Tag Archives: Discrimination

The elegance and simplicity of equality in Vermont

Vermont Department of Health application for an adult adoptee to obtain their true birth records (page 1 of 2).

Today is the first day that adult adoptees born in Vermont, who are at least 18 years old, can access their original birth/vital record and not face legalized inequality by discriminatory statutes that single out adoptees as second-class people who do not receive equal treatment by law.

Well done to everyone who made this happen there. I salute all you did for adoptee rights and adoptees everywhere.

It is important to remember, even in the absence of any “landmark court case,” this inequality in most U.S. states violates the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and the U.N. Declaration of Human Rights, Article VII.

I also appreciate what the public health employees in Vermont did in communicating this legal reform, passed in the 2022 legislative session.

This is how the Vermont Department of Health communicates equality by law to adoptees born in the state of Vermont, as of July 1, 2023.

What I see on the updated website for the Vermont Department of Health today is the simple elegance of equality for adoptees without harmful conditions, obstructions, discrimination, bias, and public health and human health harm. It is only today, July 1, 2023, that an adult adopted person born in Vermont who is 18 years old can access a document all non-adopted persons born in the USA can access without any discrimination.

Just think about that. And there are anywhere from 5 to 8 million adoptees in the United States, most of whom are still denied this legal right.

This was the result of concerted advocacy, and, again, I applaud all who led the efforts for long-denied reform. It’s important to remember that this law change restoring rights that were taken away, also by law, will not and does not erase decades of past harm.

The New England Adoptee Rights Coalition has noted, “Vermont was among the first 20 states to revoke an adopted person’s right to request and obtain a copy of their own unaltered, original birth certificate in 1946.”

However, the decades-overdue restoration of basic legal rights is a path that other states can follow.

Will Michigan follow Vermont?

The state I remain focused on is my birth state, Michigan, which denies the simplicity of basic legal equality to thousands and thousands of adoptees.

As of July 1, 2023, this is how one of a few Michigan adoption-related statutes looks like, creating a maze of confusion and nearly impossible barriers for any adoptee born in Michigan to ever obtain their original birth record, as a matter of law.

The so-called “progressive” governor, Gretchen Whitmer, continues to promote her chops supporting those who need a helping hand—except of course thousands of adoptees.

She has done nothing about this issue, and she is already in her fifth year in office, with no gesture, statement, or visible communication she cares about thousands of persons, many who are now aging and even dying, or that they will ever know their truth or even kin.

For comparison to Vermont’s reform, here is how inequality looks in Michigan. It is an absolute cluster.

I will keep trying to point out these issues in Michigan, which Vermont’s reform makes all the more glaring.

Vermont’s law gives me hope, when often what I feel is loneliness on the mountain top. And sometimes hope truly can be a wonderful thing.

‘No friends but the mountains’

The Kurds’ saying is also true for adoptees: “No friends but the mountains.”

I rarely do videos related to my book on my story as an adoptee and U.S. adoption history, or on larger adoptee rights issues.

Last week, I decided to make one. Find my video here.

I made it on the fly, in response to a now-stalled and wildly discriminatory bill against adoptees in the California Assembly, AB 1302.

I needed to express my realization and my personal and sobering assessment of the cold, hard, and inequitable reality that adoptees continue to face in the political sphere. In that place where laws, politics, power, and culture collide, adoption remains a reliably bipartisan issue championed by Democrats and Republicans in states and nationally. We saw that with this bill in a state with a rock-solid Democrat super majority in the state legislature and control of the Governor’s office.

Here is reality as I see it based on the outcomes and the events that unfolded: Adoptees have no friends but the mountains.

My video that I shared shortly after the California Judiciary approved an anti-adoptee bill with not one “no” vote and the committee controlled by Democrats by a nearly 3-1 margin.

I stand by this assessment because the facts point to this long-used Kurdish metaphor of being betrayed by all sides, which all of us can independently verify and see.

We do not have to like it, but confronting the underlying truth is critical to how one approaches solutions strategically. It is also relevant for what I see in my birth state of Michigan, where there is no effort by a Democratic governor, Gretchen Whitmer, or its Democratically controlled legislature to even acknowledge denied human and legal rights to thousands of adoptees like me who were born there.

What happened and where is this bill in the California Legislature:

Apparently this measure is now stalled because it did not advance on the legislative calendar for this year.

However, I cannot independently confirm this based on the bill’s tracking record, but this has been reported by the Adoptee Rights Law Center. That would mean the measure is still ready to be heard in 2024 by the Assembly Health Care Committee. I think we all need to see this communicated clearly by the California Legislature too.

Assemblymember Tom Lackey (R-Palmdale) is the prime sponsor of AB 1302, which is one of the most anti-adoptee pieces of legislation proposed in a state legislature in years, based on its potential harm to likely tens of thousands of adoptees born in California.

This measure is sponsored and championed by an anti-abortion, right-leaning state lawmaker, Assemblymember Tom Lackey (R-Palmdale). He is an adoptive parent of two children, and his anti-abortion voting record aligns with the wider GOP efforts to promote adoption as the so-called “policy alternative” to abortion.

As we’ve seen since the U.S. Supreme Court’s anti-women decision the 2022 Dobbs decision, this view is gaining momentum, to the detriment of adoptees and women and their rights to bodily autonomy.

In his deliberately dishonest presentation of what the bill would do, Lackey was joined by the proverbial “anti-adoptee” Quisling. I use that term for a person who is adopted and who supports legislation that harms the collective group of millions of adoptees. In this case it was a seasoned corporate lobbyist named Lance Hastings, who fulfilled the obligatory role of a Quisling we see whenever adoptees are sold out without regard to their inherent legal and human rights. “Quisling” is the appropriate word because the facts bear it out.

Both Lackey and the Quisling presented what I call false statements and framing comments that no one called out for what they were.

Before the hearing, adoptees and adoptee rights advocates, however, provided lawmakers ample documentation to call out such falsehoods. From what I saw, no comments were uttered by lawmakers who had that information.

Afterwards, Bastard Nation, which staunchly opposed this regressive and discriminatory measure, wrote a devastating analysis of everything wrong with this harmful proposed bill. That analysis noted: “AB1302 bill would not have flown 50 years ago much less today. It goes against current adoption culture, best practice standards, and the success of the adoptee rights and justice movement/OBC access. [Fourteen] states already unseal [original birth certificates] with no restrictions or conditions for the adoptees to which they belong.” Also go here to see the nightmare that AB 1302 would lead to if passed as written; the infographic is by Adoptee Rights Law, and is brilliant. Also see Adoptee Rights Law summary here.

The legislative kabuki during the bill hearing proved the hardest to watch and internalize. I say kabuki because that best describes the bill hearing for this toxic measure and how publicly disengaged logical allies were at the bill’s hearing on April 18, 2023, with the Assembly Judiciary Committee. (See the full hearing recording here, starting at around 37:00, with the CalOpens testimony against starting at 46:00.) The logical allies, many assume, would be California’s elected Democrats on the Assembly Judiciary Committee.

This committee has eight Democrats and three Republicans.

At no time did Democrats state facts provided to them by multiple adoptee rights advocates in advance that no adoptee rights group supported the measure or were consulted. At no time did Democrats state the most basic fact of all: that this bill and existing law deny all adoptees in California equal treatment by law.

Zip.

Nothing.

Silence.

And no on in that room needed anyone to tell them millions of adoptees, including all of those born in California, are denied equality by law.

That is the 800-pound gorilla that not one of them had the cojones to confront. Even worse, this Democrat-dominated committee recorded not one “no” vote.

Worse, it’s impossible to even tell during the roll call from the legislative video what the abstaining votes said when asked to publicly cast their vote. It sounded like mumbles so they would not heard, as they apparently cowered with their muffled public votes.

This is a copy of the California Assembly Judiciary vote on April 18, 2023, when no Democrats voted against a measure that passed with eight yes votes and three abstentions, which if passed into law would further deprive basic legal rights from thousands of California-born adoptees.

Adoptees can learn from the Kurds: they have no friends but the mountains

According to the legislative record, which is published however, eight committee members voted for it, and three “abstained.”

That’s called cowardice, because it is. I believe that is a factual statement too.

In short, adoptees were abandoned again by legislative silence and performance gestures.

The worst of the lies and talking point shared repeatedly in most legislative hearings, that a birth mother was promised confidentiality, was not corrected, even after a lawyer invited to the presenter table for reasons I still don’t understand openly lied to committee members that a so-called “presumed promise” of confidentiality to women coerced into surrendering their children to adoption existed.

For the record, no such legal promise has ever been made or documented in any court or legislative setting.

Bastard Nation in its submitted response on this bill addressed this canard that never, ever dies: “There is no evidence in any state that records were sealed to ‘protect’ the reputation or ‘privacy’ of biological parents who relinquished children for adoption. In the over 60 years of the adoptee rights struggle, not one single document has been presented anywhere that shows that birthparents were promised or guaranteed anonymity by the state or anyone else. If they were made on the sly, they were made by individuals who had no legal authority to do so.”

In the end, misinformation and kabuki prevailed.

Adoptees were abandoned by their likely but no-show “friends,” and the bill advanced.

Though this bill appears to be on hold until 2024—which I still can’t verify on the Legislature’s website—adoptees will have to confront their reality in other states and with the public.

The Kurds know betrayal well having endured countless acts of harm from nations in their historic homelands, as well as from the United States.

Right now, they have no allies.

They have no “friends” willing to correct lies and misinformation when it counts and where it counts.

They are utterly on their own, as they always have been the last half-century of working tirelessly to end legal discrimination, rooted in my view in their illegitimate status.

So that is why I made my video, as a reminder of lived truth, which the historically persecuted Kurdish people have experienced since they were denied a nation state by conniving colonial powers after WWI. They have a saying, uttered at each violent, tragic betrayal by all nations, repeatedly since that time: “No friends but the mountains.”

Webinar recording available on petitioning courts for original birth records

Nearly 60 people joined a recent webinar on March 21, 2021, hosted by the adoptee advocacy group Adoptees United. I presented with fellow adoptees Greg Luce of Minnesota and Courtney Humbaugh of Georgia. Each of us highlighted our experience as adoptees denied basic legal and equal rights in accessing our adoption and vital records.

  • My introductory comments can be found at the start of the recording.
  • My comments about my court petition begin here (17:00 into the recording).
  • A copy of my presentation that I shared with attendees can be found here.

As a presenter, I wanted to provide a roadmap for others who face nearly insurmountable barriers in getting what should be provided to all persons as a basic human right. My memoir and critical study of the U.S. adoption system describes why the state-level denial of these records must be understood historically and sociologically as part of the historic mistreatment of adoptees and illegitimately born persons, like me.

In addition, I provided what I consider to be a strategic approach for channeling defiance to an unjust system that had impacted my life greatly. At the very least I hoped my words and example helped to motivate a few others. Many of my decisions in my life were profoundly influenced by words I heard from someone else, sharing a story about why they took action to do good things.

As I had shared earlier, access to vital records by adoptees is intrinsically an issue rooted in power relationships. Those relationships are communicated through symbols that are invested with far more meaning than what they appear to have on the surface. And anything invested with this much magical and symbolic power, such as one’s original birth record, is worth a lifelong fight, which I have had to undertake only because I was born as an adoptee.

It is also critical to remember that an original birth certificate is a document that continues to be withheld from millions of U.S. adoptees. This denial of equal treatment by law has and remains in violation the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights and equally the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

My book also explains this struggle as a hero’s journey that too few adoptees can do for reasons too long to explain in one post. You can order my book on that issue, which describes how the state of Michigan denied me my birth record for decades until I finally took the state’s adoption bureaucracy to court and won my right to what was always mine as a human right.

“The state never had the legal and moral right to hold my past from me or the right to prevent my birth families from knowing about me,” I wrote in my memoir. “My true birth certificate shows the world that I exist as someone with a past. It shows I have an identity that I alone own. This document is and always has been mine by birthright.”

I would encourage adoptees, policy-makers, and journalists to visit the website of Adoptees United. The organization continues to host events that focus on issues it works on supporting the rights of adoptees in the United states as it works on changing laws and policies that deny rights to adopted persons.

You are invited to a webinar on petitioning courts for original birth records

First, please add this event to your calendar. Great. Thanks for doing that!

Everyone is invited, because this is an issue that is about what many of us care about deeply: equality, fairness, and the right to know who we are.

This webinar will focus on something bigger than vital records and court processes.

This discussion will be about power relationships. Those relationships are communicated through symbols that are invested with far more meaning than what they appear to have on the surface.

And anything invested with this much magical and symbolic power is worth the fight.

The symbol I’m talking about is perhaps the single most important document any human can possess: their original birth certificate.

For decades, this document has been withheld from U.S. adoptees, through discriminatory state laws that still deny millions of persons equal treatment by law, in violation the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights and equally the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

Right now the people working to change these harmful laws are those denied the right to know who they are, where they came from, and who they can call their blood kin.

One way that many states provide the most slender means for an adult adoptee to get their basic vital record created at birth is through the courts.

Getting to that point is nothing short of a hero’s journey too few adoptees can do for reasons too long to explain in this post. I wrote a book on that issue, which details how the state of Michigan denied me my birth record for decades until I finally took the state’s adoption bureaucracy to court and won my right to what was always mine as a human right.

I hope you join my fellow adoptees and advocates Greg Luce, Courtney Humbaugh, and me for our webinar on March 21, 2021 (1 p.m. PST) about petitioning courts to release adoptees’ original birth records.

For my part in this special event, I’ll be highlighting my experience in Michigan, where it took me 27 years to secure the release of my original birth certificate, even after I had met my birth families.

In my book on this experience, I wrote: “The state never had the legal and moral right to hold my past from me or the right to prevent my birth families from knowing about me. My true birth certificate shows the world that I exist as someone with a past. It shows I have an identity that I alone own. This document is and always has been mine by birthright.”

Learn why adoptees will invest years if not decades fighting for their legal and human rights, including in the courts. I look forward to seeing you there.

Adoptees’ access to their original birth certificates

Adoptees are entitled to their original birth certificates as a human right. Mine was withheld from me for decades, and likely illegally, by the State of Michigan, even after I found my biological kin. (I have intentionally hidden information in this copy.)

My book on the U.S. adoption experience, You Don’t Know How Lucky You Are, uses my personal story as an adoptee to explore how the former rights of U.S. born adoptees have been restricted and, in many cases, annulled over decades through lawmaking at the state level. My discussion of this larger issue, as part of a wider analysis of human rights and the loss of those rights by U.S. adoptees, is mostly found in chapter 7 of my book: “Legalized Discrimination Against Adoptees: The Demon Behind the Problem.”

Some of the best published resources explaining this history can be found on my recommended reading list, which includes the works of historian E. Wayne Carp and law professor Elizabeth Samuels, among other unbiased and carefully researched works that dispel many of the false myths about adoptees and the history of adoption in the United States.  

Another trusted source I reference in my book, in my writings, and on my website is the Adoptee Rights Law Center, run by Gregory Luce, a Minneapolis-based attorney and fellow adoptee, who also shares my birth year and status as a Crittenton kid. I have never met Luce, but I have communicated with him over the years on a sporadic basis regarding shared areas of advocacy interest regarding legal reform, which he works on nationally. He has proven to be a highly trusted source of fact-based information that informs the public and key stakeholders.

Luce has just published several resources I want to recommend to the larger adoptee and research, media, and policy-making community who deal with adoption law and the restriction of rights to adoptees. Luce plans to publish more resources later on original birth certificates and other records restricted from adoptees. The more factual information can be shared, versus myths and propaganda by the pro-adoption interest groups that still dominate the public discourse on adoption issues, the more likely advocates can achieve long-overdue reform.

  • FAQ: Original Birth Certificates (published December 2020): Luce writes “this FAQ relates to original birth certificates of adopted people born in the United States. FAQs on additional issues, including those related to intercountry adoptees, are forthcoming.”
  • A video documenting the erosion and loss of human and legal rights by adoptees to access their original birth certificates (published December 2020).
  • Original Birth Certificates Map, available on the Adoptee Rights Law website (updated continually). This map explains and show what states restrict access, provide compromised access, and provide access to original birth certificates for adoptees — an invaluable way to understand how legalized discrimination still denies millions basic legal rights given to non-adoptees.