Do you think they should open up adoption records or keep them sealed?

Question

Both of my biological parents are adopted and i would like to know what my ethnicity is where my family is from and important medical history. I now have a son of my own and I feel foolish when they ask me for my family history and I can't give it to them.

Answer 1

I am in a similar situation.  I was adopted too. and i had a closed adoption also.  I'm about to pull my hair out with people asking me what am i mixed with all the time. i am obviously of black decent but i don't know what else if anything.  I've been getting checked by doctors for various things they check in people 40+ b/c i don't have a fam medical history, so i think they should do something about it.  IL has something where they are a third party to getting the info, but the bio-parents still get a choice to send it or not!!! so not  kewl

Answer 2

Open the adoption records.

Answer 3

I think Laurie has said everything that I would say (and more besides).

I did want to touch on the medical information issue.

Family medical history of the birthparents (if available at all) is generally decades old.  Who is going to update the medical information for the adoptee?

My family medical history tells me that my great-grandfather died of TB in the 1930s.  Am I entitled to an update?

Answer 4

open open open

Answer 5

Should adoptees sit at the back of the bus too?

There is NO excuse for records to be sealed. I'm a free being, neither the state nor my adopters own me.

Answer 6

I think they should be opened when they are adults, but the birthparents should be told this will happen when they sign the papers.

Answer 7

Yes, I do think that they should be opened up when the child turns 21.  

However, don't feel foolish that you don't know your background. You'd be surprised how many people made up their backgrounds when they arrived in the US not to mention how many children were fathered by someone other than her husband and the secret kept.

Answer 8

They will open, it's only a matter of time.   The current situation where they are sealed is an outdated relic from the past when shame and stigma dictated they be sealed.

There is no need for this shame and stigma to continue in this day and age.  Unfortunately, there are special interest groups who fight to keep them closed, but they can't do this forever and State by State they are opening and State by State the terrible things that they said would happen, haven't thus disproving the arguements of the few who fight to keep records sealed

Please join the fight to open adoption records to those they pertain to.   Change won't just happen.   It will only happen if we make it happen.

Answer 9

A lot of people even the ones not adopted are having issues with family history because of things kept "in the closet" so to speak but I do think that medical information in adoption records should be required to be opened to the adoptive parents when they adopt but as far as names and things go I think that only those biological parents that want to be found should be opened with their names because if for some reason a person doesn't want to be found and reliquishes their rights then i think that should be respected, but the adopted child can put in a request on the database requesting info and see if the bioparents respond.

Answer 10

I been in both circumstances and I think all records should be open unless the mother or father is a high risk for hurting a child.  But I think that all kids seen i was in foster care and was placed should have my records open and kids should know because of they need to know where they first came from and i have placed my twins up for adoption a boy and girl and they should have all records to know where and there culture, etc........ most women give a child up out of love that was in my case like almost 8 yrs ago. and i always think of them.  but the situation was unstable for them and they needed alot more than i could give them at the time.  so i have been in both circumstances.  and i think in general records should be open.  for the childs case and a parents sake at a certain age.  I do think it should be against the law to keep adoption a secret from a child.  Some adoptive parents dont tell the children they were adopted and i think thats why records should be open but with a councelor, therapists present when records are open.

Answer 11

I know what you're saying.  When i became pregnant I too felt stupid for not being able to answer basic family history questions.  I felt like i hadn't studied for this test.  And when trying to find out this information I was shocked at how impossible it was to attain.  

Yes I think the records should be open, at least a very detailed family history.  It was nice for me to find and meet my birthmother.  But it in no way defined my life.  It was nice to see a person i resembled so closely, but only physically.  I was already who I am before we found each other.

Answer 12

I totally think adoption records should be available and open to anyone that has been adopted so that they can a least have a background history of there medical even if they do not bond or have a relationship with that family

Answer 13

This is REALLY a tough one and I'm not sure how I feel on the matter.  It's an issue with the birthparent's right to privacy vs the adoptee's right to know.  There are very compelling reasons for each.  

But that is aside from medical information.  I think that should be available, no questions asked.  A family history of any given condition or illness is becoming more and more important with ongoing medical research.  

However, the other piece: if a birthmother wants the records sealed, should the adoptee find out her name/identity?  That's what I'm not sure about.  So, I'm still wrestling with that.

Answer 14

YES i do believe in open records for adoptees!!

I believe it is our civil right to have access to OUR identifying information.

Did you know that mothers/fathers who surrendered don't have a right to privacy? There is no law promising it.

We DO deserve our records. Giving adoptees the record of their birth doesn't impose on another persons privacy, it doesn't even put the two beings into contact. But it does give us the name of our people, that we come from, so that we can trace our ancestry and we can know our history.

Opening our records has also shown, through history, in the states who's records have been opened, to decrease abortions! All of those right to lifers are too busy picketing the abortion clinics to see that in every state who's records have been opened, the abortions have actually decreased!

82 and counting so far will be gathering in New Orleans this July 22, 2008 at the Annual State Legislatures Convention ( because they are the people who have the power to unseal our records ) protesting our sealed records. We have an exhibitors booth inside the convention which will give us floor time and one on one time with the legislatures to encourage and educate our legislatures about sealed records and the importance of opening them.

Please join us if you support open records for adult adoptees and our decendants! http://www.adopteerights.net

Answer 15

British and Australian society didn't come crashing down 30 years ago when they gave adoptees their full civil rights and opened their records.  The skies didn't crumble, the earth didn't open up and swallow whole cities.  No mass suicides or murdering sprees were undertaken.  Why would we expect anything different here in the US?

Why doesn't the "leader of the free world" either put up or shut up already?

Answer 16

They most certainly should be opened.  Here is why.

Adopted citizens are denied unconditional equal access rights to the factual documents of their own births in 44 states. This is something the non-adopted take for granted. In only six states, Alabama, Oregon, Kansas, Alaska, Main and New Hampshire, are all adopted adults granted the sames rights as their non-adopted counterparts.

This is an issue of an entire group of citizens, adopted adults, being barred from a right non-adopted citizens have. Unequal treatment under the law is discrimination by the state holding the records. This discrimination turns access to one's own birth record from a right to a privilege, based solely on the adoptive status of a person, a condition over which the adopted person had no say or control. No other citizens but adopted adults are expected to grovel before a judge or ask someone else's permission in order to obtain access to their own birth records. This places adopted citizens in a position of being considered suspect and placed in a secondary class compared to non-adopted citizens.

At one point in history, no one was denied the right to his or her own birth record, adopted or not adopted. The sealing of these records began in the 1930's to hide the shame of out-of-wedlock pregnancy and infertility. Sealing records was also a means allowing adoptive parents privacy from birth parents. Some states did not seal records until much later, while some states, Alaska and Kansas, never sealed records.

For anyone who believes records are sealed in order to protect the anonymity of the natural parents, consider the actual law.

1. It is highly notable that records only seal upon the finalization of an adoption. They only stay sealed if an adoption remains intact. They do not seal upon relinquishment, are not sealed while the child is in foster care and are not sealed while the child is in an adoptive placement that is not yet finalized by the court. So, if parents give their children up for adoption, those birth records DO NOT SEAL.  How does this protect a natural parent's anonymity?

2. If an adoption fails, i.e. the adoptive parents "return" the child, the original birth record with the natural parents' names on it, is unsealed and re-established as the child's only legal birth certificate. How does this protect the natural parents' anonymity? Incidentally, I'm sad to say that there have been stories in the papers lately about failed adoptions occurring.

3. Adult adopted citizens in states with sealed records can gain access to their birth records as long as they petition the court and get a court order. How does this protect a natural parent's anonymity?

4. No one has ever been able to bring forth a relinquishment document that promises anonymity. Even the greatest opponents of open records, such as the National Council For Adoption, has ever been unable to produce such a document.

5. In some states with sealed records, it is the prerogative of the adoptive parents or the adoptee (if old enough to state a desire) as to whether or not the original birth certificate is sealed. The natural parents have no say. How does this protect a natural parent's anonymity?

Hence, there is no guarantee of anonymity or confidentiality, nor can such be promised under the law as written. Oddly enough, however, I have met natural parents who asked if and when they could contact their relinquished children. They were told that upon reaching 18 years of age, the adopted person could retrieve his or her original birth certificate containing the natural parents' names. Upon reuniting many years later, these natural parents were surprised to find that what they were told didn't pan out because no one had told them that the records were retroactively sealed, despite the information they were given.

Although this is not truly an issue about reunion, the topic always brings with it discussion of reunion. Therefore, I shall briefly cover this issue. Reunions happen all the time under sealed records laws. Several states that allow all adopted adults to obtain their original birth records also have contact preference forms. This is a form that natural parents can fill out stating whether or not they wish to be contacted. The preference can be changed at any time. It is filed with the original birth certificate. A copy of it is given to the adopted person if and when s/he obtains the original birth certificate. Because the adopted person knows right away that the natural parent does not want to be contacted, this greatly, greatly decreases the risk of unwanted contact. In states that do not grant access, natural parents and adopted people will continue to find one another, but there will be no information available as to the preference for contact.

Like other citizens, adopted persons and natural parents are capable of handling their own relationships, without state interference. They do not need others speaking for them or deciding what is best for them as though they were children incapable of doing so themselves. This is an infringement of the free association enjoyed by other citizens in our society.