Bastardette’s Letter to the Texas Senate State Affairs Committee: HB 984–Amend or Vote No!

Posted on by — Leave a reply

This is not a language nit-pick. Language matters, and there is a world of difference legally between the words “prefer” and “authorize.” These sections take the traditional language of the CPF and turns it on its head exchanging the word “prefer” for “authorize;” thus, creating a “Contact Veto” (without that specific term in the bill) that will act as a restraining order against an adopted adult with no opportunity for that adult to appear in court and stand against the accuser. No reason needs given, and no court adjudicates the request. We believe that a Contact Veto by that or any other name is unconstitutional and actionable.
Continue Reading →

Bastard Nation Action Alert: Texas HB 984–Amend or Vote No!

Posted on by — Leave a reply

Section 2 and Section 3 of the bill would provide a birthparent a new affirmative right to “authorize” or “not authorize” contact, by their adult adoptee. The language of “prefer”, as utilized in Oregon, Alabama, New Hampshire, and Maine, was lobbied OUT of this bill. By replacing this single word, it changes the intent of adoptee autonomy. Continue Reading →

Adoption Do-Rights Through the Lens of William S. Burroughs: I want to be buried right in the same coffin with you

Posted on by — Leave a reply

Our Adoption Do-Rights are known by various names: deformers, Scooby-Dooers, Do-Bees ,asskissers, and the American Adoption Congress and its hangers-on.The goal of these pristine patsys is to be liked by downtown fat cat tax eaters, adoption industry hacks, and therapists who do their damnedest to suck the life out of Class Bastard dispensing persona bromidal solutions to political and class rot.

As Burroughs so perfectly put it: Continue Reading →

Bastardette on Illinois NPR: Foundling Birth Certificates

Posted on by — Leave a reply

My central gripe about the bill is that it would create a “foundling birth certificate” to serve as an original birth certificate for all newborns “relinquished” at a state-authorized safe haven ” drop off point. The certificate, to protect parental anonymity, will contain no identifying information about the relinquishing parent even if that information is known to hospital, fire, police, or social service authorities. Continue Reading →

Indiana SB 352: The Non-Access Bill by Guest Blogger Lisa Zatonsky

Posted on by — Leave a reply

On the surface, the bill used the State Registry as an intermediary while allowing the biological parent(s) to add an additional disclosure veto on all information found in the Registry and on pre-adoptive sibling contact information. The disclosure vetoes would remain effective even after the biological parents were deceased. As if the mutual consent aspect of the Registry requiring both the biological parent(s) and the adoptee to be registered before information may be released isn’t a big enough access hurdle? Repeatedly, SB 352 names the disclosure vetoes as a “non-release of contact information form”. A Contact Preference Form, along with its exact wording, is not in the bill. Yet, the terms and their names were interchanged by those presenting the bill to individuals, media, and legislators. Continue Reading →

INDIANA: EMERGENCY ACTION ALERT: Urge Indiana State Senate to Vote No on SB 352 as written

Posted on by — Leave a reply

Indiana has a very bad bill in the hopper and ready for vote in the Senate. Orignally a clean bill it has been deformed into an anti-adoptee piece of legislation that not only includes a Disclosure Veto, but a warped and inaccurately named Contact Veto that allows birthparents to authorize the state to withhold contact information from pre-adoptive sibings even if they are registered with the state’s adoption reunion registry. Indiana Open Access has offered an amendment to remove ant-adoptee language. Continue Reading →

Ohio: Sub SB250 passes; Ohio Right to Life tramps on first parent and adoptee rights

Posted on by — Leave a reply

t’s been said that Sub SB 250 has its genesis in Mike Gonidakis’ hassle in adopting a child domestically, He has said it was easier to adopt his daughter in Guatemala than his son in Cleveland. If true, Gonidakis inconvenience zone trumps the rights of biological families to stay intact….t’s been said that Sub SB 250 has its genesis in Mike Gonidakis’ hassle in adopting a child domestically, He has said it was easier to adopt his daughter in Guatemala than his son in Cleveland. If true, Gonidakis inconvenience zone trumps the rights of biological families to stay intact. Continue Reading →

Ohio will lose millions in revenue if Sub HB250 passes; tax credits will subsidize private adoption corrorations

Posted on by — Leave a reply

I’m no mathematician, Thankfully, The Ohio Department of Taxation has done my work for me. According information from the department found in SuB SB 250’s fiscal note, we learn that Ohio taxpayers can be soaked (depending on how the credit is spread out) between $6-9 million a year–and possibly up to $11.5 million. To top it off, money from other state projects–including public library funding– would need to be reduced to cover the revenue loss.The department expects these costs to increase annually.

From the fiscal note: Continue Reading →