Grannie Annie agrees! This is a wonderful book!
PRESS RELEASE
November 2007
IMMEDIATE RELEASE
RES Marketing Alliance
Request a Review Copy
ontact: Reina Santana863-427-4848
The Adoption Mystique Award Winning Finalist In the USA Book News 2007 National Best Books Award
Kissimmee, Fl - November 2007 - On November 1, 2007, USABookNews.com, the premiere online magazine and review website for mainstream and independent publishing houses, announced the winners and finalist of the 2007 National Best Books Awards. Winners and finalists traversed the publishing landscape. They included publishing houses like Simon & Schuster, Penguin-Putnam, HarperCollins, Random House, and McGraw-Hill. Amongst the winners, The Adoption Mystique: A Hard-hitting Exposé of the Powerful Negative Social Stigma that Permeates Child Adoption in the United States was a finalist in the social change category.
Listed as recommended reading by The American Adoption Congress (AAC), The Adoption Mystique, written by Joanne Wolf Small, M. S. W., is a well researched book that questions and challenges the stigma that permeates the many readily accepted and rarely questioned social norms and myths that continue to support adoptee and adoptive family intolerance, and hinder efforts to make positive and healthy changes that would help to bring adoption policy and practice into the 21st century.
Midwest Book Review says, "The Adoption Mystique is not a general book about adoption, but rather a focused, politically-minded call for the civil rights of adoptees" as it "examines bias against adoptees in the media and society." Carrie Craft from About.com Adoption writes, "author Joanne Wolf Small, M.S.W. just doesn't break the adoption myth, she shatters it with her compilation of various research studies, essays, and personal knowledge on the subject of adoption...The Adoption Mystique is respectful and not at all anti-adoption, just pro-truth and openness." It is a useful proven resource for all whose lives have been touched by adoption.
"Your essays are so thoughtful - and so rich in conveying the historical context for adoption in general and the policies and practices surrounding information sharing, in particular, and in conveying the critical psychosocial issues that lie at the heart of adoption. I am certain that your book will be viewed as a critical resource for policy makers and practitioners seeking to better understand adoption." - Madelyn Freundlich, Senior Policy Analyst, and former Executive Director, Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute
ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Joanne W. Small, M.S.W is an adopted adult, adoption rights activist, author, and psychotherapist. She was executive director of Adoptees in Search (AIS) and served as the first and only adopted person on the Model Adoption Legislative Procedures and Advisory Panel. Her 30 year professional experience includes a post-adoption clinical practice, clinical supervision, in-service training and seminars, lectures, publications, and interviews with over a thousand adoptive family members. Visit her website at http://www.jwsmall.com/.###
The Adoption Mystique: A Hard-hitting Exposé of the Powerful Negative Social Stigma that Permeates Child Adoption in the United States, Hardcover, $28.95, is available via Amazon.com, Barnes & Noble, and Ingram. To request a review copy please contact Reina Santana at rsantana@resmarketingalliance.com
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Saturday, November 17, 2007
AN ADOPTED WOMAN TALKS BACK
Adopted adults are fighting for the right to request and receive our original birth certificates with no conditions or falsifications. In a free society, states cannot hold on to their power to withhold our identity information from us. We are adopted men and women – not enemies of the state.
The state governments must get out of the search and reunion business. They must also get out of the business of gathering our medical information. If we wish, we can do all of these things on our own.
§ We are not asking for anyone in the government or private sector to help us find our first parents.
§ We are not asking for anyone in the government or private sector to plan or mediate reunions between us and any other person on this planet.
§ We are not asking for anyone in the government or private sector to secure medical information for us.
§ We are not asking for anyone in the government or private sector to tell us which relatives are okay and which are not okay to associate with.
The states should be and indeed they are in the ADOPTION business, because it is important to find permanent homes for children who need them. That’s good. But once we homeless children reach the age of majority, the states should wish us a good life and say goodbye. They really must stop interfering in our lives forever!
The only way to accomplish this change is for the legislatures to repeal the antiquated sealed records section of their laws. Then we adoptees will once again be free to access the records of our birth. That’s all we are asking.
Friday, October 26, 2007
A LESSON FOR DEFORMERS
Bastard Nation is Not the Only Ones who Oppose Baby Step Bills
Bastard Nation is Not the Only Ones who Oppose Baby Step Bills
DISCLAIMER: This blog is not intended to compare in any way the issues facing immigrants in America with the totally different issues of adopted adults in our country. I take no stand, pro or con, on America’s immigration policies.
What is a Deformer? Adoption deformer is a phrase coined by Marley Greiner, Executive Chair of Bastard Nation. Deformers are adoptees who us to proceed in baby steps. They ask us to accept bills which provide for conditional access, disclosure vetoes, contact vetoes, intermediary bills, white-out provisions or tiered legislation. Deformers claim that these conditional access bills have a better chance of being passed and that is reason enough for us to support them. They tell us that legislation which gives some adoptees restricted access to their original birth certificates is "better than nothing." They claim that conditional access legislation serves as intermediate steps to someday getting the true open records legislation.
The Chicago Tribune reported on Thursday, Oct. 25th, that the Senate fell short Wednesday of the 60 votes needed to debate the Dream Act, a bill that would give young undocumented immigrants the possibility of citizenship if they were brought illegally to the US as children.
What caught my attention was the part of the article that discussed the reasoning behind some of the senators’ votes – one long term senator in particular.
“Senator Arlen Specter (R-Pa) said he likes the Dream Act and believes it should be enacted, yet he voted against allowing the Senate to proceed.
“’I do not think we ought to cherry-pick here,’ Specter said.
“I have grave reservations about seeing a part of comprehensive immigration reform go forward, because it weakens our position to get a comprehensive bill.’”
Deformers: If you truly want to see All adopted adults in the United States and Canada have unconditional and unrestricted access to their original birth certificates, then hang on to those convictions. Stop trying to pass open records bills that will “weaken our position to get a comprehensive bill.”
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
OPEN LETTER TO SUSAN HICKS & ABC
WHAT WILL YOU TELL THE “BLACKLISTED ONES?”
The Massachusetts Committee of ABC was one of the prime supporters of SB 63. I have read over your webpage and discovered that something very important is totally missing from ABC’s laundry list of superlatives about SB 63. The missing link is your feelings and attitudes toward the “Blacklisted Ones” – you know, the adopted men and women who happened to have been born on the politically incorrect dates between July 17, 1974 and December 31, 2007. What do you say to these adoptees who will still have to go to court to get their birth certificates?
Will you look them in the face and tell them how good SB 63 is?
Will you pat them on the back and thank them for being martyrs to the cause?
Will you tell them that you'll come back in a year or two to revisit the law and then you will support changing it to include the Blacklisted Ones?
Will you tell them that with all political issues there are bound to be scapegoats? And with SB 63, they are the scapegoats.
Will you look them in the eyes and tell them that this bill was the right thing to do?
Will you tell them that leaving them out in the cold was the politically expedient thing that you all had to do in order to get this bill passed into law?
Will you tell them you’re sorry?
Sunday, September 09, 2007
MORE ON MA DISASTER - BLESSED ONES ARE NOT TO BLAME
TO THE BLESSED ONES:
You all should NOT feel guilty about being in the Blessed category. You all didn't do anything wrong! The ones who wrote and passed this law are the guilty ones. Funny, isn't it? Right now, I don't hear any celebrations from them - I think they're hiding under some rug.
Blessed Ones, don't feel guilty. Sometimes in life you find yourself in the right place at the right time. So you all run, not walk, to your nearest Vital Stats office and get your original birth certificates. They belong to YOU.
You all should NOT feel guilty about being in the Blessed category. You all didn't do anything wrong! The ones who wrote and passed this law are the guilty ones. Funny, isn't it? Right now, I don't hear any celebrations from them - I think they're hiding under some rug.
Blessed Ones, don't feel guilty. Sometimes in life you find yourself in the right place at the right time. So you all run, not walk, to your nearest Vital Stats office and get your original birth certificates. They belong to YOU.
Friday, September 07, 2007
DISASTER IN MASSACHUSETTS
ABC SAYS………
GRANNIE ANNIE SAYS………
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. http:www.accesstobirthcertificates.org.
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.”
WHAT?
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?!
MASSACHUSETTS IS NOW LIVING ON ANIMAL FARM, WHERE ALL ADOPTED PEOPLE ARE EQUAL EXCEPT THAT SOME ADOPTED PEOPLE ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS.
GRANNIE ANNIE SAYS………
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. http:www.accesstobirthcertificates.org.
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.”
WHAT?
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?!
MASSACHUSETTS IS NOW LIVING ON ANIMAL FARM, WHERE ALL ADOPTED PEOPLE ARE EQUAL EXCEPT THAT SOME ADOPTED PEOPLE ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS.
Wednesday, September 05, 2007
MASSACHUSETTS SB 63
“An Act to Further Regulate the Access of Birth Certificates”
ARE YOU BLESSED OR ARE YOU BLACKLISTED?
SB 63 is one of the worst bills ever devised in adoption history. Under SB 63, adopted adults will be separated into two distinct categories based solely on dates of birth. I call them the BLESSED LIST and the BLACK LIST.
MASSACHUSETTS’ BLESSED LIST
1. Adopted men and women who were born before July 17, 1974.
2. Adopted children who will be born after January 1, 2008.
If you are the Blessed list, you will be able to request and receive from the Commonwealth’s Registrar your original birth certificates without any restrictions.
MASSACHUSETTS BLACK LIST
1. Adopted men and women who were born between the dates of
July 17, 1974 and January 1, 2008.
2. Adopted adults in all of the United States and Canada. This bill has the potential to set an unacceptable precedent in adoption law. If one state, Massachusetts, is allowed to blatantly discriminate against 34 years of adoptees, the potential for other states to copycat is great.
If you are on the Black List, you will only be able to request your original birth certificate by petitioning the courts.
HOW CAN YOU PROTEST TODAY?
SB 63 has passed both the Senate and the House and is awaiting the governor's signature within the next few days. Please phone, fax or email Governor Deval Patrick IMMEDIATELY and tell him to veto SB 63.
The Honorable Governor of Massachusetts Deval Patrick
Phone: 617 - 725 -4005
Fax (in state only) 617-927-9725
Email: http:www.mass.gov/
HOW CAN YOU PROTEST IN NOVEMBER?
ALL ACTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES!
THE SPONSORS OF SB 63 MUST ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR ACTIONS. THEY MUST BE VOTED OUT OF OFFICE.
SENATOR FREDERIC E. BERRY, Republican. Represents the districts of Second Essex, which includes Beverly, Peabody, Salem, Danvers, and Topsfield
THE SPONSORS OF SB 63 MUST ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR ACTIONS. THEY MUST BE VOTED OUT OF OFFICE.
SENATOR FREDERIC E. BERRY, Republican. Represents the districts of Second Essex, which includes Beverly, Peabody, Salem, Danvers, and Topsfield
SENATOR KAREN E. SPILKA. Democrat, Majority Leader of Senate, 2003 – 2008. Represents the districts of Second Middlesex and Norfolk
REPRESENTATIVE JOHN. A. LEPPER. Democrat, Minority Whip 2003 – present. Represents the Attleboro District, precincts one, two, and three.
Save this list and watch for these names at the next election!
PLEASE FORWARD FREELY
Thursday, July 05, 2007
WRITE A THANK YOU NOTE TO GOVERNOR LINGLE
Thanks, Governor Lingle!
Governor Linda Lingle has placed HB 1830 on her list of potential bills that she will veto. She has until July 10th to act on this list. After this date, the legislature may call a special session in order to try and override any of the governor's vetoes. HB 1830, known as the Safe Haven bill, would legalize the anonymous abandonment of infants which directly brings about the theft of these babies' true identities. I firmly support Governor Lingle, as does my group, Bastard Nation: The Adoptee Rights Organization. I send my most heartfelt thanks to the governor for holding firm on the subject of Safe Havens. Governor Lingle truly understands the underlying issues of safe havens. She has insight into the problems that would arise as a result of a safe haven law and she has the courage to stand up for her convictions. Governor Linda Lingle has the best interests of Hawaii's families at heart. She has her finger on the pulse of the people. She had a 71% approval rate in 2005, 12th highest in the nation. Last year she was reelected to the governor's office by the largest margin in the state's history, 67% - 35%. The people trust Governor Lingle. She knows that the citizens of Hawaii will consider anonymous baby dumping an unacceptable practice. Governor Lingle's veto will maintain the status quo – Hawaiian families already know how to take care of children who cannot be raised by their biological parents. They do not want or need safe havens. If you agree with Governor Lingle's position on safe havens, why not drop her a note and thank her. Tell her that she has your support. She needs to hear from all of us who have been directly affected by identity theft. Here's her address. The Honorable Linda Lingle Governor, State of Hawaii Executive Chambers State Capitol Hololulu, Hawaii 96813 Phone: (808) 586-0034 Fax: (808) 586- 0006 Email: governor.lingle@hawaii.gov -- |
Tuesday, June 26, 2007
AS MAINE GOES, SO GOES THE NATION.
MAINE PASSES OPEN RECORDS BILL
On June 25, HB 1084 was signed by Governor John Baldacci. This bill, which will go into effect January 1, 2009, recognizes the rights of all adopted adults 18 years and older in the state of Maine to request and receive, unconditionally, their original birth certificates.
Maine takes its place on the Honor Roll of states with totally open records for adopted adults: Kansas, Alaska, Oregon, Alabama and New Hampshire. Each time a new state joins the Honor Roll it makes it that much easier for the other states coming up. As Maine goes, so goes the nation. I know it's going to happen.
IT COULDN’T BE DONE WITHOUT...
The legislative sponsors of the bill, House Representative David Farrington and State Senator Paula Benoit. These two people believed in this bill and they worked tirelessly to make open records a reality in Maine.
Bobbi Beavers and OBC For ME, the grassroots organization that filed the bill and worked so hard to get it passed.
Every adopted man and woman and every birth parent in Maine who supported this bill and raised their voices to get it passed. You spoke and the government listened.
THANK YOU
All adopted adults and all birth parents in the United States and Canada are grateful to you all and we send you our most heartfelt THANKS!
And Grannie Annie sends everyone some big special “grannie hugs and kisses.” I am thrilled to see another state recognize the fact that adopted men and women must be treated equally under the laws. Maine’s bill stands as a beacon, shedding its light over the entire USA and Canada. Other states contemplating similar bills can look to Maine for guidance.
WAY TO GO, MAINE.
Thursday, June 14, 2007
PLEA TO HAWAII GOVERNOR LINDA LINGLE
Dear Governor Lingle:
I URGE YOU TO VETO HB 1830 which would create safe havens for women to
anonymously abandon their unwanted infants. You vetoed it last session
and I beg you to stand tall and strong and veto it again! You won't be
sorry!
I am adopted woman in her 60's, long active in adoptee rights
issues, and I know first hand how very wrong it is for any government
to strip in perpetuity even one baby of her ethnic history and
identity.
HB 1830 will not solve the problem of crisis pregnancies. In states
with safe haven laws, infants are still being dumped in trash bins,
toilets and back alleys. The solution to this tragic problem does not
lie with the creation of safe havens. Preventing disastrous results
from crisis pregnancies is a mental health issue. Viable solutions
must come from the psychiatric community - not from folks who want to
pass a bill that might "save one baby." These people are looking to
solve the problem after the fact instead of trying to reach women in
crises before they give birth. Please say NO to these well meaning but
misguided individuals.
HB 1830 would seriously damage the practice of "Hanai" in which
extended family and community care insures that children unable to be
reared by their biological parents are lovingly kept within the family
or close community where their identity and heritage remain intact.
HB 1830 would deny certain government benefits available to all
Native Hawai'ians because the "safe havened" infants would be
unable to prove their Native ancestry.
HB 1830 flies in the face of 100 years of social welfare and best
practices for children. It has been the norm until now for social
work professionals to rigorously oppose child abandonment of any
kind.
I URGE YOU TO VETO HB 1830 which would create safe havens for women to
anonymously abandon their unwanted infants. You vetoed it last session
and I beg you to stand tall and strong and veto it again! You won't be
sorry!
I am adopted woman in her 60's, long active in adoptee rights
issues, and I know first hand how very wrong it is for any government
to strip in perpetuity even one baby of her ethnic history and
identity.
HB 1830 will not solve the problem of crisis pregnancies. In states
with safe haven laws, infants are still being dumped in trash bins,
toilets and back alleys. The solution to this tragic problem does not
lie with the creation of safe havens. Preventing disastrous results
from crisis pregnancies is a mental health issue. Viable solutions
must come from the psychiatric community - not from folks who want to
pass a bill that might "save one baby." These people are looking to
solve the problem after the fact instead of trying to reach women in
crises before they give birth. Please say NO to these well meaning but
misguided individuals.
HB 1830 would seriously damage the practice of "Hanai" in which
extended family and community care insures that children unable to be
reared by their biological parents are lovingly kept within the family
or close community where their identity and heritage remain intact.
HB 1830 would deny certain government benefits available to all
Native Hawai'ians because the "safe havened" infants would be
unable to prove their Native ancestry.
HB 1830 flies in the face of 100 years of social welfare and best
practices for children. It has been the norm until now for social
work professionals to rigorously oppose child abandonment of any
kind.
Thursday, May 24, 2007
Update: Wanted, a Miracle
Dear Friends,
Thank you all so much for your help and your support on my behalf in looking for a miracle. I don’t have enough words to tell you how much I appreciate it.
Unfortunately, the “facts” of my case lead nowhere. My goal is for someone to recognize something in the “facts” that might be true and trigger a memory of long ago. My second goal is the hope that someone might look at my photos and see a strong family resemblance.
When and if this ever happens, I promise you all that I’ll shout it from the roof tops right here.
Thanks a million for your encouragement and your help.
Sincerely,
Grannie Annie aka Anita
Thank you all so much for your help and your support on my behalf in looking for a miracle. I don’t have enough words to tell you how much I appreciate it.
Unfortunately, the “facts” of my case lead nowhere. My goal is for someone to recognize something in the “facts” that might be true and trigger a memory of long ago. My second goal is the hope that someone might look at my photos and see a strong family resemblance.
When and if this ever happens, I promise you all that I’ll shout it from the roof tops right here.
Thanks a million for your encouragement and your help.
Sincerely,
Grannie Annie aka Anita
Wednesday, May 16, 2007
Saturday, March 24, 2007
Thursday, March 15, 2007
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
The Black Hole
A new access bill, HB 2190,l has been filed in MASSACHUSETTS and it has the same insane “Black Hole” provision as last year’s bill. Adopted adults can request and receive their original birth certificates so long as they weren’t born between July 14, 1974 and January 1, 2008.
The rationalization for the black hole is that this bill acknowledges an “implied promise” of confidentiality made to some birth parents who relinquished during that time period.
Grannie Annie says:
An "implied" promise? How can a promise be implied? A promise either IS or it ISN'T. Period. Oh, such crap!
The rationalization for the black hole is that this bill acknowledges an “implied promise” of confidentiality made to some birth parents who relinquished during that time period.
Grannie Annie says:
An "implied" promise? How can a promise be implied? A promise either IS or it ISN'T. Period. Oh, such crap!
Monday, February 19, 2007
GRANNIE ANNIE NEEDS MIRACLE
ADOPTEE GRANNIE ANNIE
NEEDS MIRACLE
Please Forward Me Everywhere!
Grannie Annie aka Anita Field aka Anita Walker Field
Anita5000@comcast.net
www.grannieannie.org
I am an adoptee. I need your help. I have been searching for any biological relatives since 1993 with no success I cannot find one single person, living or dead, who even
remotely resembles any name in my adoption file. My only hope now is for
someone, somewhere to recognize my birth story or see a resemblance in my face.
I need national, or international exposure. How else but the Internet to get
seen around the world fast? Please forward this blog freely to every person,
Email List, organization, blogsite, etc. that you can think of. You have my
grateful permission to send me around the world..
I was a gray market baby, bought and paid for, and I came with falsified
records. I have two different dates of birth. My place of birth, particularly,
is in doubt and that is why the federal government did not want to issue me a
passport. I may have been "shipped" to Chicago from a baby farm and then given
up for adoption. Or, my birth mother may have come to Chicago just to give
birth. She could have been housed in one of the illegal maternity homes which
were thriving right in the very same Chicago Uptown/Edgewater neighborhood where
both my adoptive parents and my birth mother resided.
MY BIRTH STORY
Name of Infant: empy line on birth certificate. – no name entered, not even Baby Girl. Adoption Decree - Baby Girl Walker, adopted Anita Mae Abramson, married
name Anita Field, aka Anita Walker Field and Granny Annie.
Date of birth: August 6th or 9th, 1937.
Place of birth: Will Rogers Memorial Hospital, 6970 N. Clark St., Chicago, IL.
[This hospital changed names many times. In Feb. 1938 it became Rogers Hospital,
Rogers Park Hospital or Doctor’s Hospital.]
Attending physician: Alice Teola Wilson, MD, 4611 N. Broadway, Chicago, IL
Legitimate? No
Maiden Name of birth mother: Margaret Walker
Name of birth father: "Mr. (first name unknown) last name Walker"
Birth mother’s residence at time of birth: 4840 N. Magnolia St., Chicago, IL
Birth mother’s age at time of birth: 17
Birth mother’s place of birth: Gary, Indiana
Adoptive parents: Charles & Tillie Abramson
Adoptive parent’s residence at time of birth: 5240 N. Sheridan Rd. Chicago, IL.
Adoptive parent’s attorney: Theodore Kahn, 188 Randolph, Chicago, IL.
Private Placement: Approximately 5 days to 2 weeks after birth.
Believe Me, Folks, I’ve Really Tried!
I have been continuously searching for my biological relatives since 1993 with
no success. But not for the want of trying.
court appointed social workers from Midwest Adoption Agency spent two years on
my case, only to ask for its dismissal after 2 years because they could not find
even one person, living or dead, who even remotely resembled any person named in
my adoption file.
was to pay her $2,900. After 6 months, Ms. Lee dismissed my case because she was
not successful in finding anyone. I still had my money - but no family.
Lake County, Indiana, a gentleman from Kansas, and a searcher in Chicago.
Nothing.
Dept. of Public Health. In my petition, I asked that all my adoption files as
well as my original birth certificate be turned over to me. In January 1997, I
received these documents. The "information" in my vital stats is from my original
birth certificate and the adoption file. I know there are omissions,
contradictions, half-truths, and lies in these documents but when your adoption
isn’t legal, what can you expect?!
for searching adoptees, as well as becoming a vocal advocate for adopted adults.
I have made numerous contacts all over the globe and have had wonderful people
from all over trying to help me. God bless them all, but we found no
one.
messge board I can find. I’ve taken out personal ads in both newsapers and
magazines, but no one knows me.
I really need a miracle.
THANKS AGAIN AND GOD BLESS.
Saturday, January 06, 2007
Saturday, December 23, 2006
NIGHT BEFORE CHRISTMAS
TWAS THE NIGHT BEFORE CHRISTMAS
By Grannie Annie
By Grannie Annie
Twas the night before Christmas
And all through his house,
St. Nick at the North Pole
Was as busy as a mouse.
Rudolph was ready,
Pawing the ground,
Waiting for St. Nicholas
To tell him their rounds.
St. Nick was still working,
Tuning up his GPS.
Feeding in the coordinates,
Don’t want any mess.
The place where we’re going
Is very hard to find.
Bastard Nation is our destination.
It lives within Bastard’s minds.
So our job tonight,
Said Santa to his reindeer,
Is to find all the Bastards
Who live in this sphere.
I’m bringing them a message
Of Christmas cheer.
Sealed records and baby dumps
Must disappear!
The bastards are nestled
All snug in their beds,
With visions of open records
Dancing in their heads.
Bastards’ stockings are hung
By their chimneys with care,
In hopes that St. Nicholas
Soon will be there.
Through the night sky
The coursers they flew.
With a sleigh full of court orders
And legislative bills too.
He was a right jolly old man,
All in red he was dressed,
With a Bastard Nation T-shirt
Proudly covering his chest.
First stop. Ohio.
Bastard Mother Marley lives here.
No more baby dumps,
Oh founding foundling dear.
All deformers and dimwits
Get nothing but coal.
Bastards get equality -
They already have soul.
Santa spoke not a word,
As he opened his sack.
Filled all the stockings
With shiny keys from his pack.
All decorated with bows
Were these sparkly golden keys.
They open all the right doors
To set every adoptee free.
Freedom Keys, I call them,
Said dear old St. Nick.
And I’m counting on the Bastards
To use them all - quick!
It was a long journey
For St. Nick and his team.
Now he’s on his way home
He’s fulfilled Bastards’ dreams.
But I heard him explain, ere he flew out of sight,
Happy Christmas to Bastards . Keep up the good fight.
Grannie Annie wishes everyone peace and joy
during the holiday season and in the new year.
____________________________________ Sunday, December 10, 2006
NEW JERSEY BILL S1087
BastardGrannyAnnie
NEW JERSEY BILL S1087
ORIGINAL BIRTH CERTIFICATES: RIGHT OR PRIVEILEGE?
When you pass out privileges, you pick and choose.
When you pass out civil rights, it’s all or nothing.
The Bastardette at http://bastardette.blogspot.com wrote an eloquent blog about New Jersey Bill S1087 and the New Jersey Dimwits associated with it, some of whom support the bill as amended and others who think the bill is giving away the farm.
I’d like to say a few words about the Deformers in New Jersey who continue to support this bill with the conditional amendments added in a Senate Committee. The Deformers are as much the enemy of equal rights for all adoptees as are the Dimwits.
Deformers, unlike Dimwits, are for the most part adopted men and women who have worked very hard for many years to see an equal access bill pass in New Jersey. They are not governmental officials. They are adoptees just like you and me. They want original birth certificates be issued to adopted adults. Their hearts are in the right place. But heads are needed too, in order to pass legislation that will benefit ALL ADOPTED ADULTS.
The Deformers in New Jersey have fashioned a “Mother, May I?” amendment allowing birthmothers 12 months following passage of the bill in which to file an affidavit of nondisclosure. This means that if a birth mother signs a statement saying she doesn’t want her identity known to her child of adoption, then that adoptee doesn’t get his or her birth certificate- possibly forever.
New Jersey is actually handing over its constitutional responsibility of issuing birth certificates to birth mothers who claim they want their privacy. These are the same birth mothers, I might add, who legally and irrevocably gave up all legal rights to their children at the time of the relinquishment.
Giving birthmothers this veto power is a crucial point in adoptee rights negotiations. And it is at this point where the Bastards part ways with the Deformers.
Bastards believe ALL adopted men and women are entitled to unconditional access to their original birth certificates. Bastards believe that “Mother, May I?” clauses are demeaning to all adopted adults. Bastards believe that endowing birth mothers with veto powers turns the issuance of original birth certificates into a privilege rather than a right. Bastards believe that equal access for ALL citizens to the documents of their birth is a human and civil right.
When you pass out privileges, you pick and choose.
When you pass out civil rights, it’s all or nothing.
I’m not a deformer and I can’t speak for them. But I don’t understand why they chose to fold at this crucial moment. I don’t understand why Deformers are willing to sell out for less than unconditional records for all adoptees. And I don’t understand how Deformers can rationalize leaving some adoptees out in the cold. How can it be okay for the state to give original birth certificates to some, but not all adoptees?
Passing a bill is a long and arduous task. Going back to the legislature for changes the following year isn’t realistic. History has proven that once conditional legislation has passed, it is not revisited any time. Deformers, remember the old saying, “Be very careful what you wish for. It might come true.”
Besides dividing adoptees into two classes, I wonder if Deformers seriously consider the reality of setting precedents. When one state passes a controversial law, its effects are felt in other states. New Jersey is a very large state. Other states will look towards the bigger ones when it’s their turn to craft an adoptee rights bill. If it’s okay with all those millions of folks in New Jersey, then it must be okay for us. Deformers - that’s what it means to set a precedent. It’s dangerous.
BOTTOM LINE
S 1087 is a search and reunion bill. Both the Dimwits and the Deformers will agree on this. They both blabber about how much or how little the state should be in the business of managing the private affairs of adopted adults and birth mothers. Some want more state interference, others will settle for less. Bastards want no part of a search and reunion bill. Bastards want no government interference in the private issues of adopted men and women.
The state sealed the records long ago and the time has come for the state to unseal them. Reunions, good or bad, have absolutely nothing to do with adoptees having equal access to their original birth documents.
Bastard Nation leaves no adoptee behind. Bastard Nation will never support conditional legislation where some adoptees will be left to the whims of the birth parents who legally relinquished all claims to them many years ago. We have always opposed those equal access bills that contain conditional sections and we always will.
Bastard Nation is working to bring ALL adopted adults the same equal access to their original birth documents that non-adopted people take for granted. We’ve done it in Oregon. We’ve done it in Alabama. We’ve done it in New Hampshire. And we are working for similar laws until the government treats ALL adopted adults in America equally.
As New Hampshire State Senator Lou D’allesandro said on the eve of his state passing its equal access bill, “It’s the right thing to do.”
NEW JERSEY BILL S1087
ORIGINAL BIRTH CERTIFICATES: RIGHT OR PRIVEILEGE?
When you pass out privileges, you pick and choose.
When you pass out civil rights, it’s all or nothing.
The Bastardette at http://bastardette.blogspot.com wrote an eloquent blog about New Jersey Bill S1087 and the New Jersey Dimwits associated with it, some of whom support the bill as amended and others who think the bill is giving away the farm.
I’d like to say a few words about the Deformers in New Jersey who continue to support this bill with the conditional amendments added in a Senate Committee. The Deformers are as much the enemy of equal rights for all adoptees as are the Dimwits.
Deformers, unlike Dimwits, are for the most part adopted men and women who have worked very hard for many years to see an equal access bill pass in New Jersey. They are not governmental officials. They are adoptees just like you and me. They want original birth certificates be issued to adopted adults. Their hearts are in the right place. But heads are needed too, in order to pass legislation that will benefit ALL ADOPTED ADULTS.
The Deformers in New Jersey have fashioned a “Mother, May I?” amendment allowing birthmothers 12 months following passage of the bill in which to file an affidavit of nondisclosure. This means that if a birth mother signs a statement saying she doesn’t want her identity known to her child of adoption, then that adoptee doesn’t get his or her birth certificate- possibly forever.
New Jersey is actually handing over its constitutional responsibility of issuing birth certificates to birth mothers who claim they want their privacy. These are the same birth mothers, I might add, who legally and irrevocably gave up all legal rights to their children at the time of the relinquishment.
Giving birthmothers this veto power is a crucial point in adoptee rights negotiations. And it is at this point where the Bastards part ways with the Deformers.
Bastards believe ALL adopted men and women are entitled to unconditional access to their original birth certificates. Bastards believe that “Mother, May I?” clauses are demeaning to all adopted adults. Bastards believe that endowing birth mothers with veto powers turns the issuance of original birth certificates into a privilege rather than a right. Bastards believe that equal access for ALL citizens to the documents of their birth is a human and civil right.
When you pass out privileges, you pick and choose.
When you pass out civil rights, it’s all or nothing.
I’m not a deformer and I can’t speak for them. But I don’t understand why they chose to fold at this crucial moment. I don’t understand why Deformers are willing to sell out for less than unconditional records for all adoptees. And I don’t understand how Deformers can rationalize leaving some adoptees out in the cold. How can it be okay for the state to give original birth certificates to some, but not all adoptees?
Passing a bill is a long and arduous task. Going back to the legislature for changes the following year isn’t realistic. History has proven that once conditional legislation has passed, it is not revisited any time. Deformers, remember the old saying, “Be very careful what you wish for. It might come true.”
Besides dividing adoptees into two classes, I wonder if Deformers seriously consider the reality of setting precedents. When one state passes a controversial law, its effects are felt in other states. New Jersey is a very large state. Other states will look towards the bigger ones when it’s their turn to craft an adoptee rights bill. If it’s okay with all those millions of folks in New Jersey, then it must be okay for us. Deformers - that’s what it means to set a precedent. It’s dangerous.
BOTTOM LINE
S 1087 is a search and reunion bill. Both the Dimwits and the Deformers will agree on this. They both blabber about how much or how little the state should be in the business of managing the private affairs of adopted adults and birth mothers. Some want more state interference, others will settle for less. Bastards want no part of a search and reunion bill. Bastards want no government interference in the private issues of adopted men and women.
The state sealed the records long ago and the time has come for the state to unseal them. Reunions, good or bad, have absolutely nothing to do with adoptees having equal access to their original birth documents.
Bastard Nation leaves no adoptee behind. Bastard Nation will never support conditional legislation where some adoptees will be left to the whims of the birth parents who legally relinquished all claims to them many years ago. We have always opposed those equal access bills that contain conditional sections and we always will.
Bastard Nation is working to bring ALL adopted adults the same equal access to their original birth documents that non-adopted people take for granted. We’ve done it in Oregon. We’ve done it in Alabama. We’ve done it in New Hampshire. And we are working for similar laws until the government treats ALL adopted adults in America equally.
As New Hampshire State Senator Lou D’allesandro said on the eve of his state passing its equal access bill, “It’s the right thing to do.”
Monday, December 04, 2006
New Jersey S1087 - Vote No
BastardGrannyAnnie
Honorable Senator:
I am a 65 year old adopted woman. I urge you to vote "NO" to S1087. This bill contains a disclosure veto which will allow birth mothers a year in which to file a veto prohibiting their names from being disclosed to adoptees’ on their original birth certificates.
A disclosure veto presumes that receiving one’s original birth certificate from the state is a privilege rather than a civil and human right of all citizens of the state.
It was the state who sealed ALL the original birth documents and it must be the state that reinstates the issuance of original birth certificates to ALL adopted adults.
How can the state possibly rationalize turning over to birth mothers its constitutional responsibility of issuing original birth certificates? These are the same birth mothers, by the way, who irrevocably terminated all legal rights to their children when their children were adopted.
I urge you to reject Senate Bill 1087 and return to the drawing table. Craft a bill that enables adopted adults to join the ranks of all other citizens of New Jersey. Restore to ALL adult adoptees their right to UNCONDITIONALLY access the records of their birth.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Anita Walker Field
Honorable Senator:
I am a 65 year old adopted woman. I urge you to vote "NO" to S1087. This bill contains a disclosure veto which will allow birth mothers a year in which to file a veto prohibiting their names from being disclosed to adoptees’ on their original birth certificates.
A disclosure veto presumes that receiving one’s original birth certificate from the state is a privilege rather than a civil and human right of all citizens of the state.
It was the state who sealed ALL the original birth documents and it must be the state that reinstates the issuance of original birth certificates to ALL adopted adults.
How can the state possibly rationalize turning over to birth mothers its constitutional responsibility of issuing original birth certificates? These are the same birth mothers, by the way, who irrevocably terminated all legal rights to their children when their children were adopted.
I urge you to reject Senate Bill 1087 and return to the drawing table. Craft a bill that enables adopted adults to join the ranks of all other citizens of New Jersey. Restore to ALL adult adoptees their right to UNCONDITIONALLY access the records of their birth.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Anita Walker Field
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
