Wednesday, February 28, 2007
No Falsified Birth Certificates!
.
The purpose of this post is to clarify my position in answer to queries I have received.
Am I anti-adoption? Not in the sense that some define that term. I recognize that there will always be children who have absolutely no family who can to raise them no matter how much help they are afforded. These children need and deserve permanent, stable families to love and care for them. They should not linger in or bounce from one foster home to another.
HOWEVER…I am totally against adoption as it practiced in this country, with lies andsecrets, or semi- one-side controlled openness, and as means of filling empty arms. I am opposed to practices which encourage the importation children from their country of origins, while there are thousands of children here needing homes.
I oppose any practice which offers adoption to an expectant mother without first fully exploring all other options and offering all necessary resources for her family to remain together.
And, I oppose all lies and secrecy in adoption – first and foremost of which is the falsification of birth certificates - for the following reasons:
1. It maintains a discriminatory status for those who are adopted treating them differently in regard to their own birth records as compared to non-adopted children and adults.
2. It is unnecessary. Why does a child need to have his/her name changed in order to be cared for? The answer is there is nothing inherent in the name change that benefits the child’s best interest. The “stigma” of illegitimacy that might have faced children in the past bearing a different surname than their parents, no longer exists in a society with a 50% divorce rate and an acceptance of same sex marriage.
3. Rather than serving the best interest of the adopted child, it serves only those who adopt. It creates encourages the proliferation of lies and secrets that meet the needs of those who adopt in order to fill their need to have a family that is the “same as if” it were biologically connected instead of helping to recognize the reality that adoptees already have a mother and father. There is no need to encourage the infant adoption – the demand for which drives a money-driven exploitive and coercive market.
It has been suggested that true open adoption could be met by providing adoptees with their original birth certificate and a certificate of adoption to be used as identification. But why? What purpose does it serve to maintain special laws that apply only to adoptees and no others? Equality is equality.
Those adopting have only one reason to re-name a child who already bears a name given to him/her by his first/original parent(s)…and that is “ownership.”
For the adoptee, especially the foreign born adoptee, it creates only confusion and identity confusion and dysphoria, not unlike what is expressed by men and women going through body image or gender dysphoria.
In any school room today half of the kids have different surnames than those they live with. If a child feels uncomfortable bearing a different surname than those raising him...at the age of 12 (the age a child can have a say in his custodial parent in cases of divorce) he or she, with the agreement of his caretakers, may legally change his name to theirs. As an adult, anyone can legally change their name with no one’s consent or agreement.
The falsified birth certificate is the foundation of the lies and secrecy upon which adoption is built. Adoption cannot be “reformed” into a truly open and honest system while remaining built on this false foundation. It needs to be torn down to its base and rebuilt from the ground up.
Psychologists have for decades said that is it necessary for adopters to recognize that adoption is NOT the same as if the child were born to you but that he has parents. Legally obliterating those parents and certifying that the child was “born to” his adopters is in direct opposition to this goal. It satisfied the needs and desires of those adopting whose demand for infants has created and perpetuates the commodification of children and the exploitation of their mothers as breeders. It needs to be nipped in the bud.
Falsified birth certificates are a flailed social engineering experiment that began in the 1940’s. We got along fine without them prior to that and can again. These draconian laws serve no purpose, are in fact harmful to those they purport to “protect” and serve, and need to be repealed!
As always, I open the flood gates for comments and differing points of view. If anyone can tell me how a falsified birth certificate is in the best interest of an adopted child or adult...please do so.
-----------------
The Stork Market: America's Multi-Billion Dollar Unregulated Adoption Industry is now available from:
www.AdvocatePublications.com
Proud sponsor of: www.TwiceLost.org
www.BirthParentProject.org
The purpose of this post is to clarify my position in answer to queries I have received.
Am I anti-adoption? Not in the sense that some define that term. I recognize that there will always be children who have absolutely no family who can to raise them no matter how much help they are afforded. These children need and deserve permanent, stable families to love and care for them. They should not linger in or bounce from one foster home to another.
HOWEVER…I am totally against adoption as it practiced in this country, with lies andsecrets, or semi- one-side controlled openness, and as means of filling empty arms. I am opposed to practices which encourage the importation children from their country of origins, while there are thousands of children here needing homes.
I oppose any practice which offers adoption to an expectant mother without first fully exploring all other options and offering all necessary resources for her family to remain together.
And, I oppose all lies and secrecy in adoption – first and foremost of which is the falsification of birth certificates - for the following reasons:
1. It maintains a discriminatory status for those who are adopted treating them differently in regard to their own birth records as compared to non-adopted children and adults.
2. It is unnecessary. Why does a child need to have his/her name changed in order to be cared for? The answer is there is nothing inherent in the name change that benefits the child’s best interest. The “stigma” of illegitimacy that might have faced children in the past bearing a different surname than their parents, no longer exists in a society with a 50% divorce rate and an acceptance of same sex marriage.
3. Rather than serving the best interest of the adopted child, it serves only those who adopt. It creates encourages the proliferation of lies and secrets that meet the needs of those who adopt in order to fill their need to have a family that is the “same as if” it were biologically connected instead of helping to recognize the reality that adoptees already have a mother and father. There is no need to encourage the infant adoption – the demand for which drives a money-driven exploitive and coercive market.
It has been suggested that true open adoption could be met by providing adoptees with their original birth certificate and a certificate of adoption to be used as identification. But why? What purpose does it serve to maintain special laws that apply only to adoptees and no others? Equality is equality.
Those adopting have only one reason to re-name a child who already bears a name given to him/her by his first/original parent(s)…and that is “ownership.”
For the adoptee, especially the foreign born adoptee, it creates only confusion and identity confusion and dysphoria, not unlike what is expressed by men and women going through body image or gender dysphoria.
In any school room today half of the kids have different surnames than those they live with. If a child feels uncomfortable bearing a different surname than those raising him...at the age of 12 (the age a child can have a say in his custodial parent in cases of divorce) he or she, with the agreement of his caretakers, may legally change his name to theirs. As an adult, anyone can legally change their name with no one’s consent or agreement.
The falsified birth certificate is the foundation of the lies and secrecy upon which adoption is built. Adoption cannot be “reformed” into a truly open and honest system while remaining built on this false foundation. It needs to be torn down to its base and rebuilt from the ground up.
Psychologists have for decades said that is it necessary for adopters to recognize that adoption is NOT the same as if the child were born to you but that he has parents. Legally obliterating those parents and certifying that the child was “born to” his adopters is in direct opposition to this goal. It satisfied the needs and desires of those adopting whose demand for infants has created and perpetuates the commodification of children and the exploitation of their mothers as breeders. It needs to be nipped in the bud.
Falsified birth certificates are a flailed social engineering experiment that began in the 1940’s. We got along fine without them prior to that and can again. These draconian laws serve no purpose, are in fact harmful to those they purport to “protect” and serve, and need to be repealed!
As always, I open the flood gates for comments and differing points of view. If anyone can tell me how a falsified birth certificate is in the best interest of an adopted child or adult...please do so.
-----------------
www.AdvocatePublications.com
Proud sponsor of: www.TwiceLost.org
www.BirthParentProject.org
# posted by Senior Mom @ 10:19 AM 
Comments:
<< Home
Adopttalk:
regarding the birth certificate with adoption verification attached. You questioned if that is necessary. I don't know if it is, and am not the person to answer that.
But I know that in Canada, there is such a thing, and I think that France might have it too. There is a social worker in Texas who first told me about it. I have seen one from Canada like that.
The only thing that is necessary, regarding identity and adoption, IMO, is that there be proof that the child is in the "legal custody" of the people who are raising him/her...so there is proof that the child was not kidnapped. Right now, the courts hand down an adoption decree which is supposed to be "proof" of legality.
But maybe it is not necessary for there to be anything attached to the birth certificate whatsoever.I have never adopted a child, so I don't know if specific documents are needed for certain times.
Nowadays, I am hearing about adopted people who are having problems with their fake birth certificates. Some authorities will not accept the amended certificates because they are not the truth and the government is cracking down on fake documents .
ironic isn't it??the government that issued the fakes, now won't accept them.
regarding the birth certificate with adoption verification attached. You questioned if that is necessary. I don't know if it is, and am not the person to answer that.
But I know that in Canada, there is such a thing, and I think that France might have it too. There is a social worker in Texas who first told me about it. I have seen one from Canada like that.
The only thing that is necessary, regarding identity and adoption, IMO, is that there be proof that the child is in the "legal custody" of the people who are raising him/her...so there is proof that the child was not kidnapped. Right now, the courts hand down an adoption decree which is supposed to be "proof" of legality.
But maybe it is not necessary for there to be anything attached to the birth certificate whatsoever.I have never adopted a child, so I don't know if specific documents are needed for certain times.
Nowadays, I am hearing about adopted people who are having problems with their fake birth certificates. Some authorities will not accept the amended certificates because they are not the truth and the government is cracking down on fake documents .
ironic isn't it??the government that issued the fakes, now won't accept them.
# posted by 
: 6:15 PM
: 6:15 PM
K
If you can direct me to any info on someone being hassled over a false BC I'd be interested to see it. Hard to imagine since amended certs aren't marked amended in any way.
If you can direct me to any info on someone being hassled over a false BC I'd be interested to see it. Hard to imagine since amended certs aren't marked amended in any way.
Actually they are marked differently. Indiana has an amended birth certificate. It just says birth certificate on it. It is half the size of a normal one.
The BN website used to have stories of people whose amended BCs caused them problems.
They do not, at least in my state, have anything to show that they are amended, leading to sometimes ludicrous and biologically impossible statements about who was born to whom and where.
I guess Mirah is not going to post my previous comment--her right of course--but perhaps she could pass this info along.
Lane
They do not, at least in my state, have anything to show that they are amended, leading to sometimes ludicrous and biologically impossible statements about who was born to whom and where.
I guess Mirah is not going to post my previous comment--her right of course--but perhaps she could pass this info along.
Lane
# posted by : 7:36 AM
: 7:36 AM
Amy,
Could you be confusing long and short form BCs? I know here in the East Coast - NY, NJ - and in many other (all?) states there is a short form that simply has name, date and place of birth. And then there is a long form with names of parents and other information. Everyone has two - adoptee and non-adoptee. Many people simply don't know that they can request long or short form, but the all have them.
But amended certificates do NOT say amended or it would defeat the purpose. The alleged purpose of the amneded cert was to remove the "stigma" of illegitimacy. To makr it ameded is to put a stamp of illegitimacy on it.
That was th emended purpose. The real purpose is to pass off adopted kids as being "the same as if" they were born o their aps so that people would want them. Sorry to say that Amy. And again, marking it amended would defeat that purpose.
If anyone has a BC marked amended on it - or in any way different that a cert of someone born in that state - I'd very much like to see it.
Post a Comment
Could you be confusing long and short form BCs? I know here in the East Coast - NY, NJ - and in many other (all?) states there is a short form that simply has name, date and place of birth. And then there is a long form with names of parents and other information. Everyone has two - adoptee and non-adoptee. Many people simply don't know that they can request long or short form, but the all have them.
But amended certificates do NOT say amended or it would defeat the purpose. The alleged purpose of the amneded cert was to remove the "stigma" of illegitimacy. To makr it ameded is to put a stamp of illegitimacy on it.
That was th emended purpose. The real purpose is to pass off adopted kids as being "the same as if" they were born o their aps so that people would want them. Sorry to say that Amy. And again, marking it amended would defeat that purpose.
If anyone has a BC marked amended on it - or in any way different that a cert of someone born in that state - I'd very much like to see it.
<< Home
