PHILLY PROTEST 2009 A HUGE SUCCESS!

On July 21, 2009 people from as far as England gathered in Philadelphia, PA to protest legally sealed birth certificates in the United States.

Adoptees, mothers, fathers and adoptive parents marched down Market St. in Philly to the Pennsylvania Convention Center, where the National Convention for State Legislatures was being held. Two police cars stopped traffic at each intersection to allow marchers to freely cross the street. Protesters yelled, “You’ve got yours – we want ours!”

While protesters spoke with legislators and other NCSL participants outside the building, others were inside the centre working at The Adoptee Rights Coalition booth. Lawmakers and stakeholders were educated for three days straight by experts, such as Joyce Bahr, president of New York’s Unsealed Initiative and Paula Benoit, former Maine senator and president of Adoptee C.A.R.E. , on successful legislation and current laws pertaining to legally sealed birth certificates. Visitors to the booth, I found, were extremely receptive to learning more about the issue of sealed birth certificates in their state. Some, not surprisingly, did not know adopted persons could not obtain their own birth certificate.

Birth certificates, based on the research I have done, were sealed (what’s on paper, not was is propagated) so the person adopted could not possess two official documents showing two identities. So why hide the names’ of the parents? A simple stamp on a birth registration stating, “Not for official use” would have been sufficient.

While digging through Ontario’s child welfare and adoption legislative archives (1890s-1950), I was not able to locate one document or stumble upon one sentence in any legislative material that stipulated or even suggested that mothers who had lost their daughters and sons to the system of adoption, were assured privacy/anonymity from those children sent away to be raised by people other their own families. The only reference I found to mothers was the recommendation that these women, post an unwed pregnancy, receive adequate counselling to help them integrate back into society and be deemed worthy of a respectable man’s admiration. Governments should be ashamed of the way they treated these women.

What legislators need to know is that sealing birth certificates with the idea that there was government-authorized privacy among family members, is a tall tale fabricated by proponents of legalized secrecy. How can anybody justify sealed birth certificates based on a law that does not exist?

A protest for adoptee rights is about offering people affected by adoption policy and laws, a platform to articulate to the lawmakers and the public how these laws are fictitious, discriminatory, and why they need to change. An adoptee rights protest, like any other protest proclaiming social injustice, attracts people with diverse experiences, and some express those experiences differently. But, to be sure, all participated in the Adoptee Rights Protest for the same reason: to reclaim what was unjustly taken from them- without compromise.

It was incredibly powerful meeting adopted people at the Philly protest who were, for the first time, speaking publicly about sealed birth certificates and fighting for their rights. How brave, how inspiring—how ‘right’ it felt. Bravo to my sisters and brothers for a job well done!

There were also two other events in Philly that cannot go unsaid –

Our dear friend Heather and her Mother, Carol reunited in person on July 20, 2009. About ten of us piled into two vehicles and headed to the Philly airport to wait with Heather, while she waited for Mom to arrive from Florida. Talk about a nail biting experience!

Heather held up a sign that said “Hi Mom” and we waited. We waited some more. We shifted left to right of the pathway leading out from arrivals. Then we shifted back to the left. Then, with what seemed like not a moment to blink, Heather’s sign dropped to the ground, her eyes were fixed on her Mother’s face – she and her Mother locked arms and held each other tight. It had only been 38 years since mother and daughter had been legally separated.

The other event was the road trip to Helium Comedy Club where we heard our Linda Gambino deliver her comedy routine. Linda is not just funny; she is sharp, gorgeous and can deliver the jokes without missing a beat. Let’s just say that she is a masterpiece. When Linda shows up at a comedy club in your city—get there fast.

Lastly, a gigantic thank you to all the participants and supporters of this Philly event. Of course another thank you goes to my comrades in The Adoptee Rights Coalition who pulled the demonstration and convention centre booth together.

We’re keepin’ it real.

Check out lots of
Pics & videos

THE ANTI-ADOPTION CONFUSION

Not a week goes by without reading somewhere in adoptoland criticism about those of us who are anti-adoption.

I can't speak for all who claim to be anti-adoption, but I do have my reasons for being anti-adoption, so let me share them with you here on Bloggers Ending The Myth.

Adoption is:

a) a system that changed my identity and legally sealed my original one. (By doing that it legally removed my choice to know my parents, my ethnicity, my culture, my siblings, my grandparents, my relatives, and my ancestry.)

b) a system that fed me scraps of no-name-privacy-protected dribble about my family and called it: Non-Identifying Information. Basically, what they were saying was: please eat shit and be grateful that somebody actually provided you with that shit to eat. Non-Identifying information goes like this: "Birth mother had brown hair." "Birth sister born in NY -1958." "Birth father was Catholic."

c) a system that would not legally allow my mother, father, siblings or relatives access to my (changed)identity or an update of my whereabouts or well-being.

(I've left out the transfer from one set of parents to another, as I didn't need adoption for that to happen - that was done via foster care and permanent legal guardianship, where I still possessed my own identity and access to my family.)

d) a system that sealed my birth certificate and refuses to unseal it, based on the presumption that I will cause harm to my parents simply because I have the "adopted" tag hanging from my sleeve.

e) a system that deems me capable of causing harm, when it is that same system that sealed my birth certificate. So, the obvious question here would be: if the system that created adoption knows that it is creating potential criminals, why does this system exist?

f) a system that won't present to me on paper why my birth certificate is sealed and why I am deemed capable of causing harm to others.

g) a system that sells humans.

h) a system that in some jurisdictions, only allows a mother 24-48 hours to revoke her adoption consent. (Here of course the system has denied a child the right to be raised with its own mother and/or father or other family members.)

i) a system that, even when it allows humans to posses their own birth certificates, says, oh, but only some can have their birth certificates - the potential criminals don't get theirs because a parent has dropped a disclosure veto into their daughter or son's file.

k) a system that does not require mandatory child advocates representing the best interest of the child.

l) a system that will not allow me to obtain my mother's death certificate because I can't provide my birth certificate to prove that she was my mother.

m) a system that allows those who have adopted a child in an open adoption agreement, either the adopter(s) or the mother/parents to break that agreement without court intervention, which would advocate for the rights and of the person adopted and reinforce the ethical responsibilities of those who chose to bring a child into the world and those caring for the child.

Is there ever a reason to take a human's identity, change it, legally seal the original one and legally separate family members from one another? Well, maybe there is a parent who is completely insane and should really have no contact with any human, never mind their own child/ren - but don't phone companies offer services to help deal with these situations?

Anti-adoption is not about leaving children in unsafe environments just for the sake of maintaining one's identity or keeping a family together. That would be anti-child safety. It's about the multitude of unethical and discriminatory laws and policies inherent to the system of adoption. These laws and policies apply post the forced removal or voluntary surrender of a child. Surrendering mothers do not seal their children's birth certificates - a mother loses her parental rights. That is not adoption.

Finding a home for a child is not adoption. Child adoption is a paper process, a choice after a decision has been made for a child to be raised by anyone other than that child's parents. The system of adoption allows those planning to raise a child not born to them, the choice to enforce the changing and sealing of a that child's identity and the permanent legal separation from its family.

Until the adoption system abolishes many of its immoral practices and policies, the first being the legalized sealing of birth certificates, I will remain, anti-adoption.