For those who feel birth mothers have a "right" to privacy?

Question

Can you please find and quote the law or statute that guarantees that, please?

I want to see real, legal information, not just conjecture or assumed promises.

Can somebody provide me a link to any state or federal law that actually says a relinquishing mother is guaranteed protection from her son or daughter?

Answer 1

No one can find it because IT DOES NOT EXIST.  I just asked this, too.......funny how so many people jumped onto the "how dare the adoptee intrude on the birthparents" tirade.  I agree with many: You have s*x, have a child, and then relinquish for adoption, you lose the right to privacy.  Free association.  If you do not want a relationship, you tell the adoptee so.....don't p**s and moan about how the the adoptee is a stalker simply because they want to know where they came from.  All they want is their original birth certificate.  And why should natural parents have such a right to privacy?  Anyone can go into the public records office and legally track down my four year old daughter or even myself.  Where is her right to privacy?  All adoptees want is their original birth certificates and some knowledge of where they came from and how they came to be.  We have no right to deny them that.

Answer 2

In Roe vs. Wade, its called familial privacy.  Interesting enough, this case law is about the right to be free from governmental intrusion.  In fact, Texas had banned abortion.  It was Roe going up against the state of Texas.  In parenting, contraception and abortion, women are exercising their right to family privacy.  However in adoption,  its something completely different.  Some folks call it a contract.  Its more of a transfer of parental rights.  The natural parents are transfering their parental rights to the adoptive parents.  In this process they are losing their right to familial privacy.  Interestingly again, the relinquishment is still not sealed at this point.  In fact, if anyone is searching they can find their natural parents' relinquishment in local newspapers.  Again where is the natural parent privacy?  Upon finalization of the adoption is when the records are SEALED.  Again further proving that these mothers were not promised privacy.

In fact, if you think about it, most mothers don't want that privacy.  That is why they have abortions.  They don't want to spend the rest of their lives wondering what happened to their children.  It makes sense.

Answer 3

If someone pleads to a crime in juvenille court in order to not be prosecuted in adult court even if they're innocent, they are doing so because they know that juvenille records are sealed and they don't want to have any memory of the incident.  

Similarly, if a woman places a baby for adoption with the understanding that the court proceedings there of will be sealed - then she is doing so under the assumption of anonymity (at the discretion of the courts).  There does not need to be a legal clause for anonymity since the very act of participating in a legal act that will be sealed means that the act will essentially have never happened.  In Texas, the law actually states (or at least it stated for many years) that adoption records were sealed but not relinquishment documents UNLESS specifically requested.  If biological parents requested the relinquishment be sealed, and a judge granted it, then they have every right to assume they will not be tracked down later.  

Also, I know that Texas and many other states have what is deamed a "Baby Moses Law".  This law allows a healthy infant to be dropped off with personel at a hospital, fire station, or police station, no questions asked.  They can volunteerily give a medical history, but they are not required to.  The very existance of such a law throws should severely limit any adoptees simply curious about origins from being able to force open sealed court documents.  Otherwise, mothers who go through the formal adoption proceedings, mothers who provide their names, addresses, medical histories, etc so that if there is a true emergency in the future, the adoptee willl have somewhere to turn, then those women are being punnished for trying to play by the rules.  

I am all for open adoptions, but I'm not for openning sealed court records for curiosity sake.  If you have a valid health concern, by all means, petition the court to unseal the records.  I also support mutual reunification databases, and encourage open adoption.  However, forcing open legally sealed records for curiosity purposes seems to be setting a bad precedent for all classes of sealed records...  not just adoption ones.

Answer 4

it does exist... right under the stature that prohibits people from pressing charges against santa clause for home invasion, when he slides down the fireplace on christmas.. </sarcasm>

i stated this yesterday, yet the question was delete.  so i'll post it again: it amazes me how much support fmoms get when it comes to their assumed right to not be contacted by the children they placed for adoption.

i find it extremely ironic that the same people who are so protective of fmoms' privacy and rights regarding contact by adoptees, have no problem advocating for legislation which shortens relinquishment periods, demonizing any fmom who shows the slightest bit of reticence to placing her child, or supporting non-legally enforceable open adoptions.

i mean, seriously... fmom privacy ensures some apaps that the "breeding w***e" will not be sought out by their 'forever-child.' bottom line.

it's lame. and more of a means to make her just fade away into the woodwork...

and to all the "selfless women" who placed their children, why is it ok to all of a sudden be so d**n...selFISH?

Answer 5

I can't, and I doubt anyone else will be able to.  The right to privacy refers to the right of citizens to keep the government out of their lives...not other people.

Also, what many bparents claim is a Right to Secrecy...which does not exist as law/statute any where!

Answer 6

There is no such law, it's actually a promise that was made by the adoption agency to the birth mother. A promise is different from a law. I don't think all adoptees or birth parents fall under the stalker category. If either party does not wish to be contacted or have a relationship then they can express as such. I am a big supporter of birth parents providing as much medical information as possible, because some things can be passed down from mother or father, and this information could possible save a life.

Answer 7

In 1972 when i gave my daughter up, we were "told" we could never find her and she could never find us. I don't remember ever seeing anything in writing. I guess that is where we got the idea that we would remain annonymous. It was "best " for everyone is what we were told. I was a silly girl and never questioned whether there was a law.

Answer 8

not sure if this is what your looking for but have fun reading.

Answer 9

The supreme court decision Roe vs. Wade provides privacy for women in reference to allowing them to have abortions and no one to know about this.  This privacy would go to all factors of life and due to this legislation from the bench decision people have a right to privacy provided for in the constitution.  Where in the constitution was based on very poor law though that doesn't change the current situation.  Be happy your mother is using this right to keep her privacy about giving birth to you and adoption you out instead of useing this privacy to have killed you in the womb.  Abortion would have been much easier, be thankful she had the power to give birth to you and the realization that you would have a better life in a family environment that she wasn't able to provide.

Answer 10

Nobody will find one, because it doesn't exist

I'm looking forward to some of these answers, it's really interesting to see some of the arguments in defence of adoptee discrimination.

Answer 11

Good luck finding that one.  Even the NCFA can't find that law, because adoption law itself actually guarantees that relinquishment will NOT provide anonymity.

Of course, birthparents have the same right to privacy that all other citizens have.  It's just that they don't have any type of privacy or anonymity under the law that is above and beyond what everyone else has.

eta:

PATRICK:

Roe vs. Wade does not address this issue.  In fact, if you were to use Roe vs. Wade as a reference, you'd be supporting open records for all adopted persons.  Roe vs. Wade gives a right to privacy from GOVERNMENT intrusion, not a right to privacy from other private citizens.  

I suggest you go back and read Roe v. Wade.

We live in a society that allows free association.  If contact is not desired, everyone has the same autonomous right to refuse contact/relationship.

ANGEL:

Egg/sperm donation for surrogacy is a different issue altogether.  It requires no relinquishment of a child already born to the donor.  It is simply the donating of genetic material.

eta:

Birthparents were told all sorts of things when relinquishing.  Some told they could find their child when the child turned 18.  Some were told their children could  have their information at 18.  Some were told no one would ever "have to know."  A lot of it depended on what agencies, unwed mothers' homes and others felt the particular birthparent wanted to hear.

ETA  LittleJaina:

If the sealing of records is "proof" of birthparent anonymity rights, then the provisions UNDER THE LAW that 44 sealed records states have for ADOPTEES to open those records are real proof that such a right doesn't exist.  Supreme courts in 2 states that have RE-opened records for adoptees have upheld open records as Constitutional because no such right could be shown under the law.

BTW, I know my natural parents, even though I came from an era where closed adoptions were the only option.  However, I still can't access my own birth record without the hassle of going to court and getting an order to open it to me.  I want to be able to do so, however. Obviously not out of curiosity, though, since there are no secrets left.  I want it because I want to be treated EQUALLY UNDER THE LAW!!!  Non-adopted people don't have to go to court Sorry you aren't for equal treatment.

Also, when a birthparent relinquishes, the records DO NOT SEAL!  No provision of anonymity there.

Answer 12

If you haven't already, you might want to contact an adoption agency and ask them what "law" they reference when they explain the "right to privacy" to parents.  

If anyone can provide a specific answer to this, I would think it would be an adoption agency.  The only adoption agency I know of is "The Cradle" in Evanston, IL just north of Chicago.

Answer 13

There isn't a law that i know of.   I do feel that if a brith mom is contacted though she has the right to refuse contact.  She may not of told her family or her current children and does not want to upset that.  It is a two way street. If a birth mom looks for her child after they are 18 they have the right to turn her away  so privacy in that sense i believe.