Tag Archives: Adoption History

Update on new legislation to end discrimination against Michigan-born adoptees

A coalition of adoptee rights groups in Michigan called the Michigan Adoptee Rights Coalition is working with a bipartisan group of Michigan state lawmakers to advance two adoptee rights reform bills in Michigan. The measures have cleared the state House of Representatives and were moved over to the state Senate just before the Michigan Legislature adjourned in mid-November 2023.

These legislative efforts, now being pushed by the coalition’s three partners (the Minneapolis-based Adoptee Rights Law Center and Michigan-based Adoptee Advocates of Michigan and Michigan Adoptee Collaborative), follow years of advocacy by countless Michigan-born adoptees, on behalf of probably tens of thousands of persons born and relinquished to adoption there in the years before and since World War II.

Committee hearing testimony on November 8, 2023, on HB 5148 and HB 5149 (snip of public video coverage)

The bills, House Bill 5148, sponsored by Rep. Kristian Grant (D-Grand Rapids), and House Bill 5149, sponsored by Rep. Pat Outman (R-Six Lakes), were introduced in the Legislature in late October 2023. The coalition working with the two lawmakers explains that the introduced legislation would, if not amended further, restore long-denied legal rights for adult adoptees to access their original birth records like all non-adopted Michiganders. 

I encourage people to read the bills themselves (HB 5148 and HB 5149) to see how legislation would change current laws. Currently, it is nearly impossible for any adoptee in Michigan to secure a copy (in redacted form) of their original birth certificate (see my FAQs on that topic).

Most importantly, the legislation, if approved and then signed by Gov. Gretchen Whitmer–a Democrat who has not spoken publicly in any statement I can find in favor of adoptee rights–would end outdated laws in Michigan that deny tens of thousands of Michigan born adoptees equal treatment by law. I would be a beneficiary of this legislation, as would my sister, along with uncounted thousands of others separated from their families and kin by the state’s harmful, cruel adoption secrecy laws.

Committee hearing highlights human rights and new and worrisome anti-adoptee messaging

The House Families, Children, and Seniors Committee held its hearing on the bills on Nov. 8, 2023. The hearing is videotaped, and it can be seen by anyone with access to the internet. Testimony and discussion begin at minute 21:00. (Note: the video takes a long time to download; you will need to be patient.)

I was particularly impressed by one supporter of the bill, Ned Andree, a Michigan resident and a bi-racial and transracial adoptee. 

Adoptee Ned Andree speaking in support of the two bills to restore adoptee rights on Nov. 8, 2023

Andree spoke eloquently to the committee in support of the bills. He testified about being adopted and being raised by white parents and seeking his truth for years. He told the committee he was born and relinquished in 1968, from a white mother and an African-born father, originally from Nigeria. Andre spoke of his costly effort find his birth parents, including spending $20,000 to fly to Nigeria to find his birth father, “only to have no success.” Andre also spoke of being denied his truth by the almost impossible barriers created by Michigan’s discriminatory laws denying him his truth. “The current law denies adult adoptees … a fundamental human right granted to non-adoptees.”

Filmmaker and Michigan-born adoptee spoke in support, and a birth mother who also testified in favor of the legislation and told her story of the harm of relinquishment.

Opponents also received prominent time before lawmakers.

Committee hearing testimony of Michigan Catholic Conference (MCC) lobbyist Rebecca Mastee who opposed the two bills on Nov. 8, 2023

Michigan Catholic Conference (MCC) lobbyist Rebecca Mastee came out against the bills with talking points heard in past legislative settings in other states, where opponents seek to enforce legal inequality to millions of persons by supporting outdated adoption secrecy laws. Mastee repeated unprovable talking points and outright lies regarding promised secrecy to birth mothers, when no such legal promises were ever made. Mastee concluded that such non-existing secrecy claims, that have never been documented by written documentation in legislative settings, require that the state continue to deny adult adopted persons equal treatment by law in accessing their birth records, as is the case in Michigan today. These talking points have been used repeatedly in most state legislative hearings I have seen by adoption industry promoters—and Catholic Charities in Michigan and other states were among the biggest adoption “businesses” that separated kin for decades.

Mastee, on behalf of the MCC, also used another false taking point of the alleged “stalking” of birth parents by adoptees as a rationale to deny tens of thousands of adoptees unobstructed access their birth certificate. She offered no facts or any credible evidence such harm can be proven by documented facts. In even more frightening language that is a foreshadowing of pro-adoption rhetoric to come likely for years, Mastee claimed that the bills would harm the flow of newborn infants to the now-expanding baby box supply chain in post-Roe America. (We learned during the hearing that the two bills do not prevent the erasure of new adoptees’ identities who are surrendered in metal dumpsters in Michigan, as allowed by current law, and without any regard to their basic human rights.)

Though grotesque as a basic statement of denied equal rights to current and future adoptees, adoptee rights advocates must confront the new harmful normal that this is now an active talking point. We will likely hear again that adoptees can’t get their birth certificates because it would disrupt the medically harmful practice of newborn infant separation from vulnerable moms through these dangerous baby dumpsters. Luckily this malarky did not convince the state lawmakers the day of the hearing.

Another anti-adoptee rights opponent, lawyer Heath Lowry, of the Michigan Coalition to End Domestic and Sexual violence, testified to oppose the bills. He used the canard of “sexual violence and rape” that has been shared repeatedly in adoptee rights discussions before lawmakers to claim victims of sexual violence would be traumatized to have contact with their child. The scare tactics were given without any evidence. He provided not one fact, no data, not even an anecdote. He claimed that the “consent of birth parents” had to be protected by the continued denial of vital records to thousands of adoptees born in Michigan. His testimony was forcefully tossed aside as baseless by a supporter of the bills who testified in support of the two measures (you can watch the testimonies here).

Fortunately, the committee strongly approved both bills (substitutes) before sending the bills to the full House for a vote.

The new substitute bills are here:

The House of Representatives on Nov. 9, 2023 voted on the substitute bills as follows:

  • HB 5148: Yeas 99, Nays 8, Excused 0, Not Voting 3
  • HB 5149: Yeas 99, Nays 8, Excused 0 Not Voting 3

All of the submitted testimony from adoptees, adoptee rights groups, birth mother groups, and other champions of equality urged lawmakers to support the legislation. All told, supporters provided 45 pages worth of materials in support. That was very impressive to read. You can find a downloadable copy of the testimony for the legislation on the Michigan Legislature’s website. A short hearing summary for Nov. 8, 2023 is here.

Final comments as a Michigan-born adoptee rights advocate

For the record, I have no affiliation with the groups in the coalition who are working with lawmakers, as I explained in this blog post from June 2023.

I have been advocating for adoptee rights in Michigan, my birth state, since the mid-1980s. I published a book on adoptee rights and the public health impacts of the U.S. adoption system in 2018, You Don’t Know How Lucky You Are. It highlights the history of U.S. adoption and a major adoption mill in Michigan that was likely the country’s second biggest adoption promotion center in terms of babies separated from their mothers. It also highlights my experience being denied my vital records, for decades, and the harmful practices of the state’s health system managing vital records, the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services

A great story: the perfect holiday gift

Books remain one of the best passports to understand others and the world around us.

The stories we remember are those that tell us something new and also something universal. My tale, as an adoptee who spent decades reclaiming my past and seeking justice, is as old as humanity. It mirrors the archetypal myth of the orphan/adoptee/hero, who overcomes impossible odds to complete a perilous quest.

The hero’s journey is also the larger story of millions of adoptees in the United States, like me. Through my own story, I also tell the larger tale of the U.S. adoption experience in the decades after World War II.

My book, You Don’t Know How Lucky You Are, is a perfect gift to show others this hidden world and how it impacts those who are forced to travel through it, throughout their lifetime. My memoir about my adoptee journey, from my birth in one of the largest maternity hospitals that promoted adoption to finding justice more than five decades later, is accessible to all, even readers who know little about this uniquely America system.

Buy the book online on Amazon, in paperback and as an e-book for your Kindle reader.

Please consider sharing my book website with a friend, and tell them about this story addressing the universal quest for justice, truth, and living a meaningful life. Happy holidays!

How the controversial history of adoption is scrubbed from the ‘record’

A 1974 article from the Detroit Free Press on the closing of my birthplace, Crittenton General Hospital of Detroit, fails to mention the thousands of adoptees who were born and relinquished here in the decades after World War II.

I have published an article that examines a widespread practice of hiding the history of the U.S. adoption system and how it operated nationally in every state in the decades after World War II. Those who promoted adoption include millions of family members, religious organizations like the Catholic Church, the Salvation Army, social service groups that served single mothers, mainstream religious leaders and churches, doctors, some medical groups like the American Academy of Pediatrics, hospitals that delivered the infants, and the profession of social work, whose practitioners managed and promoted the adoption system for decades. 

Yet the roles of adoption institutions are whitewashed and omitted in most accounts that most of the public will read from these groups’ publications and on online sources. My research that I highlight in greater detail in my book indicates this pattern of historical inaccuracy is intentional, in order to hide their complicity in promoting a system that separated families. For most of those impacted, this has been and remains a lifetime separation because of discriminatory laws sealing adoption records.

Even beloved public libraries say ‘no’ to adoptees

My proposed presentation on the U.S. adoption system would have explained how facilities like Detroit’s former Crittenton General Hospital, shown here in 1965, promoted adoption and the separation of millions of mothers and their children in the decades after World War II

Between July and December 2018, I made five written attempts to offer a free, adult education program to the public at the Multnomah County Library. The library is a major cultural institution in this region that prides itself on promoting all voices and advancing knowledge and reading, particularly the issues highlighted in books shared with the public.

My presentation and reading would have mirrored the one I gave at the Tigard Public Library on Sept. 25, 2018. You can see my proposal here

In the end, the library refused my idea, which would have showcased the little-known research I shared in my newly published memoir on the American adoption experience and on the history of that system in the post-World War II years, along with ways adoptees are denied basic equal rights.

Not only did library event planning staff say, “No,” but they also shared that adult adoptees in the United States weren’t the “marginalized” community that they wanted to focus on with adult programs. Those activities include public events and conversations about books that highlight historic and political issues in American life. 

Don’t Count on “Progressives Allies” to Care About Adoption History or Adoptee Rights

The Multnomah County Library shared this statement with me by email after I asked event planning staff to reconsider my proposal for a free public lecture on the history of the U.S. adoption system. Staff did not change their minds.

As an adoptee, I am not surprised by this outcome.

When it comes to the story of adoptees, articles about adoptee rights, columns on the history of adoption, adoptees seldom find anyone who cares to give them a platform or who really gives a damn what adults adoptees have to say. 

Sadly, the library’s tinny tone reminded me of ways public health officials denied giving me my original birth certificate decades after I had found my birth families. It is hard to ignore that “paternal tone” if you have heard it for decades.

The irony for me is that I used the excellent resources in this library to research my book, including great works on adoptee rights and adoption history, and other works on the larger issue of sociological bias toward illegitimately born people, such as adoptees.

The library also secured many interlibrary loans for me, which was crucial for my work. This facility also has dozens of others books on adoption issues. But that information will stay on the shelves, mostly unknown to this community for now, in part because of the library’s decision.

In my two replies sent to the library asking them to reconsider its decision, sent on Dec. 12 and 13, 2018, I failed to convince the lower level librarian staff that the library decision was not consistent with the library’s stated mission. I wrote: “Among your stated goals are to be a ‘trusted guide for learning,’ a ‘leading advocate for reading,’ and a ‘champion for equity and inclusion.’ My proposal aligned with all three, particularly of a historically marginalized group in U.S. history and to this day.” 

For that email, I copied Vailey Oehlke, library director, and Terrilyn Chun, deputy director. I documented for both senior managers why the library failed, and in a way that showed adoptees that even so-called advocates of reading and knowledge will turn their backs on proposals as simple as a free public lecture.

Neither Oehlke nor Chun replied to my emails.

Why I Care About this Experience with the Library

As an adoptee, I decided long ago I never would apologize for promoting awareness of adoptee rights issues or for my advocacy that tried to educate the public by using facts and research.

That is why I am writing this post on this disappointing experience with the library concerning a human rights issue about millions who are denied basic rights. This interplay with staff showed me even librarians, who may self-identify as progressive, do not see adoptees rights as an issue that deserves a modest platform to discuss ongoing legal inequality in 2018.

I am moving on to find others who care about this issue and the story that still remains hidden in the shadows of shame. 

If you are a Portland area adoptee and care about this issue, you are welcome to contact Oehlke and Chun and encourage them to change the minds of the subordinates who made this decision; find their email addresses here. About the only thing a public official responds to is public shaming through fact-based news reporting and self-concern about their jobs. There is never a wrong time to engage public officials who are responsible for the actions of the public bodies they manage. 

My memoir makes top 20 list of Adoptee Reading

The website Adoptee Reading has chosen my memoir on the American adoption experience to be on its top 20 list for 2018. The site provides recommendations for books “written by adoptees themselves.” The website celebrates the totality of the adoptee voice and experience, noting “we believe adoptees have a unique perspective on life in general.”

I am delighted my work, You Don’t Know How Lucky You Are, is recommended. The authors and works picked showcase a wide spectrum of adoptee experiences in the United States.

The list features a diverse collection of works and authors, including Korean-American adoptee authors Nicole Chung, J.S. Lee, and Julyanne Lee, as well as books on the language of adoption, by Karen Pickell, and on famous adopted persons, by Alice Stephens. My narrative nonfiction work mixes my life story and journey to justice and a critical look at the adoption system as a public health, political, and sociological and historic issue tied to the harmful treatment of illegitimately born persons.

Rudy Owens’ memoir on the American adoption experience

Adoptees number more than 5 million Americans, and they provide a rich diversity of voices that is frequently drowned out and ignored in the larger national discussions of the U.S. adoption system. The continued publication of poems, novels, historical accounts, and nonfiction works like mine, which combines memoir and a critical and detailed study of that system, are slowly helping to change how the country, the media, and the public think about this incredibly diverse group and their collective experience.

The one unifying theme that binds U.S. adoptees is having been raised by people who were not their biological parents. U.S. adoptees may be born overseas, be raised in transracial familial settings, be foster-raised persons, or be persons raised by kin such as a grandparent. Or they may be like me, a person who is the product of one of the least-understood social-engineering experiments in U.S. history, which separated millions of families in the three decades after World War II.

I encourage you to order my book for the holiday season to learn more about the importance of kin relationships in the raising of children, the political landscape that denies most adoptees their legal rights, and the history of a system that encouraged single mothers to relinquish their illegitimately born kids to address societal fears of stigma and illegitimacy