February 3, 1998
Doug Klunder
Privacy Project Director
ACLU - Washington State Chapter
705 Second Avenue, #300
Seattle, WA 98104-1799
RE: SB 6496/HB 2810
Dear Mr. Klunder:
I received word last night that the Washington State chapter of the ACLU is opposed to SB 6496/HB 2810 which if passed would provide to all adults adopted in the State of Washington their original birth certificates, without restriction, upon request. While I have not seen the letter which was emailed to the Washington Legislature yesterday, I understand that your argument is based on "birth mother privacy," the old saw that gets played every time adopted persons seek Constitutional redress for records that are denied them.
While I can appreciate the ACLU's privacy argument, rooted in its historic mission of "equal protection," I would suggest that its "privacy" issue in the case of sealed adoption records has more to do with historic sentiment than with sound legal deliberation. You can argue `til the cows come home Alma v Melon - type opinions that "sealed adoption records serve valid state interests in promoting adoptions," but the fact is, that it just ain't so. The recent Doe v Sundquist decision in Tennessee, with which I know you are familiar, unequivocally holds that the right to privacy does not extend to the disclosure of birth information to the adopted person. More to the point, the Court of Appeals ruled that
....the birth parent plaintiffs' desire to conceal their identities from their birth children is not constitutionally protected and Plaintiffs can cite no state case law as authority for such a proposition. ....The information to be disclosed in this situation is limited to the fact and circumstances of parentage and the disclosure is made only to adopted persons, which hardly comprises "public disclosure."
To bring the point closer to home, I am personally familiar with hundreds of birth mothers who were not promised "privacy." On the contrary, they were told by "adoption professionals" that when their relinquished child reached the age of majority that they would be able to access his or her records and/or that the relinquished child, as an adult, would be given full access to his or her adoption file. Where is the outrage over these lies? Not in the office of the Washington State ACLU, I reckon.
I am not here, however, to argue the birth mothers' argument. They do that quite nicely themselves, and I'm sure you'll be hearing from a few of them shortly if you haven't already. Instead I am here to tell you that by supporting sealed adoption records the Washington State ACLU upholds the right of the government to confiscate, lock up, deface and forge the birth certificates of a substantial number of the population simply on the grounds of their adoptive status. By supporting sealed records the Washington State ACLU supports a Jim Crow system that denies adopted persons access to personal records that any other person born in the United States has access to for the asking. By supporting sealed records the Washington State ACLU infantalizes adult adoptees, sending the message to them, the state, and to the public at large that adoptees are not stable enough to own information about themselves. By supporting sealed records the Washington State ACLU validates the concept that the government needs to intervene in and to regulate the personal relationships of adopted persons. Hardly a traditional attitude for an outfit that claims to be about supporting MY personal "right to make personal decisions without government interference-- about religious, abortion, marriage, and other family and life style matters," huh? But then I'm just and adoptee.
I am particularly disturbed that the Washington State ACLU chose to distribute incorrect information to the Washington State Legislature regarding abortion rates in states and countries where open records are in place, claiming that open records would force up abortions. This claim is trotted out regularly by opponents of open records legislation--The National Council for Adoption, The Christian Coalition, Pat Robertson and the American Center for Law and Justice, Judie Brown and her American Life League, and the Eagle Forum to name a few--and is patently untrue. Figures compiled by the National Center for Court Statistics as well as the Alan Guttmacher Institute clearly show that abortion rates in states and countries where open records stand are substantially lower than surrounding areas and that adoption rates are substantially higher. Even more disturbing is that the Washington State ACLU chose to contradict the ACLU's long tradition as an advocate of reproductive freedom to take up the banner of reproductive choice enemies.
Two states, Kansas and Alaska, currently have open adoption records on their books. Kansas, in fact, has never had sealed records. England, Scotland, New Zealand, parts of Canada, New Mexico, Scandinavia, Israel and Argentina all have open records. These open records have caused no problems in the adoption triad. Why should open records cause problems here? And why especially in Washington State?
Historical studies of the sealed records system suggests that it was never the intention of social workers or legislators to seal adoption records in perpetuity. Records were to be opened, upon request, when adoptees became adults. In practice, however, just the opposite has happened with the creation and the state support of an entrenched system of "secrets and lies" which legally holds hostage the identification and heritage of adopted people throughout this country. Would any ethnic or religious group in the US be subjected to this type of discrimination and breach of the Constitution? I think not. By the way, Mr. Klunder, only adopted persons' records are sealed. Relinquished children who go through the foster care system or for other reasons are not adopted have free access to their records. If the Washington State ACLU is so concerned about birth mother confidentiality, then I suggest it start to work immediately to close those records, too. Then why not close divorce records and death records and boat licenses and incorporation papers? It's probably in somebody's best interest that somebody not know about them either.
In a letter to Bastard Nation member Janine Baer dated October 3, 1997, Rita Buland, ACLU Membership Liaison in the national office in New York, informed Ms. Baer that after investigation, she was "unaware that the ACLU had any position against adoptee birth certificate access." Did you or any member of your office consult with the national office regarding policy on adoption record access before you contacted the Washington State Legislature?
Interestingly enough, almost eleven years ago, the Oakland County MI, and the Southern Florida Chapters of the ACLU addressed the sealed records issue head on and came to a totally different conclusion than you. In The Rights of Adult Adopted Persons Policy Statement of April 21, 1987, the Southwest Florida Chapter, following a policy adopted by the Oakland County Chapter endorsed the following statement:
.....the ACLU believes that so long as state and/or local governments choose to maintain birth records, such records must be maintained and accessible without discrimination by virtue of adopted or non-adopted status.
Toward this end, the ACLU believes that laws suppressing information about adoptees and/or their birthparents and laws laws allowing access to such information only upon consent or registration, or laws allowing access to such information only upon court order, deny adopted persons their birthparents and their relatives the equal protection of that laws and constitutes unwarranted interference by the government with the right of people to choose whether to associate.
The Southwest Florida Chapter of the ACLU recommends that this policy be adopted by the ACLU of Florida and the ACLU of Florida in turn recommend adoption of this policy by the National ACLU.
If I were in a good mood this morning, which I am not, I'd like to think that the ACLU thinks it is taking what it believes to be a moral stand on the open records issue in Washington State. The ACLU, of course, is wrong--dead wrong. Adopted persons were not part of the deal. We had no say-so in the adoption contract. Our Constitutional rights are abrogated by the sealed records system. Yet, apparently the Washington State ACLU expects us to put up and shut, and stop being a bunch of ungrateful bastards. Well, Mr. Klunder, what of the morality of endorsing and protecting government malfeasance? What of the morality of confiscating and defacing state records in the name of birth mother's rights that never existed? What of the morality of withholding the Constitutional rights of 6,000,000 adopted Americans simply because of their adoptive status?
This whole pernicious sealed records argument reminds me of my old cinema professor, Mojimir Drvota. Back in the 1950s he received his Ph.D. in philosophy from the University of Prague. One day Drovta was on campus and needed to check something he had written in his dissertation, so he naturally dropped by the library where a copy was kept. Upon requesting to borrow his dissertation for a couple hours he was told by a flinty apparatchik that he couldn't. "You're not ready yet to read it" declared the gray-suited She Who Must Be Obeyed. Thus, like the droney librarian, the Washington State ACLU tells adopted persons, "you're not ready yet." Drvota defected shortly after the incident. Unfortunately, we have no place to go and must remain here in perpetual babyhood until the ACLU in the gray flannel suit deems us suitable for personhood.
If I still belonged to the ACLU I'd quit right now and demand my money back. The Washington State ACLU policy sickens me, Mr. Klunder. I suggest that you and your cohorts look into your souls and decide what you want the ACLU to really stand for: my right to make personal decisions without government interference about religious, abortion, marriage, and other family and lifestyle matters--or only those matters of which you and your minions approve.
By all means necessary,
Marley Elizabeth Greiner
Executive Chair, Bastard Nation
Acting Chair, BN Great Lakes Region
Chair, Ohio BN/Mad Ohio Bastards
cc: National ACLU, New York
Ohio ACLU, Columbus, OH
[ Prev ] [ Open 98 Home Page ] [ Next ]