Agendas

Letter to the Editor from the NJ Bar Association opposing open records bill.

You know I would have a little more respect for these people if they would tell the truth about their true agendas. Do they think we HONESTLY believe that they care one iota about the rights of birthmothers? If they DID care they wouldn’t oppose open records! Our government is based upon the principal of majority rules. How many research studies need to be done before they accept that the majority of birthmothers SUPPORT open records?

I think their agenda is personal, protecting themselves from potential law suits. Maybe a little AP client protection thrown in for good measure.

They state; “New Jersey adoption law has, since its enactment, promised confidentiality to birth parents, allowing access upon a legal showing of good cause. While some have characterized this legislation as the “birthright bill” it is clear that for some, only one party in the adoption process has rights – adult adoptees.”

Now do you suppose that’s because we are the only ones who had our identities stolen? It’s not supposed to be about anyone else. Regardless, I am not aware of ANY language in a legal adoption document in which confidentiality was promised!!!!! It’s presumed.

Then they have to go and throw the Safe Haven thing in there. Ohhhhhh my. Are you serious? This should be a non-issue regarding open records. It’s a no brain-er. They throw it in because they know it takes the attention off of the real issue. But since THEY brought it up…………..

You know Safe Haven law suggests that any woman who is CRAZY enough to stick their child in a dumpster to die would somehow be capable of making the clear and rational decision to drop their baby off at the local fire station. Let’s be logical about this. Any woman clear minded enough to choose a fire station over a dumpster should not be allowed the OPTION to do something so entirely irresponsible as abandoning their child. Leaving that child to go the rest of their lives without ANY identity. Some may say “well at least the baby is alive” but I can’t imagine someone rational enough to make this choice would even consider something as horrifying as leaving their baby to die. These women obviously care about the fate of their child.

I ask you how not only allowing this sort of behavior from perfectly competent young women but actually ENCOURAGING IT can be seen as a positive thing??? ACCOUNTABILITY PEOPLE!!! Crazy dumpster dumpers aren’t capable of morally just actions regardless of the options out there. Utterly heartbreaking but true and no Safe Haven law is going to change that. Abandoning a baby is NEVER the right choice!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Shame on anyone who not only suggests it is but actually encourages it. A competent young woman who doesn’t have the choice to abandon her baby with no repercussions would be FAR more likely to choose adoption. Are we to believe that abandoning your baby is a calculated decision from conception? Nooooooo, so don’t even try and convince me it’s tied to the choice to abort. Utter rubbish.

The concept of safe haven is a feel good law.Everyone wants to climb aboard the feel good bandwagon. The problem is it doesn’t address the real issue which is the serious lack of unbiased and readily available support for women who find themselves alone and pregnant. It’s a patch, like putting gum on the flat bandwagon tire. It looks good but ultimately it isn’t going to get you where you want to go. People support it because it makes them feel good, so they can sleep at night. But if the claims of it’s potential success are true then tell me something; will the mother who abandons her baby at the fire station be getting any sleep? Will that child who WILL grow up and become an adult have serious identity issues (that CANNOT be rectified) get any sleep? So if the two people for whom this law was supposedly created are not getting sleep at night please remind me again…… who is? Oh. That’s right.

I am so sick and tired of all of these groups claiming they “care” and using misleading information to convince everyone that they do. I am tired of watching them throw in key phrases they know people will listen to like Safe Haven in an attempt to draw attention away from their true agendas. It’s like watching a bunch of cheaters play poker.

All of these people fighting laws and speaking for others they have no right speaking for. People with personal agendas, people covering their asses, people who’s paychecks depend on successful adoptions, people SO self riotous that they invent their own patches even though those directly involved have repeatedly given them viable solutions. Who ARE these people sleeping so peacefully at night? How do they DO that?!?!

Oh oh oh It’s MAGIC, YOU KNOOOWWWW.

I’ll bet if you ask any of these people to show you a copy of THEIR original birth certificate they could provide you with one.

Advertisements

8 Comments

Filed under Adoptee Family, Open Records

8 responses to “Agendas

  1. Bravo, Mia. Once again, very well said.

    They don’t have one real, logical leg to stand on when you take away all the SPIN.

  2. Because I’m small-minded and petty, I always like to assume that those are against Open Access have one additional reason (besides the billions of dollars) to oppose it: a once little secret now a searching adult from the past that they are trying to forget never happened lest it tarnish their perfectly proper and moral public face.

    I know that’s not true but I’ve never been one to let reality get in the way of my malicious musings.

    I think they like to throw in that Safe Haven law because it causes people to have an immediate and emotional response – “Oh little babies in dumpsters!!” – thereby distracting them from the real issue at hand.

  3. joy

    I am with you I think birthmother privacy is a ruse, used by the same type who would use, “well she should have thought about that before she had sex” in a hearbeat.

    Liars.

    Liars

  4. I agree with you Mia on this one. First, I have not known any mothers who have abandoned their babies at a fire station or hosptial in the twenty plus years of doing child welfare. To think that cops and social workers are not going to find out (or try like hell) who the parent(s) is/are of the child is ridiculous. Again, I think you are wise to ask the question: who benefits from the Safe Haven law? Not the mother or the child.

    More efforts need to be made to support keeping families intact rather then separating them. Only when safety cannot be maintained after herculean efforts should the state intervene and then, to bring this family back together if it must be apart for awhile.

  5. I keep wondering if someday there will be a place online where we can match up our DNA records, (like a service?) and find our genetically related families for those of us who don’t have certainty in the few records we find.
    I’ve heard some donor sperm kids have been able to find each other this way at least with records.
    I wasn’t left in a dumpster by any means, but I’ve never been sure my birth mother really put the right name down as my father. I’d love to be able to check…

  6. deanna

    The only way to fight this is to expose their logic. I’ve worked in government on adoption reform (several years ago during college) and I’m an adoptee. My state was dangerously close to passing something resembling adoption reform when a Senator stood up, painted a picture of an old lady in a rocking chair suffering a stroke because her grown child finally aquired the right to his identity and barged into her unsuspecting life. It was immediately voted down. For real. That’s the way it is. The legislation would have opened records after 50 years.

    Spin? Yeah. I was an intern who had been assigned to the bill because of my status as an adoptee. The Senator sponsoring the bill told me before I started that the ABA is the obstacle. THE obstacle. If records are open, lawyers have trouble convincing prospective adoptive parents to adopt in their state. Prospective parents don’t want to have to worry about the child growing up and returning home. That’s the organization and the logic against the open record law. Anything else you hear is nothing more than justification.

    So where’s the hole in the logic? If prospective adoptive parents wanted what is best for their prospective children, they would put the child’s best interest over their own. If the people handling the adoption cared about the best interest of the child, they would want to provide for the child’s future needs. Prove this, and you’ve opened the records. Don’t argue over their justifications (excuses). They’ll just come up with more. And don’t be shocked at their tactics. It’s about money.

  7. Deanna have you given thought to an effective way to convey this message? I agree with everything you have said. I wonder where the delivery of the message fails because I know this tactic has been tried ad nausium. How do we get them to believe/understand it is in our best interest?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s