I think the question in the OP was about more than just medical history…even delving into the reasons for being given up for adoption. Personally, I think the medical history thing is a little over-blown, too, and I’m not sure if there is any good way to demand that people give a full history before they give their child up for adoption (I would rather be alive, with my two dedicated parents, and without my birth parents’ medical history, than aborted or with a parent who might not be equipped to take care of me.)
In terms of having the right to know details about a birth parent…I think that the biggest problem with this as a concept of being a “right,” is that it can directly conflict with any right the birth parent has to remain anonymous, if they so choose…or any right the adoptive parents have not to have to deal with another set of parents in the child’s life.
I think that, overall, the benefits a child receives from being adopted (as I mentioned, not being aborted, and being raised in a stable family) are more important than the perceived
“right” to know about their blood relations. I gladly revoke any right I have to this kind of information, in exchange for life, happiness, and a loving family.
It seems to me if I have a legal “right” (which is the only sort I need consider for this argument, I think) to know the circumstances of my birth, and the reasons for my relinquishment, why should children in the custody of their biological parents be any less entitled to know the circumstances of their birth, and the reasons why their parents wanted to or otherwise felt inclined to keep them? I mean, do I need to sit my kids down at some point, by law, and tell them how and why I helped bring them into the world and kept them around? If adopted children have lawful rights to specific forms of information about their parents, are biological children being discriminated against somehow? Say, for instance, my Dad decides to move away and cut off all contact with his family other than providing child support. Mom raises me. I’m not an adopted child. Do I therefore not have a right to question my father about his actions because they don’t involve adoption? What, then, would make adoption so special that the adopted child gets the legal right to be a know-it-all, but I don’t?
It’s just a horrible intrusion of govt. into people’s personal affairs, with rather onerous implications, if you ask me, to start granting legal rights to such information.
Another adoptee here. Like Sarahfeena, I don’t recall ever not knowing that I was adopted and I’d recommend that to adopting parents. I have no interest in finding my biological parents or knowing anything (health history included) about them. I’m perfectly content to live the health cards my biology deals me as they come. The people I call Mom & Dad are my parents in every way that is important to me. My three siblings (all older) were also adopted*. The only time I’ve seen adoption be an issue in my family was during my rebellious sisters’ teen years. They would wield it in unrelated arguments with only cruel intentions.
Given all that, I’d say that the birth parents right to privacy trumps any right of the children to know anything about them and vice versa. I don’t think anyone has a right to know their future. It’s not unfair that some have more of a clue than others. There are registries where interested parties can be matched if both sides are willing. That’s about the best solution I can see.
[sup]*Of the four of us, I’m the only child that resembles our parents. I sometimes joke that my parents will some day reveal that I’m not adopted.[/sup]
I’m saying that the records should remain sealed unless someone can convince a judge that someone’s life is in danger, all other avenues have been exhausted, and that unsealing the records would provide vital information that would make a substantial difference in the outcome.
I can’t agree with that. I will respect the privacy of either party to remain anonymous, but the absolute sealing of the records has prevented people who wanted to be reunited from finding each other. That is just pointless bureaucracy.
I would prefer that all adoptions be registered by date of birth and sex and that if a child and a parent both apply to the registry seeking a reunion, each be given a blind drop through which they can communicate until both are sure that they want it and through which they can provide current name and address if they choose to give it out.
The absolute seal was implemented foolishly and serves no purpose.
It’s funny, I find far more adoptees feel like you and I do than not…I have only ever met one other adopted person who went on a search, and she was someone with a lot of problems, anyway. I always thought this was an attempt on her part to try to solve them somehow, but unsurprisingly, it didn’t. Her brother, also adopted, had a really good attitude about it, and never was too interested in searching. I know that there is a movement in the adopted community to open birth records, but I believe these folks are a tiny minority of adopted people.
I agree that I don’t think it’s unfair. Each of us is in a different circumstance in life…and that’s just life. Even in “blood” families, some people have a ton of relatives and lots of information, and some hardly have any. My husband’s family (on one side) is from Cuba, and he only ever had his dad in this country, and virtually no contact with anyone else on that side of the family (none of whom are living anymore, anyway, including his dad). I’m sure he would love to know more about his dad’s family, but what can you do? Life doesn’t always give us exactly what we want, but somehow we muddle through.
I agree that this is a fair system…why not let the parties get together, if there is interest on both sides? I just don’t think it should be able to be done unilaterally.
It’s interesting to get this perspective. I’ve been to a couple adoption conferences recently, and questions related to disclosure get asked a lot. The consensus among the agencies appears to be to strongly encourage leaving a door open, some mechanism to allow the relinquished child to make contact if they so wish. Given this stance, you’d think the actual interest level in such reunions would be higher than it appears to be.
Quite frankly, I think there’s a little bit of political correctness going on. There’s a belief (like diggleblop’s) that adopted people are all yearning to find their “real” parents. This is why I said that he doesn’t know how he would feel if he was actually adopted…I think a lot of this comes from how non-adopted people THINK adopted people feel, or how they think THEY would feel if they were adopted. But, they don’t really know how it feels at all.
I’m not sure what a “tiny minority” entails. If there are 125,000 adoptions every year and only 5% of adopted kids seek their birth parents, we are still talking about over 6,000 additional adoptees looking for parents each year. (And the same site to which I linked suggests that there were more adoptions in earlier years, so the numbers might be higher.)
Excuse me? Cite? Hemophilia refers to the inability for blood to clot properly. It’s not just a generic term for blood disorders. There are several types of hemophilia yes, but it is primarily an inherited disease.
ON THE OTHER HAND, I would like to see procedures adopted (no pun intended) that would require women giving children up for adoption to provide a family medical history, so all bases are covered from the beginning.
I’m not sure what it entails, either, as I have no evidence or statistics for this other than my own observation. Even if it is 5%, this is still a pretty small minority, even if the actual numbers seem like a lot of people.
The only point I was trying to make is that I think it is an overblown assumption that many adoptees are very eager to find their birth parents, or feel that they are missing something if they don’t know their birth parents. I wasn’t trying to imply that I consider this a factor in deciding whether knowing about your birthparents is a right.
What if they don’t have one? Or what if the necessity of doing so is too big of an undertaking, so that she decides she doesn’t want to go through with it? I appreciate the good intentions behind wanting to secure medical records, but I just don’t think it’s necessarily practical.
It may be overblown, but I think it’s a subject worthy of discussion all the same. I guess what I find interesting (if, again, only a “tiny minority” of adopted kids have any interest in finding their biological parents) is that so much attention seems to be given the subject by prospective adoptive parents and the agencies that work with them. Of course that’s a base to be covered, but I remember one discussion where the subject of what one should do if the child wants to connect with his or her birth parents took up half the session. There are so many inevitable practical concerns the adoptive parent has to deal with, many of which they typically had no idea about (my wife and I sure didn’t), I figured anything that got that much of an airing must be a priority. I suppose it still is, but I was originally thinking more in terms of frequency.
I am absolutely not saying that it’s not a subject worth discussing (or thinking about, if you are a prospective adoptive parent). There are, obviously practical concerns, as you mention. I think that it’s thought a lot about because it’s probably the #1 way in which raising an adopted child is different from raising one’s birth child, other than the unlikely chance they will end up absolutely needing medical records that you won’t have.
My experience is that it is more likely to originate with the agency than the adoptee. It seems to be an idea that is more common than it used to be.
Possibly I am projecting. When we suggested a trip to Korea* for the family, both the kidlets agreed that they would rather go to Disney.
Again, possibly something they got from me - we attended a meeting when we were adopting for the third time, where the birth mother in an open adoption spoke. I was surprised by the intensely negative reaction I had to her and what she had to say. I had to leave the room.
YMMV. Void where taxed or prohibited. Professional driver on a closed course.
Regards,
Shodan
*Both the Shodan-ettes are adopted from South Korea.
Regardless of medical implications, You should have a right to know whio you’re parents are. Maybe not when you are raised by adoptive parents, but when you become an adult you should be able to connect with your biological heritage and confront that person or persons that abandoned you. They fucked up, and they should be taken to account. Toi deprive your baby of a real mother and father is very cruel in my books, regardless of your circumstances. Anyone here who doesn’t give a shit about who there parents are? That includes sperm donor kids.
I don’t necessarily agree with you, because I think it might be a deterrent to people deciding to place their children for adoption. But I do understand that some may see a certain logic in giving an adult some control over being allowed to find out where they came from, if it is important to them.
On the other hand, I do not really appreciate the way you have characterized adoption. First, how has a birth parent “fucked up,” when they have given a child a chance for a better life than they feel they could give it? Second, I strongly object to your implication that the people who raised me are not my “real” parents, or that anyone treated me cruelly. I love my parents, and I deeply respect my birth parents, who made a difficult choice. And, in case you didn’t read my posts, or ThePCapeman’s, neither of us cares at all about knowing who our real parents are. I can’t necessarily speak for him, but in my case, I know everything I need to know about them…which isn’t much in hard facts.
Even if it is 5%, this is still a pretty small minority, even if the actual numbers seem like a lot of people.