Advertisements
Wednesday a group of adoptees met and testified to the Missouri House Standing Committee on Families and Children about Rep. Cynthia Davis' HB48 which would allow all Missouri adoptees to have full access to their OBCs and all records when they turn 18.
Paula Benoit of Maine came and spent over a week working the Legislature as well, and testified on our behalf. What amazed her was how strongly the Missouri Catholic Conference opposed the bill, along with Lutheran Children's Services and the Missouri Right To Life Alliance; they appear to be the only opponents. No one representing birth mothers appeared anyway.
It is hard for me to understand why the Church I grew up in is so opposed to allowing us, the objects they got so much money for when they brokered us, having any say about getting the papers a horse or dog buyer expects. Meeting later, Marilyn Waugh said one adoptee explained to her when Marilyn obtained her OBC for her that "I've always been adopted - now I can say I was born."
This time the Bishop's lobbyist's line was that it would be unfair to break the promises of secrecy made many years ago. Beg pardon? Since when is it the purpose of the State to enforce promises made - WITHOUT basis in law - by private or religious agencies?
Paula Benoit had some excellent advice for us; she suggested modelling our campaign upon that of the gay/lesbian alliance that simply sought an end to discrimination as a civil right, refusing to compromise or be drawn into side arguments. Thinking that over, I agree - the forces trying to keep records sealed try to change the argument from opening records to one about whether birth parents need protection from the children they surrendered. These are two separate arguments!
We must avoid getting distracted that way; if birth parents feel they need privacy, let them unite to get their own legislation passed (though most are covered by non-harassment statutes anyway.) Access to one's own records is NOT the same as contacting birth family; it may lead to that, but many adoptees don't feel the need for contact yet would like to have their own birth records.
We need to find ways to focus the OBC issue squarely upon civil rights; any suggestions or reactions?
Like
Share
I live in hope that MO law will change. I have had a Judge and a lawyer look into getting my file unsealed and have run into the privacy lock on it. I have the bad luck of having been adopted through Catholic Charities and being born in 1969. I actually know where my file is and have only non-id information, yet I can't get any closer to finding a member of my birth family. I know that I might have to make contact with an actual birth family member, but my actual intent is to only get a better medical history than I have. I don't understand why courts can't seem to understand that not having a medical history is scary and can be problematic. I have no intention of creating havoc on anyone's life or making my way into a family, I already have one. What I don't have is something so taken for granted by most people, and that is to know if my medical problems can be hereditary for my daughter.
The conclusion that I am drawing to is that Catholic Charities is worried that their information is flawed at the very least or that they are hiding something. They don't exactly have a history of being above board with their adoptions. I don't think they are "protecting" birth parents nearly as much as they are protecting themselves.
Advertisements
Welcome to the wonderful world of Missouri adoptions! The courts here seem to all be convinced that we bastards would ever want to know anything about our origins... more importantly, that our original birth parents are so ashamed of us that it would destroy their lives to acknowledge they had us. At least that was the current malarky peddled by Larry Weber, the lobbyist for Catholic Scarities this legislative session as he smugly shot down any chance of opening access to records. He told the committee that courts open records in case of medical need.
I had to explode at that remark, so when the committee chair recognized me I pointed out that Missouri courts even refused to open records for an adoptee who needed a blood relative for a bone marrow transplant; allowing an adoptee to die was more important than exposing a birth parent. So good luck on that front - it may exist in statute, but in practice it's rare that Missouri courts will consider a desire for medical history grounds to open your file. But it varies by court and by individual judge.
I don't know that your information is flawed - I found my non-ID to be quite accurate. As far as Catholic Scarities hiding anything, I suspect if the records ever came to light we might find that priests fathered bastards even more than they molested altarboys (as a former Catholic altarboy myself...). Ostensibly the Bishops' position is that "promises were made years ago" and it would be unfair to birth parents to break that promise. Of course, no one has ever seen one of these promises in writing; I know a number of Missouri birthmothers and they do not recall any such thing.
I invite you to join with us in trying to change the law. Our primary opponents are the Missouri Catholic Conference, aided by the Missouri Right to Life organizations, and the adoption agencies in Missouri. Pretty stiff competition who refuse to even consider our position. Seems like Missouri believes life begins at conception and ends at birth; (the same Legislature refused to take Federal funds for Children's Health Insurance Program - go figure...)
Hi,
I am brand new to this and just happened to stumble across a post with 'Missouri' in it and that is the state I was born in and adopted in. I had no idea that it was so difficult to get records opened up. Now I was not involved with Catholic Charities or any other agency, as far as I know. My adoption was handled by private parties along with a circuit court judge that was a childhood friend of my adopted father. If there was an agency involved I was never told about it.
I was going to send in the "Adopted Adult Registration" form to social services, but I wonder now whether it will do any good ?.
If I have to petition the court, would it be the one for the county I was born and adopted in ?. I was born and adopted in St. Joseph (Buchanan County) in 1960 at the Methodist Hospital, which isn't around anymore. Who would I contact the court clerk ?. I think I can do that myself, because I am handling my own Social Security Disability case now.
So I wonder about us folks that wasn't involved with these agencies that are fighting to keep our records sealed ?. And what about the "Freedom of Information Act" doesn't that apply to adoptees ?.
Sadly, FOI act has no jurisdiction on us; it applies to Federal records, and adoptions are state records. Yes, you petition the county where the adoption took place. By all means send in the registration; it is possible that someone may already be looking for you. Also register on ISRR - that's the national/international registry.Missouri law is quite clear about keeping records sealed, except in cases of medical emergency. It is up to each judge to decide what the emergency is, from terminal cancer to an ingrown toenail. Go for it, but don't expect success right off the bat.
There are no reasonable arguments for the sealing of records and it is in fact a civil rights issue. What is interesting is why the church has so much vested interest in continuing to lobby for sealed records. No group lobbys for continuing a precedent for which there is no legal premise. The argument used as a reminder of a b-mother promise supposedly made at the time of the birth, is not law...Clearly somewhere the church has a strong stimulus for not allowing open records.If you guys can find a good civil rights lawyer who will review the precedents set by other states it will become obvious that sealed records are in violation of civil rights. It will however also take a considerable amount of finances to bring this issue into the legal area.
Advertisements
Hi, If I have to petition the court, would it be the one for the county I was born and adopted in ?. I was born and adopted in St. Joseph (Buchanan County) in 1960 at the Methodist Hospital, which isn't around anymore. Who would I contact the court clerk ?. I think I can do that myself, because I am handling my own Social Security Disability case now.
Drywall
There are no reasonable arguments for the sealing of records and it is in fact a civil rights issue. Clearly somewhere the church has a strong stimulus for not allowing open records.
If you guys can find a good civil rights lawyer who will review the precedents set by other states it will become obvious that sealed records are in violation of civil rights.
This is sounding a whole lot like the Social Security Disability system, where claimants are subject to all kinds of obsticles which have nothing to do with the law. I have been fighting SSD for the last 5 years and counting and have been denied for reasons not related to my medical problems, ie: judge in foul mood; V.E. (vocational expert) in a bad mood; I don't 'appear' to look disabled; etc. I have a sort of 'unique' case though I think, because the adoption was handled by a Circuit Court Judge that was a next door neighbor and childhood friend of my adopted father and this makes me wonder if whether a conflict of interest didn't play a big part in my case ?. The judge didn't have any business handling an adoption case for a close friend, he should have passed it on to a 'Probate' judge. Another 'unique' difference I have is that I have found my birth mother. I have met all 3 of my brothers, her parents, her 2 sisters and a host of other family on her side, the problem is she is being very secretive about information on my father. All I can get out of her is a name. She has told at least 4 different stories about what happened so far, and my adopted parents told a 'remarkable' story about how they come to have me. I can't pin anyone down on the "truth". Both of my adopted parents died with the story they told, never changing. My adopted mother just happened to be a "charge nurse" in the emergency dept. at the hospital where I was born.......?. Nobody has ever told how my 'real' mother and my adopted parents came to know each other, but I have a " permission slip/Title/Deed " whatever you want to call it, that was written by my mother on an envolope.... giving HER permission for my adopted parents to 'have' me, and that she would sign any paper's to that effect..... !. I jokingly call it " my receipt". I cost a sum total of ....... $ 300.00 . So as you can see, my case is somewhat different from the 'ordainary' adoption case. My goal has never been to 'interfere" with my real dad and his family, if I ever found him and it would be at his choice (if he's still alive) it's just that at 50 years old, I would like to feel "complete".
1steelplayer, There is a really good message board called butyoudontlooksick that has alot of people you would never know were sick but deal with life threatening illness that are not visible. You should check it out. Yes, it would be nice to feel complete and know where we came from completely. Sadly, many of us will never know. Kind regards,Dickons
Advertisements
What I would like to know is, what is the case law or precedent that was given for keeping records sealed...?. I could probably look it up but because of my disability, I am limited on the amount of time I spend sitting at the computer.I just went to the : butyoudontlooksick website, it is similar to another one I belong to : Social Security Disability Coalition. Thanks for the information. Each of these sites have good information to help those of us that are ....." acting as our own attorney ". I will say that after having had 2 so-called (disability expert) attorneys, by handling everything myself, it has sped up the process considerable.
D28Bob...thanx for the note.... what adoptees need is to form a unified coalition and pool their finances. Many of us have no (known) connection to movers and shakers or attachment to individuals in high places that could impact the current state of the sealed records issue. We simply dont have the finances or the influential position to start making enough noise to over turn the states rights issue of sealed records. What we need is a "star" and the financial backing to acquire those "star" services.....someone like a law professor from Harvard who is respected and considered an expert on constitutional law. Without that publicity there will be a gradual unsealing of records, but it will be evolutionary...and not revolutionary...many of us will be gone before those changes are made. The adoption industry is currently a $4.1 bil industry...if you look at that amount of $$ and measure it against the interests of the few thousand adoptees who no longer contribute to the system, why change it? Its not about adoptees, its about money.
Advertisements