Friday, September 07, 2007



ABC (Access to uncertified Birth Certificates) is the Massachusetts Group that fought to pass SB 63 into law. They are so happy about passing SB 63 and have devoted a whole website page to “What SB 63 is all about.”

For sake of clarity, I will refer to all adopted men and women born between July 17, 1974 and December 31, 2007 as “the blacklisted ones.” Remember, these are the adopted persons who cannot get their original birth certificates like everyone else.

All ABC statements are in red and are directly and fully quoted from ABC’s website.

Senate Bill #63 is about stopping the clock now. Every year that goes by, we add thousands of newly adopted persons to the list of people who are excluded from access to their original uncertified birth certificates.

No, No, No, ABC! You can NOT stop the clock. Not any clock. Not the wind-up kind my grandma used to have nor the atomic clocks sold at Sharper Image. The clock continues to tick for us all - the blacklisted ones and all the rest of us.

Every second that passes is yet another second that the blacklisted ones are being kept in their black hole where their identity information is being withheld from them. Honest! They can hear those clocks just whirring away, marking the passage of time and counting the days, weeks, and years that they are going without access to their original birth certificates.

Before July 17, 1974 adult adopted persons over the age of 18 or adoptive parents of minor adopted persons were able to access an uncertified copy of the adopted person’s original birth certificate. Therefore, all birth mothers who relinquished before July 17, 1974 relinquished during the years when access was the law of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

JUST A MINUTE! HOLD YOUR HORSES! You’re making a giant leap from fact to fantasy here.

Shame on you, ABC. This argument is only an assumption on your part - is not a fact. For the sake of your argument, you are assuming that the law change in 1974 which took away adopted peoples’ access to their birth records also means that the birth mothers who relinquished after 1974 were given legal assurances of confidentiality.

Oh yes, the legislature did change the access law but it did NOT ever address the legality of birthmother’s confidentiality in any way. Birthmother confidentiality has never been a LAW. Don’t equate a law about access with a wish for confidentiality!
Don't make a law where none existed before.

Senate Bill #63 will still require adopted persons born between July 17, 1974 and January 1, 2008 to obtain a court order. The bill also stipulates that evidence of a birth parents willingness to provide information about their identity to the adopted person shall serve as sufficient evidence to grant access to the birth certificate.

ABC’rs – have any of you gone to court to get an order to release your original birth certificates? Guess what? I have!

I spent about 2months doing research in law libraries and then at least another 4 months wending my way through the judicial system. During this time, I spent numerous days making court appearances, amending petitions, gathering more evidence, and enduring many continuances.

Total cost in dollars was well over $1000 – and that was without hiring an attorney. Add on a lawyer and you can add on several hundred dollars to the total expense.

ABC, do you ever wonder how many blacklisted ones have that much free time or money to go to court? Do you even care?

Senate Bill #63 will establish an Adoption Contact Information Registry at Vital Statistics for the purpose of housing information indicating whether or not a birthparent(s) wishes to grant access to the original birth certificate.

What? Yet ANOTHER REGISTRY? Are you serious? ROTFL

Senate Bill #63 is about respecting the judgment of adoptive parents to hold their infant, child, and teen's information and to make decisions in the best interest of their minor child.

Oh my! I didn’t even know that prior to passage of SB 63 adopted CHILDREN were able to make decisions about anything related to their adoptions.

Whew! It’s a relief to know that SB 63 will stop minor adopted CHILDREN from storming the Bureau of Vital Statistics.

Senate Bill #63 is about trusting Adult Adopted Persons, Birth Parents and Adoptive Parents--as we trust other citizens--to respect boundaries.

What boundaries? Whose boundaries?

Oh, I get it. The blacklisted ones must have a history of breaking boundaries? Is that it?

Heavens, there may even be some blacklisted ones in the clinker at this very moment, serving time for not respecting boundaries. No wonder you have to teach them about trust

Senate Bill #63 is about reinstating the same access that existed until 1974 in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

ABC, watch out!! You’re going backwards – and fast! Most people in the United States like to believe that they are moving forward on important issues. Most people want to change with the times. They believe in flexibility. But maybe they don’t know the issues as well as you do.

ABC, what other laws will you be going backwards to find and enforce? Would you like to go back to the 1950’s and enforce the “Gentlemen’s Agreements” about selling houses or renting hotel rooms to Jewish people?

Or maybe you don’t like African Americans drinking from your water fountains. Maybe that can be your next project – go back to the 40’s and 50’s and reinstate society the way it was then.

Say, maybe you’d like to reinstate the law that says women cannot vote. You’ll have to go pretty darned far to get that one, but hey, you’ve got lots of political experience. You can do it.

“Senate Bill #63 is about granting Adopted Persons their first formal certificate of membership in the human race and as citizens of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.”


Just a minute. What’s wrong with the blacklisted ones? Why can’t they get a formal certificate of membership in the human race? Why can’t they be granted full citizenship in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts?

Is it because their mothers gave them away and don’t want them coming back?

Or maybe the blacklisted ones aren’t smart enough yet to get a formal certificate. Is it like a graduation certificate?

Could it be that the blacklisted ones are bad people, ones you really don’t want to join the rest of the human race anyway?

Or could it be that you all just don’t care?!



Anonymous said...

Way to go, Granny. You couldn't have said it better. I've no idea who wrote the ABC web page but it's very hard for me to believe that there is a group out there that honestly believes any of what is written. My heart goes out to the blacklisted adoptees and I hope that they will find some justice somewhere. To be stabbed in the back by those who are supposed to be watching out for your rights is beyond description.
I bet they all wish they knew who to "thank" but I guess those responsible are all slinking under some shadowy rock somewhere. The MA law will now become our example of legislation that you don't want to pass. I'm disgusted.

Marley Greiner said...

Beautiful, Anita! You shredded their rationale--not that there was a real one to start with! ABC should be held accountable for their betrayal. Those of us who tried to stop this train wreck were stonewalled at every turn. Who is ABC? Why aren't their names listed on their webpage? Why are agency hacks hi-jacking adoptee identity rights? What does ABC get out of this?

Anonymous said...

I feel like I have survivers quit. Like Im the only one to survive a plane crash. I dont know what to do with my guilt about being one of the "Blessed Ones"

Anonymous said...

quit whats wrong with me guilt guilt guilt.

Marley Greiner said...

I just re-read your blog, and you stated this so well: "privacy" was never addressed. The sealing of an obc is one thing, privacy guarantees quite another. The are not equivilent. That is just so simple!