I just read online that the ACLU opposes open records. Is anybody else surprised by this?

Question

I don't particularly care for the ACLU. It seems they represent people based on political agendas now instead of real free speech. I can't believe they don't support open records. Anybody else surprised by this?

Answer 1

I am not surprised.  I believe that every child should know his background.  My dad still doesn't know any family history or health problems in the family and that really sucks as my husband and I are trying to have kids now...what will they end up inheriting?

Answer 2

Not in the least, but only because I've been involved in reform for a number of years, so I'm used to this.  The ACLU in many states has opposed open records, as have other organizations such as NOW.  Some organizations try to link open records to "reproductive rights."  It's a h**l of a stretch to try to further a political agenda!

Answer 3

This is why I let my membership in ACLU lapse.  

They seem to buy into the NCFA's "privacy for birthmothers" nonsense argument.  That seems to be how they want to fit keeping records sealed into their agenda.  It's incredibly disheartening.

Edited to add: Yep.  Very ridiculous.  I believe that I read that each state chapter decides its own position, and that some chapters have decided to sit this one out.  I guess that's something.  If they can't help, at least they can get out of our way.

Answer 4

No because they believe in the consumate right of a woman to do what she pleases with a child until its born.  That child is thus bound by that agreement until death.

Answer 5

Hi Cowboy Fan,

Yes, I was originally surprised by the ACLU's stance on adoptee's rights.  The more I learn about them, the more I concur that it's based more upon agendas rather than upon true rights for all individuals.

Yes, I have heard the argument that adoption is supposedly a birth control option for women just like an abortion is.  For a woman to control what happens to her body during pregnancy is one thing.  For her to attempt to control what happens to another individual for the rest of that other person's adult life is quite another thing.  I believe that has nothing to do with a woman's reproductive freedom whatsoever.  Her reproductive rights with respect to the outcome of that pregnancy concluded once that pregnancy was over.  The new child then has rights all his/her own that should not be dependent upon another's wishes as to what those rights should be.  The new child should have the SAME rights the natural parents have, the adoptive parents have, & society at large has.

At the same time, I also see that the natural mother privacy facade that the ACLU is embracing is merely the smokescreen for what they are really attempting to protect, which is the adoption industry and their interests.  The evidence to date has shown that 99% of natural parents are delighted to be reunited with their adult children anyway.

If the ACLU believes that equal rights for adoptees = rights to relationships with other people, they are mistaken.  Relationships can be mutally decided upon by the adults involved, just as they are with all other relationships.  The reality is people are reuniting all the time with or without birth certificates, while some with birth certficates do not choose to have relationships.  It's irrelevant what people later decide to do with their birth certificates, just as it's irrelevant what any other citizen does with their birth certficates.  

If the ACLU truly represented equal rights for all, with no financial motivations from special interest groups such as NCFA, then they would be able to make the fair call here and put everyone's rights on an equal playing field.

The point is withholding birth records from one group of people based purely on the status of other people's decisions to adopt that child later is wrong & is nothing short of discrimination.  That is a key point there too:  The rules only change if a child is actually ADOPTED, not just relinquished for adoption.  (Further proof that there is no special additional privacy guaranteed to any natural parent.)  There should never be a separate set of rights for people based upon whether or not they were later adopted.

Thanks for asking.

julie j

reunited adoptee

Answer 6

I was shocked by this, too.

Planned Parenthood is against open records, too!

Answer 7

THe ACLU has fallen far from the helpful place it used to be.  So no, I am not surprised.

They rate right up there with Unions in my opinion.  Take your money and then use it for their own good rather than the individual.

Answer 8

No.  It doesn't surprise me.  They don't make sense anymore.  I used to think that they were a really good organization whose only goal was to defend the Constitution.  Now I don't know what they are doing.

Answer 9

Obviously, the ACLU thinks that that bparent's rights are more important than adoptee's rights.  I figure this has something to do with the fact that adoptees are perceived as CHILDREN, whether we are adults or not.

Answer 10

What surprises me, is how they can claim their stance against open records is to protect the rights of birth parents, yet if you read any of their literature about proper adoption language, etc. you'll see that they are very anti-birth parent.

They have gone so far as to suggest referring to the birth parent as the "birth giver".  I mean, how dismissive is THAT?

How they can be so dismissive of that subset of the triad yet claim to fight for their rights is pretty ironic, don't you think?

No, I think it's less about birth parent rights and more about keeping adoptees and birth parents as far away from each other as possible.  Now, why that is, is case for speculation; covering up the adoption industry corruption; appeasing adoptive parents who don't want to see reunions happen; who knows.  It could be any or a combination of reasons.

That's my opinion, anyway.

Answer 11

Yes, absolutely flabbergasted!  What a crock

Answer 12

What a disgusting association like nambla can get represneted by the aclu, but they won't let us have open records?! that is beyond disgusting. Those non-humans of nambla shouldn't even be allowed to exist!!!

well it goes to show how unjust aclu can be!