Imagine if you would for a moment, what it would be like not to know who your own parents are. No descriptions. No photographs or even drawings of them. No information on their lives, no knowledge of even their names. No knowledge of their parents, or grandparents, or the relatives before them. No information about the circumstances of your birth, or even why you are not allowed to know about it. Not a single bit of data telling you the story of your heritage and makeup. Your family tree is but a stump.
If you’re adopted, you don’t have to imagine these things – probability holds that you are living it, or have lived it. Reunions with adoptees and birth families are not the norm and sometimes even those reunions which do occur are not particularly pleasant.
I can’t speak for others in similar shoes to mine, but for me, it is the lack of a family tree, the withholding of my heritage which is the most difficult to deal with. From dealing with two stepsons from the time they were quite young, to watching the interactions between myself, my adopted brother and my adoptive parents – the verdict is out as far as I’m concerned. In nature vs. nurture, nature has the predominant role.
Of the various inequities I’ve dealt with through life, the only one which has truly caused me a great deal of anguish, is my adoption. It’s not the parents I ended up with, far from it, they’re great! I have no more qualms about my childhood than anyone else and aside from a particularly ugly battle over religious indoctrination, I can’t think of anything which really caused me much grief growing up. All in all, I think I lucked out.
The angst and general anger I have over my adoption is aimed at my long time nemesis on just about every issue concerning what is right and wrong: the government. In this case in particular, the government of the state of Minnesota, who feels that my genetic identity is none of my damn business.
There are methods to attempt to gain the simple knowledge of who my parents were, but they are quite obtuse in Minnesota, which has some of the most restrictive laws on the subject. As it is, only four states in the union; Alaska, Kansas, New Hampshire and Oregon have open records, where legal adults can gain the knowledge of their birth parents without having to jump through expensive court proceedings and red tape. If it was not for the workings of Bastard Nation and other organizations fighting for the simple right to know, neither New Hampshire or Oregon would currently be on the list. Originally, only Alaska and Kansas allowed an adult adopted individual to learn of their biological origin.
How can this be? How can it be justified that a human adult does not have the right to know who their own parents are? How can a society which stands on the concept of individual determination and equity among all, proclaim in the same breath that those who were given up at birth are not equal to those who were not? How can the argument be made that the government should have the power to withhold an individual’s very identity from them?
I find it reasonable to withhold such information from minors, as minors may not be in an intellectual or emotional position to make sound decisions over something so profound to their lives. However, I cannot fathom how this can be extended into the lives of adults. Once an individual reaches adulthood, there is no argument that can be extended, no factor taken into account, which allows the continued secrecy of that individual’s lifeblood to be held.
Certainly the primary argument which has always risen from the adoption industry, is the fear on the adoptive parent’s part, that the birth parents will come back into the picture and take their child away. Granted, this is a real fear for many and I’m sure that it causes a great deal of worry in adoptive parents, where such a potential exists. However, once that child is no longer a child, how is that their birth parents can take anything away? They can’t take back the child, they’re an adult. They can’t take away the years of growing up with their adoptive parents. They can’t steal the memories away, or force that person to change their name and abandon their past. That type of fear is utterly irrational!
The opposing argument is that handing out such knowledge, would violate the privacy rights of the birth parents to leave that part of their past in the past.
Excuse me?
Let’s break down this argument here. Two people had sex. That sex produced a child. For whatever the reason, the decision is made that they cannot, or do not want, to deal with that child. They give the child up for adoption. Cut it anyway you want to, but the simple fact of the matter is that the birth parents haven’t dealt with the ramifications of their actions, instead they’ve passed on the responsibility to others. So, to argue that their “right” to privacy needs to be attended to, by keeping the information of their identities safe from their disowned progeny, is to make the ruling that such a lacking of personal responsibility is something that the law should protect. The last time I looked, our entire legal structure was based on the concept of individuals being personally responsible for their actions. This argument is akin to protecting the identity of a motorist from the innocent victim hit by their car.
There is no right to privacy, when that privacy is merely an attempt to forget what you have done to another. No claim for the right of privacy can be held to be higher than the claim for the right to know one’s own heritage. No claim for the right for privacy can outweigh the ramifications of your actions, when the result is another living human being of your blood.
That our society would protect such dismissive irresponsibility under the color of law, is simply heinous.
The last argument against open records, is certainly the most emotional of them all – what happens when the mother was the victim of rape? How can the right to know one’s own heritage be fulfilled, while protecting the already scarred mother? I see no easy answers here. A very powerful film, “Secrets & Lies”, tackles this question, with predictably messy results.
I can understand the desire to heal and leave in the past, the memories of such a horrid attack. I can understand the mother not wanting to dredge up semi-quelled emotions. Perhaps the answer in this case is to provide the adoptee with the information of their parentage, on the stipulation of denial of contact, if such is desired by the mother. Certainly, that in itself will be difficult for the adopted child to deal with, but in the case of such a crime, how can bad feelings be avoided?
For myself, if I was in this situation, even if I could have no actual contact with my mother, I’d still want to know. I’m an adult. I’ll deal with it.
That’s pretty much all that adopted folk are asking for, the truth. We’ll deal with it. For any answer is better than no answer at all.
Tags: adoption, bastards, open records
