all adults adopted in Connecticut. Now is the time to VETO A BAD BILL. SB 0004 is a bad bill. It is a “prospective-only” bill. This is one more RESTRICTION in a long line of restrictions placed on adopted adults’ ability to access their original birth records. “Prospective-only” bills create two separate tiers of adoptees. The rights of all adoptees born before an arbitrary date are totally ignored by such a Continue Reading →