Open records in AUS and the UK?

Question

We're often told in N. America, that adoptees couldn't possibly have open adoption records and access to our original birth certificates.

Some believe it would cause too many problems for 'birthparents' who are trying to protect thier privacy.

Records are now open in the UK and Australiia.

Does anyone know the effect?

How have things in these countries changed?

Answer 1

I live in the United Kingdom where records were opened to Adoptees in the early 1970s.   They are now open to ALL members of the birthfamily

The world has not come to an end by letting Adoptees have equal access to their own records of birth

The USA stigmatizes Adoptees in the most disgraceful way possible, like they are some underclass of citizens who are suspect and cannot be trusted to conduct themselves as the rest of society do - this has GOT to change.  Adoptees must have their civil rights restored to equal that of other citizens and the stigma against them must be lifted NOW!

Answer 2

i live in melbourne and was also adopted and had my name changed .

I have heard nothing about it being any easier with open records.Every site i go to want money for what i believe should be free of charge.Hope you have some luck,i have had to pay.

Answer 3

Records opened in Australia in the early 90's - AND after a lengthy court case - the NSW state government has actually apologized for how it treated women during the Baby Scoop Era of mass adoptions during the 60's and 70's.

I believe that records are open to most - except in few situations in some backward states

.

In Queensland - those that have 'Contact Veto's' placed against them are denied any info (in other states you still get information - as long as you sign an agreement not to contact) - which are usually placed as a knee-jerk reaction of unfounded fears. Sadly - people don't realise that the veto's last a life-time - so in these cases the adoptee can NEVER get any info unless the veto is lifted by the person that placed it there.

In Victoria - I believe that perhaps only adoptees have full access - and not first mother's. (not 100% sure)

As mentioned by another Aussie adoptee above - you get info - but it still can be hard to track down people on the small amount of info you get.

I got a lucky break - I found a family tree on the internet with my first mother's full maiden name and date of birth posted - this then gave me her husbands surname - and then a quick check in the telephone directory - and BINGO - they were found.

I have another adoptee friend from Melbourne who I am helping with her search - but sometimes it really takes a long time.

Sadly - as the case with my first mother - relinquishing mothers were told to go home and forget about the children they lost - so never thought that their children would come looking. Because of this - many do not even know that their are reunion registries set up in every state - but both parties must make contact before a match is made.

There also lies a problem with most birth certificates stating 'Father Unknown' - and only the mother's maiden name shown - as this was the practice of the period - if the parents weren't married. Tracking down maiden surnames can be difficult.

Apart from all of this - for the most of Australian adoptees - we CAN get our OBC's - and quite a lot of identifying information.

And you know what?? - there has NOT been any increase of outrageous adoptee behaviour (you know - harassment of 'birth mothers') in all this time!!!

Adoptees are not to be feared. And the majority of first mothers WANT to one day hear from their relinquished children - in 99% of cases.

Come on America - get your act together - and open records for your own people - for crying out loud!

Answer 4

Okay, I'm stepping out of line and sort of answering the question.  I don't live in Australia or the United Kingdom.  I live in the United States, where nearly 10 years ago, voters in the state of Oregon passed Measure 58.  Measure 58 returns to all adopted persons 21 years or older the right to access their original birth certificates.  

At the time that Measure 58 was on the ballot, the Oregonian newspaper vehemently took a stand against it.  However, it recently wrote an article stating that all of the negatives they feared could happen by opening records have not happened.

Here are some excerpts that address outcomes of Measure 56 from the Oregonian article:

Monday, December 10, 2007

The Oregonian

"Measure 58, approved in 1998, gave adoptees the right to find out who they are

or at least who they were when they were born. For various reasons, the measure

did not go into effect until mid-2000, but it ultimately gave adoptees, 21 and

older, the right to peruse their original birth certificates, often including

the names of their birth mothers and fathers.

Although voters approved the measure, many people feared Oregon had opened a

Pandora's box. But now it seems that experience has vindicated Oregon's policy.

A new report should put most fears to rest, by analyzing what actually happened

in six states (Alabama, Delaware, Maine, New Hampshire, Oregon and Tennessee)

after they opened up their birth records, along with two states (Kansas and

Alaska) where they were always open.

The Evan B. Donaldson Institute, a New York-based adoption think tank, found

that none of the horror stories invoked about opening up birth records -- none,

we repeat, none -- has actually materialized.

Adoptees stalking birth mothers? Hasn't happened. "Similarly, there's been no

evidence that the lives of birth mothers have been damaged as a result of the

release of information to the children (now adults) whom they relinquished for

adoption," the report says."

"In Oregon, birth mothers can attach a request for no contact to their child's

birth certificate, although the request is not binding. But the report noted

that such requests have dropped off sharply. Another fear was that open records

laws would trigger a drop in adoptions and a corresponding increase in

abortions. But the evidence shows that neither of those predictions has come

true."

"The data in this report should go far to clear up prejudices about adoption,

notably the old notion that it is best for adoptees and birth parents if the

whole process remains swaddled in secrecy. "